1st shots with K20D switched from canon

1st shots with K20D switched from canon · 08:25 PM

quick shots taken in the house tonight with a few profoto strobes....Lens was 50-200mm Pentax.

Switched from a canon 40d to the K20D since the canon was constantly having focus issues and i just thought canons quality just wasnt there unless you used their most expensive lenses.....not all of us can afford that!

So far i'm glad I made the switch!

Class A · 05-07-2009, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers

it is an excellent lens

I guess, no one will dispute that the lens is a bargain for the money, but what is better than "excellent"?

If the 50-200 is "excellent" what is the 31/1.8? "More excellent"? I don't see the point in not recognising that there are bad, mediocre, above average, very good, and excellent/superb lenses. Using superlatives on lenses which are simply not top notch just leads to inflation at best and misinformation at worst.

Jonson PL · 05-08-2009, 01:06 AM

congrats, well done

Studio20 · 05-08-2009, 04:48 AM

Well this stinks....i have severe sciatica so im hoping to wobble out somewhere and really try it out this weekend and see what the camera can really do, only thing that confuses me is all the functions and menus are so different from the canons....getting there tho i guess thats what a manual is for!

thanks for all the great comments!

kevinschoenmakers · 05-08-2009, 02:35 PM

Originally posted by Class A

I guess, no one will dispute that the lens is a bargain for the money, but what is better than "excellent"?

If the 50-200 is "excellent" what is the 31/1.8? "More excellent"? I don't see the point in not recognising that there are bad, mediocre, above average, very good, and excellent/superb lenses. Using superlatives on lenses which are simply not top notch just leads to inflation at best and misinformation at worst.

Though I see your point, I would say the English language has many words that imply greater quality than 'excellent' does.

**Rense** · 05-08-2009, 02:43 PM

Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers

Though I see your point, I would say the English language has many words that imply greater quality than 'excellent' does.

Hmmmm.... Like?

kevinschoenmakers · 05-08-2009, 02:54 PM

Outstanding, amazing, divine, magnificent, brilliant, formidable, perfect, state-of-the-art, best, and undoubtedly some more.

In the most literal sense 'excellent' means it 'excels'. Which it does depending on what you compare it with. In it's class, I would say it certainly excels. Compared to the best lenses in the world, it's still an excellent lens, but not anything of the above.

Class A · 05-08-2009, 06:10 PM

Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers

Though I see your point, I would say the English language has many words that imply greater quality than 'excellent' does.

Hmmh, a definition of excellent says "Of the highest or finest quality". I don't think it gets "higher" than "highest".

Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers

Outstanding, amazing, divine, magnificent, brilliant, formidable, perfect, state-of-the-art, best

State-of-the-art, Outstanding: Usually means very good or excellent, but could be regarded as a relative qualifier. The good will be outstanding among mediocre ones. The state-of-the-art need not be excellent.

Amazing,magnificent, brilliant, formidable: Do not seem to be suitable for describing the quality of a technical item. You could also be "amazed" of how bad it is. Neither of these imply better than "excellent", AFAIC.

Divine: Do you have lenses you call divine?

Perfect: There is not perfect lens.

Jimbo · 05-08-2009, 06:23 PM

Welcome and you will get use to the kidding around! JIM

kevinschoenmakers · 05-09-2009, 12:57 AM

Originally posted by Class A

---

Apparently these words mean different things to different people. I would say 'excellent' is by for not the strongest qualifier. But feel free to think otherwise.

nulla · 05-09-2009, 01:57 AM

Amazing thread

iNVision ART · 05-09-2009, 02:04 AM

Originally posted by Studio20

i'd have to say its sharper than the 24-105mm L i had on the 40d, but for the 169 i paid for this lens im not going to complain at all......

First off, congrats and welcome to the fold. You will realize when your shooting on a sunny day with other photographers shooting with their Canon, and all of a sudden it starts to rain and they all take cover will the k20d keeps going and going

. But really? Sharper than a 24-105mm L lens?? And I thought L glass were like the top dawg/real expensive type lens? My friend has that on his 5D and he takes nice pictures but they are all bokeh.

Studio20 · 05-09-2009, 07:12 AM

Originally posted by iNVision ART

First off, congrats and welcome to the fold. You will realize when your shooting on a sunny day with other photographers shooting with their Canon, and all of a sudden it starts to rain and they all take cover will the k20d keeps going and going

. But really? Sharper than a 24-105mm L lens?? And I thought L glass were like the top dawg/real expensive type lens? My friend has that on his 5D and he takes nice pictures but they are all bokeh.

To me the canon and its lenses where just too soft and the colors where very washed out and they always needed alot of PP afterwards, i am finding so far that minimal PP is needed with pentax..

As for the excellent replies....... for the 169 i paid it is excellent........you just cant beat it.
if i bought a canon lens for 169 well actually in the canon lineup it would have been a waste of money!

**Heinrich Lohmann** · 05-09-2009, 09:10 AM

That is a very nice photo and welcome to the forum. That 50-200 is one of most underrated lenses in the whole lineup, so is the 55-300 BTW.

Studio20
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by Studio20
	Find threads started by Studio20
	Find threads in which Studio20 has posted

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Questions for people who have switched to 40d/50d Canon from Pentax	reknelb	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	32	02-25-2010 11:33 AM
1st shots with K20D - Potomac Whitewater Festival	MRRiley	Post Your Photos!	22	07-14-2009 04:45 PM
New Pentax owner, switched over from Canon	Hack_Photographer	Welcomes and Introductions	4	08-31-2008 02:49 PM
Anyone who switched to K20D from Canon's Line?	augustmoon	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	04-08-2008 05:38 PM
K20D switched from RAW to JPG files w/o me changing it!	petez	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	03-04-2008 01:25 PM

05-07-2009, 04:11 PM	#16
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers it is an excellent lens I guess, no one will dispute that the lens is a bargain for the money, but what is better than "excellent"? If the 50-200 is "excellent" what is the 31/1.8? "More excellent"? I don't see the point in not recognising that there are bad, mediocre, above average, very good, and excellent/superb lenses. Using superlatives on lenses which are simply not top notch just leads to inflation at best and misinformation at worst.

05-08-2009, 01:06 AM	#17
Jonson PL Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,842	congrats, well done

05-08-2009, 04:48 AM	#18
Studio20 Inactive Account Join Date: May 2009 Location: Slatersville, RI Posts: 88 Original Poster	Well this stinks....i have severe sciatica so im hoping to wobble out somewhere and really try it out this weekend and see what the camera can really do, only thing that confuses me is all the functions and menus are so different from the canons....getting there tho i guess thats what a manual is for! thanks for all the great comments!

05-08-2009, 02:35 PM	#19
kevinschoenmakers Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Shanghai Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,509	Originally posted by Class A I guess, no one will dispute that the lens is a bargain for the money, but what is better than "excellent"? If the 50-200 is "excellent" what is the 31/1.8? "More excellent"? I don't see the point in not recognising that there are bad, mediocre, above average, very good, and excellent/superb lenses. Using superlatives on lenses which are simply not top notch just leads to inflation at best and misinformation at worst. Though I see your point, I would say the English language has many words that imply greater quality than 'excellent' does.

05-08-2009, 02:43 PM	#20
Rense Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Zetten - The Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,050	Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers Though I see your point, I would say the English language has many words that imply greater quality than 'excellent' does. Hmmmm.... Like?

05-08-2009, 02:54 PM	#21
kevinschoenmakers Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Shanghai Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,509	Outstanding, amazing, divine, magnificent, brilliant, formidable, perfect, state-of-the-art, best, and undoubtedly some more. In the most literal sense 'excellent' means it 'excels'. Which it does depending on what you compare it with. In it's class, I would say it certainly excels. Compared to the best lenses in the world, it's still an excellent lens, but not anything of the above.

05-08-2009, 06:10 PM	#22
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers Though I see your point, I would say the English language has many words that imply greater quality than 'excellent' does. Hmmh, a definition of excellent says "Of the highest or finest quality". I don't think it gets "higher" than "highest". Originally posted by kevinschoenmakers Outstanding, amazing, divine, magnificent, brilliant, formidable, perfect, state-of-the-art, best State-of-the-art, Outstanding: Usually means very good or excellent, but could be regarded as a relative qualifier. The good will be outstanding among mediocre ones. The state-of-the-art need not be excellent. Amazing,magnificent, brilliant, formidable: Do not seem to be suitable for describing the quality of a technical item. You could also be "amazed" of how bad it is. Neither of these imply better than "excellent", AFAIC. Divine: Do you have lenses you call divine? Perfect: There is not perfect lens.

05-08-2009, 06:23 PM	#23
Jimbo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Maple Ridge BC Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,368	Welcome and you will get use to the kidding around! JIM

05-09-2009, 12:57 AM	#24
kevinschoenmakers Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Shanghai Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,509	Originally posted by Class A --- Apparently these words mean different things to different people. I would say 'excellent' is by for not the strongest qualifier. But feel free to think otherwise.

05-09-2009, 01:57 AM	#25
nulla Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 1,560	Amazing thread

05-09-2009, 02:04 AM	#26
iNVision ART Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: The 808 State: Hawaii. From Nikon to PENTAX to Canon to Pentax Photos: Gallery Posts: 71	Originally posted by Studio20 i'd have to say its sharper than the 24-105mm L i had on the 40d, but for the 169 i paid for this lens im not going to complain at all...... First off, congrats and welcome to the fold. You will realize when your shooting on a sunny day with other photographers shooting with their Canon, and all of a sudden it starts to rain and they all take cover will the k20d keeps going and going . But really? Sharper than a 24-105mm L lens?? And I thought L glass were like the top dawg/real expensive type lens? My friend has that on his 5D and he takes nice pictures but they are all bokeh.

05-09-2009, 07:12 AM	#27
Studio20 Inactive Account Join Date: May 2009 Location: Slatersville, RI Posts: 88 Original Poster	Originally posted by iNVision ART First off, congrats and welcome to the fold. You will realize when your shooting on a sunny day with other photographers shooting with their Canon, and all of a sudden it starts to rain and they all take cover will the k20d keeps going and going . But really? Sharper than a 24-105mm L lens?? And I thought L glass were like the top dawg/real expensive type lens? My friend has that on his 5D and he takes nice pictures but they are all bokeh. To me the canon and its lenses where just too soft and the colors where very washed out and they always needed alot of PP afterwards, i am finding so far that minimal PP is needed with pentax.. As for the excellent replies....... for the 169 i paid it is excellent........you just cant beat it. if i bought a canon lens for 169 well actually in the canon lineup it would have been a waste of money!

05-09-2009, 09:10 AM	#28
Heinrich Lohmann Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Airdrie, Alberta Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,097	That is a very nice photo and welcome to the forum. That 50-200 is one of most underrated lenses in the whole lineup, so is the 55-300 BTW.