Originally posted by codiac2600 Umm, the D300 only has an effective 320,000 pixels on a 3.0" screen.
This has been discussed. If measured in the same way as the K10D having 210,000, the D300 has 920,000. Not just a little bit better. The Nikon is more expensive at $1800, but it has the Nikon name which is a large portion of that price. Take away the purchase power the Nikon name has that Pentax doesn't, then you can argue that we simply can't have a 3" 920,000 pixel LCD in the K20D because the K20D doesn't cost as much as the Nikon.
These screens were last year's technology. The K20D having "better" live view than the D300 is great, and is the type of innovation that gets people to Pentax instead of Nikon - as long as Samsung gives them a comparable performance LCD which they could have if so desired.
As Samsung is a leader in LCD's, you'd think this was a no-brainer to aquire approx 900,000 pixels (unless the screen is only 2.7" instead of 3" - then maybe 800,000) for the K20D.