Originally Posted by Karn
Well, I guess a brief explanation would be good here. I'm very interested in photo(and new to this forum, hi!) and manage to do some atleast "decent" stuff with my P&S(A canon A590 IS) which I'm btw very satisfied with, at the right settings it can perform very well.
Indeed. Many of the high-end compact cameras can take very good photos. And they have various advantages that digital SLRs don't have: they do video, they're smaller (which is an advantage sometimes), they don't permit lens changes so dust is never a worry, etc.
Now, the question is: Do I, as a complete novice, need a K20D to give me something to really grow with? Would it be smarter to get a K200d instead, which perhaps is abit more rewarding for someone who's completely green on using a SLR or does it make sense to take such a big step from a P&S? A big advantage of getting a k200d is that I could buy a lens for the price difference.
That's a consideration. The cost of the camera is just PART of what you'll end up paying. Camera's no good without lenses, so you have to budget for lenses as well as the body.
I want a pentax, that's already decided.
Why are you set on Pentax?
These are the 3 different kits I've seen which I can afford, but maybe you know of a lens(within the same budget) who would make even more sense getting?
Pentax K20D + DA 18-55 II/3,5-5,6 AL + DA 50-200/4-5,6 ED
Pentax K20D + SMC-DA 16-45/4 ED AL
Pentax K20D + Sigma 18-50/2,8
I'd say, go with the body and the Pentax 16-45 f/4. And I've owned the other lenses.
Will