I bought my K10D in March of 2007. Here was the rational at the time:
95% of the "Bang" for 70% of the "Buck"
Here is the executive summary (full details below):
- Feature set
- Handling
- Price
Tried Nikon D40/D80:
- Liked the compactness
- Liked the speed
- Didn't like the lack of backward lens compatibility at that price point
- Didn't like the cost of Nikon lenses
- Didn't like the tinny feel of the kit lens, especially for manual focus
Tried the Canon Rebel XTi (?):
- Didn't like the way the camera handled
- Didn't like the tinny kit lens. Found out later that the performance is even worse than the build.
Sony Alpha:
- Picked it up. Squeezed off a few shots. Set it back down and asked if they had Pentax
Heard about the K10D:
- Handled a K100 and liked the feel. Was assured that the K10D was a little heavier, but handled much the same
- Liked better build of kit lens (found out later that it is a good performer too)
- Liked the backward lens compatibility
- Like pentaprism rather than pentamirror
- liked metal as opposed to plastic chassis
- Like in-body SR
- Liked sealed body
- Liked the price (several hundred dollars less than either the Nikon or the Canon
- Liked the glowing reviews
Again...
95% of the "Bang" for 70% of the "Buck"
This is still true for all the features that truly count.
Oh, yeah...there was aways the "underdog factor" too. I own two Ricoh film bodies (great features, low price), have bought four Mazdas new and owned a Sunbeam sports car in college rather than the ubiquitous (at the time) MGs and Triumphs. I also tend to favor odd-ball lens choices...go figure.
Steve
P.S. Regarding the Ricoh film bodies...I went with Ricoh back when Pentax was one of the top three brands. Ricoh simply had the same/better feature set as a much lower price. Sorry Spotmatic and ME Super fan boys.
