[deejjjaaaa]

You're goin' a contest with Mutley to know who's the more stupid?
Go buy a D300 and troll on DPR.

Dear Thibs, we all know that the only stupid person here is you...

[Maxington]

[shrug] And 1DSMkIII and D3 costs 570% & 350% more than A700 and got beaten by it.

And you point?

Bingo.

I'd be far more annoyed if I was a D3 or a 1DSMkIII owner personally! Way more expensive, big name, pro level cameras aimed at high speed news photography type shooting, beaten by a midrange consumer DSLR from a company new to the game.

Ouch.

[thibs]

Dear Thibs, we all know that the only stupid person here is you...

I this answer as you acknowledge the fact I stated. Seems this forum is going the DPR route.

[regken]

I this answer as you acknowledge the fact I stated. Seems this forum is going the DPR route.

And we want to thank you for being part of the group helping that transformation along.

[ftpaddict]

The internets is serious business. Can we please drop it now?

[*isteve]

And I dont mean the imbicilic ramblings of some of the regular trolls, I mean the test results.

The A700 being so much better than the D3 and 1D mk3 (notwithstanding the problems with the latter) is not consistent with general field experience. If this was true, sports shooters would be queuing round the block for an A700!

The fact is that the 1D and D3 have many alternative settings to suit different situations, and unless you pick the right one for the job this test is meaningless. Moreover, no single test can possibly tell you anything useful about CAF and focus tracking.

Nor is a test that extends over such a short duration be taken seriously unless all variables are carefully controlled and the test repeated several times with each camera to eliminate operator error.

However it the results stated above that make me seriously doubt the relevance of this test to the general situation.

Is it me or nobody realize the difference between a 50-135 and a 70-200?. I have seen a lot people here suggesting differences in prices as an argument favouring one system over another and they are not even comparing the same product. K20d is good for many people and not for others, and the same goes for Canon, Nikon, Sony or OLy, but nobody can say that Pentax is the "cheap" system anymore. The results of this test doesnt let Pentax in a good position. Some other sites will compare resolution and Pentax K20d will excel, some other will do dynamic range or noise and a different result will come up. The point that many people is missing is that to choose other system is not intrinsically wrong. Some people here are saying that Pentax is a good system for sports and wildlife cos there are good shoots in PPG. For crying out loud, you can have those shoots also with a K1000 but you might need a month to get them. Of course the K20D can be used for that kind of photography and it will be better than most of the 10years old products but if I like that kind of photography why would I want to buy a K20d over a 40d or a A700? The question that you want to make to yourself is "do I want to follow the easy path or the though path?". And I know, Ansel Adams, Capa, Cartier-Bresson, Man Ray... all used manual cameras, now go and ask Capa how many shoots he lost manual focusing or changing film....

[kenyee]

before the Tamron/Sigma 70-200/2.8 lenses, it was actualy cheaper to buy a used Nikon D80 and Nikon 70-200/2.8VR for the same price as a Pentax FA*80-200/2.8 :-0

I agree w/ Gruoso though. The old rule of Canon for sports (better AF and lenses), Nikon for weddings (best flash system), Pentax for landscapes (better primes) still holds IMHO. Nikon has gotten a lot better for sports w/ the D3/D300, but Canon still leads. It's not a question of whether you can get a photo, it's the probability you'll get the shot you want. I'm glad this reviewer has attempted to quantize that so manufacturers know there's another benchmark test they have to pass :-)

[and]

I was surprised the a700 did so well, I didnt think it would beat both canon and nikon, thats quite an achievement.

[Tom Lusk]

"Yup that D300 sure does stomp the snot out of your K100D... You even try a K20D? Walter gets some amazing shots with it and even BIF which I thought was impossible from what many people have proclaimed over the years."

You're right as always, Chris. The D300 does "stomp the snot" out of my trusty Pentax.

Did I even try a K20D? No! Why would I? If I took the time I could find the PM from you that explained that Pentax didn't make any of the changes I was looking for in the areas of focus, speed and buffer size. So, for my needs, Pentax twice has come out with new top-of-their-line cameras that were of no use to me. Why on earth would I buy one. I'm sure everyone is well aware of all the posts where those looking for cameras/lenses that were competitive feature-wise for wildlife/sports and had bought Pentax K10's and 20's were ridiculed saying they should have known Pentax was not interested in those markets. You know the ones - only poor photographers need speed. Good photographers wait for that precise millisecond before making the perfect shot.

If you'll look at my PPG -

PENTAX Photo Gallery

you'll see I've managed a few BIF shots (I've got a 100 or so more decent ones, too), but you know what? For every shot made, there were hundreds that were OOF or that I couldn't even get a focus lock at all to allow the shot due to the poor AF characteristics of my camera. This is in good light. I wouldn't even bother trying in poor light.

I held on for a couple of years, though, hoping that Pentax would address these shortcomings, but no such luck. So my only option was to go to another manufacturer (after 40 years of using Pentax products), and I'm glad I did as I no longer have to wait for a camera that lets me do what I want to. I've got it!

As for Walter's bird photos, they are the best I've seen by any Pentax user. Too bad he uses a $4000.00 SIGMA 500mm lense most of the time now, as it holds out false hopes for those who want to do as well, using strictly Pentax equipment. So much for the Pentax is just as good as Canon or Nikon, but a lot cheaper line.

"Oh the FA*300 f4.5 is not going to compete with the Nikkor 300, you're talking apples to oranges. Bargain 300 versus a top Nikon lens????"

Perhaps, Chris you are not familiar with the FA*300? Widely accepted as one of the best long lenses ever produced by Pentax, if you'll do some research. Sells used in the $1000.00 range, if you can find one. The new DA*300 hopefully will match the optical performance, and will sell for even more - approx. $1300.00, I believe, at stores like yours where pride is taken in selling at full MSRP.

My Nikon AFS 300mm f4.0 cost a little over $800.00. Can be found everywhere for well less than $1300.00.

Similarly the D300 has come down in price and can be found for under $1600. Add that to the cost of the 300mm, and the overall price favours Nikon vs your store price for the K20 and DA*300.

As Gruoso has pointed out, Pentax no longer is a clear "value leader", although anyone reading Pentax fora would come to the conclusion that you have to sell your first-born to own decent Canon or Nikon equipment.

Times have changed...

PS- I'll be keeping my camera and FA*300 as a knock-around combo that I take to work, so don't be looking for them on eBay. Everything else will be going up later this week if I get the time.

[roentarre]

Off to the "Post your Photos" section to post possibly my last Pentax shots.

Sad to see you leave, Tom.

D300 is in deed a great camera and a colleague of mine was owning this camera with 400/2.8 for taking bird shots in Brisbane. I was so jealous of the shots he got.

I tried his camera for the street shots sitting at the entrance of a local market. The AF is just so smooth.

You will love the new camera, Tom.

[deejjjaaaa]

...Times have changed...

"... imbicilic ramblings of some of the regular trolls..." (c) one smarta$$

[Falcons]

Is it me or nobody realize the difference between a 50-135 and a 70-200?. I have seen a lot people here suggesting differences in prices as an argument favouring one system over another and they are not even comparing the same product. K20d is good for many people and not for others, and the same goes for Canon, Nikon, Sony or OLy, but nobody can say that Pentax is the "cheap" system anymore. The results of this test doesnt let Pentax in a good position. Some other sites will compare resolution and Pentax K20d will excel, some other will do dynamic range or noise and a different result will come up. The point that many people is missing is that to choose other system is not intrinsically wrong. Some people here are saying that Pentax is a good system for sports and wildlife cos there are good shoots in PPG. For crying out loud, you can have those shoots also with a K1000 but you might need a month to get them. Of course the K20D can be used for that kind of photography and it will be better than most of the 10years old products but if I like that kind of photography why would I want to buy a K20d over a 40d or a A700? The question that you want to make to yourself is "do I want to follow the easy path or the though path?". And I know, Ansel Adams, Capa, Cartier-Bresson, Man Ray... all used manual cameras, now go and ask Capa how many shoots he lost manual focusing or changing film....

As I am the only one who mentioned PPG - I will assume you are refering to me.

And I will state that I did not say Pentax is a good system for sports and wildlife that is your own personal spin on it. I said show me which shots on PPG are poor due to slow lowlight AF - absolutely nothing to do with sports & wildlife only at all. The point is that there is so much more out there in the big world to photograph - that perhaps your narrow mind can't comprehend.

Price is relevant and Pentax is still the cheaper system - if it doesn't suit your needs then fine buy something that does - seriously tell me how am i somehow stopping you?

Just remember that not everyone may be as wealthy as you so you should not denegrate people for owning a Pentax or using it for sports or wildlife simply because that is the camera they can afford or are just happy with.

Yes I follow the tough path not because I want to but because I have to (M class lenses for me not even AF)- you should think yourself most fortunate - enjoy your canikon.

[*isteve]

"... imbicilic ramblings of some of the regular trolls..." (c) one smarta$$

Actually I was not referring to Tom

[Cambo]

Lots of well meaning people here trying to make the best of a bad thing, but come on now, this was simply dreadful performance.

25% lost shots? Really bad. I knew Pentax's AF performance was lacking, but I had no idea how sad it really is. Absolutely dreadful, and I hope they now make this a top priority to fix, if they haven't already.

That and apologizing to Benjikan - dreadful what they did to him as well. Marketing geeks be damned, its about the art form, and Benjikan is definitely one of the greats doing this stuff and proudly waiving the Pentax flag, and they gassed him for it.

Simply stupid. This is an awful day for the brand. They have only themselves to blame.

Cheers,
Cameron