[philbaum]

K20 would be my choice.

I considered both Canon and Nikon and Olympus 2 years when i got my first dslr, a K10. I knew with Canon and Nikon, i'd always have to consider whether to buy lenses with or without Vibration Reduction or SR. Pentax has it on all their lenses. When i talked to my brother about Canon, he reported that none of his SLR lenses were worth anything because they had gone to focus motors in their lens bodies. No customer loyalty there, as far as i could see.

Also that water proofing is important to me because i live in a very rainy, sometimes even snowy part of the country and have had my Pentax out in both situations. I just keep a small cloth over the lens to prevent any standing water and have done fine.

Also note, that with the K20, they have an easy feature to adjust back or front focusing on your lenses or globally on the camera itself. So far that has not proved necessary and all my lenses seem to work fine with the K20. Also the 14.7 megapixls have allowed me to print to 24" by 36" size - i sell framed photos at a local village store,. So i appreciate the greater resolution.

Best wishes

[pingflood]

K20 would be my choice.

I considered both Canon and Nikon and Olympus 2 years when i got my first dslr, a K10. I knew with Canon and Nikon, i'd always have to consider whether to buy lenses with or without Vibration Reduction or SR. Pentax has it on all their lenses. When i talked to my brother about Canon, he reported that none of his SLR lenses were worth anything because they had gone to focus motors in their lens bodies. No customer loyalty there, as far as i could see.

Isn't Pentax in the process of gradually screwing people over by moving to SDM-only lenses, which won't AF with the older bodies?

Where's the loyalty there?

And why did they cripple the K mount so you have to use the "Green button" to properly meter with older lenses?

Canon did a clean break in 1987, and every EF mount body or lens made since work well with each other. 22 years and people are still holding a grudge.

[Marc Sabatella]

No, that's exactly what I meant. If you plan on PRIMARILY shooting things in motion, be it racecars, running kids, dogs, horses, airplanes or birds, I think you are doing yourself a disservice going with a system that is not as capable as the competition in that aspect.

I'd agree *only* if you find that ability to get a picture in focus to be more of an issue that getting an image free of camera shake, and that those moving things never go out in the rain, and/or you have unlimited financial resources to buy a complete weather sealed and stabilized system. Assuming of course that the difference in ergonomics doesn't trump all of these concerns, but that's going to be entirely personal as to which camera feels best. For me, anything as large or larger than K20D isn't in the running - I don't care *how* good the focus is. And yes, most of my subjects move.

Why pick a tool you have to fight with to get the picture?

Indeed, which is why I'll never buy a camera without sensor stabilization.

[pingflood]

I'd agree *only* if you find that ability to get a picture in focus to be more of an issue that getting an image free of camera shake, and that those moving things never go out in the rain, and/or you have unlimited financial resources to buy a complete weather sealed and stabilized system. Assuming of course that the difference in ergonomics doesn't trump all of these concerns, but that's going to be entirely personal as to which camera feels best. For me, anything as large or larger than K20D isn't in the running - I don't care *how* good the focus is. And yes, most of my subjects move.

I'll just make a couple of points here:

1) Most of the people touting the superior weather resistance of the Pentax bodies do not own any weather sealed lenses.

2) I've used (since the 300D came out -- 2002/2003?) a 300D, 10D, 20D, 50D, 1DsII, K20D, and GX-1S all outside in rain and carried around everywhere, and not a single body of any model/brand has had any problems.

Finally, whenever I have moving subjects I find the shutter speed required to properly capture them to be more than sufficient to avoid camera shake.

But if you're shooting things where in-camera shake reduction would help out by all means, go for a system that has it.

Again, I said for _primarily subjects in motion_ but apparently it must translate into "for everything" somehow.

[Shashinki]

Let's just say that it's alot cheaper to buy a new camera than it is to buy a whole new range of lenses.

I do not envy the people who had to buy new 300mm 2.8's and the like when Canon switched to the EF system....

[MRRiley]

what in gods name is a "STRONG OPINION"

do you want, we can get MRRiley to flex while holding a K20D and yell at you, "DONT BE FOO< GET A K20D AS YOUR TOOL< RAARRRR"

I'm afraid that particular demonstration would not be very impressive Gooshin... although I have been bulking up by shooting the K20D and Bigma hand-held...

Mike

[shutterbob]

K20d is the best camera Pentax has to offer.........bar none, including the K-7. I own both. With Pentax you can build a stable of pristine glass that all come with Shake Reduction (cause it's built into the camera). Can the D60 do that? I don't think so. You'll pay double the price of every stabilized Nikon lens you buy to get a benefit that is build right in to the K20d. Be smart, think about it.

[nostatic]

My guess would be that most D60 owners have one or maybe a couple of DX lenses. Not much of a FF upgrade path there...

[Rener]

go against the grain, Pentax K20 hands down.

[Ratmagiclady]

Now you've overloaded the poor soul. Remember they're a P&S upgrader.

My strong opinion is that if I were suggesting a camera to someone with just that much money who had any intention of learning photography, K20d hands down. If they had less money I'd weigh if they should have a K10d for most of the same reasons.

Forget about super teles: if you want to buy one of those multi-thousand dollar things, you're going to need to be buying another body if you buy a D60 or a Rebel, anyway, and replacing kit lenses and a few nice affordable primes will not really be an obstacle.

That's my rationale, anyway.

I wouldn't be fussed about size: some who've started on entry-level bodies think it's big, but it's... Camera-sized. Actually, about the smallest APS-C camera out there with the two control dials. The bit of extra weight and heft is actually good to have in your hand, helps your photos.

Which dials I count essential for students. (Lots of buttons may be intimidating, at first, but it's a whole lot more straightforward than trying to keep track of things that are buried in menues. Camera makers won't put a lot of buttons on a camera that doesn't have at least one darn good use: they'd much rather have fewer parts to assemble. That's part of why you usually pay for the privilege. A lot, in the case of many cameramakers. )

Anyway, the general notion I operate under, and I'm a pretty serious photographer, is that if I end up getting paid enough and doing the kind of work to need a super-lens, or more performance otherwise, either Pentax'll have what I need or not. Whether I'm having to replace an entry-level Nikon or upgrade a K20d by that time doesn't really add up to a whole heck of a lot of difference except what I'll have been having to live with in the meantime.

I see the K20d as one of those models of camera that has hit an important plateau: it may not be *the* fastest AF ever fitted to a tripod screw, but it'll do. it *was* my upgrade path till I managed to get one at these sorts of prices last year, all unexpectedly.

Don't let anyone tell you the weathersealing is useless without a weathersealed lens. A few hundred things that won't go wrong aren't nothing to *me* anyway: ...One can treat this camera like one could always treat reasonably good cameras in a bit of rain or with wet hands: protect the lens and not worry about raindrops getting funneled into computer parts. It makes it a *whole* lot easier to cope with rain like one always used to be able to, before everything got computerized. That's not nothing. Of course, yeah, if you *do* put on a weathersealed lens, you're on a whole other level of not fussing with baggies, though. I can see having some fun with that: I've got my eye on one of em, myself. (Who would want a weathersealed fast 55? Ratmagiclady, that's who, with bells on! Now stand and deliver with that 28, Pentax! )


As for what lenses to suggest, the kit lens 18-55 II (this is the non-weather-sealed version, the new WR is probably the same lens or at least as good) is about the nicest kit lens going, and as cheap to obtain as any. I wouldn't have bothered to buy it, myself, if it didn't come free, cause I have other tastes, but it does quite well in the middle of its range. I'd also suggest a prime lens like the FA 50/1.4, which is just beautiful and can still be had cheaply or the FA 35/2 which is also lovely and gettable.

[PrimeObjectif]

To the OP:
I had sold so many D60's, Nikon sent me a two-lens D60 kit...and I sold it to fund my Pentax K10D. Since then, I've upgraded to the K20D and been very happy.

The D60 has obviously been a huge success for Nikon--it seems everyone's got one, and for most people looking to step up from a P&S, it does the job just fine: less shutter lag, burst mode, small body, better AF, and usually nicer pictures. If you don't think you'll ever buy more than the kit lens for your camera, the D60 is fine. And if you're going to head right into the woods for a camping trip right after you buy your camera, the D60 will be super easy to use.

However, you will be heading into the woods for a camping trip, and I assume you'll want to use your camera whenever you feel like taking a photo. The K20D, with it's rugged, weathersealed body, will certainly be up to the task. It won't be as light as your other options, but it is the most capable camera on your list--and the best camera for that price, period.

Pentax has the most unique lens offerings out of any camera manufacturer. Just have a look at the Limited lenses. Sure, they're not cheap, but neither are Nikon primes, and you won't have much to choose from that will autofocus on your D60, anyway. The great thing about the Pentax bodies is that you always have options with them in terms of lens compatability. Nikon's been using the same mount for generations, too, but it'll suck to want to buy a new lens that won't AF on your camera.

If you need a telephoto zoom and get anything other than the Nikkor 55-200 for your D60, you've run out of room for your right hand on the camera. The same is true if you want a better standard zoom for your D60.

And if you're still not convinced to go with the Pentax, go to pentaxphotogallery.com and search for images using a Pentax body or lens that you're considering.

Hope this helps.

-Jason

[regor]

If you want to get to the point, just skip to the end of this post where the list of cameras is.

I'm a first-time DSLR buyer (been using Pentax point and shoots for 15 years).

...
Again, the cameras are:

Pentax K2000
Pentax K200D
Pentax K200D replacement
Pentax K20D with current price drop
Nikon D60

Let the opinions flow!

Thanks!

No arguing, the K20D is the best value of the bunch. This is not to say that it is the best camera for you, and for what I read, the K20D could be too much for you. The K20D is not designed to be Point and Shooters Friendly. It is met for someone who technically knows how to take a photograph. I don't know your level of expertise nor motivation to learn, but for what I interpret, the Km/K2000 might be a better choice. Lighter, smaller, similar modes as your P&S camera, more forgiving in some ways.

[GerryL]

I would go for the K7 but since it is not on the list then by all means the K20D.
My target is still the K7 and that was the reason I bought the K100D super.
Now that i have a lot of glass, I can just save up and upgrade to the K7.
If I started with the K20D though, it probably would take me a while to upgrade to the K7.
Go K20D.
..as Pentax said, be different.
Normal is boring!

[Aristophanes]

I will totally disagree with most posts ;0

The K2000/K-M, hands down. It has 90% of the IQ and leaves huge budget room for glass, which is the main point of a DSLR. The learning curve is forgiving and a perfect transition from P&S.

With the extra $$$ you can get a zoom or WA lens, or get a prime (FA 50 to start for the big aperture) and really understand photography. It's also light and comfortable.

When choosing, the camera body is third behind technique and glass. I started with Nikon, but the VR lens costs threw me. Same for Canon. It was between Pentax and Oly, but I wanted lower light performance, so I went to APS-C with an FA 50.

There are stunning photos with the kit lenses of all makes, so don't break the bank. If the kits lens is not quite what you want, I would suggest the Tamron 17-50.

Build the hobby slowly and the regards are much better than buying the a shooter in a brand right away. more people get turned off DSLR's because they over-buy for their needs and budget.

If you can wait, the K200D replacement, but as an early adopter, you'd pay premium pricing. If you can find a well-discounted K200D, you cannot go wrong either.

[Ratmagiclady]

No arguing, the K20D is the best value of the bunch. This is not to say that it is the best camera for you, and for what I read, the K20D could be too much for you. The K20D is not designed to be Point and Shooters Friendly. It is met for someone who technically knows how to take a photograph. I don't know your level of expertise nor motivation to learn, but for what I interpret, the Km/K2000 might be a better choice. Lighter, smaller, similar modes as your P&S camera, more forgiving in some ways.

I do have to quibble about the idea of 'point and shoot friendly,' ...I may be from a bit of a different era, and the K20d's certainly targeted toward more experienced photographers, but you've still got smart multipattern metering and Program and Green modes. Frankly, I don't hold with the notion that if one *wants to learn* photography, that it's best to start with something more automated, learn to work around the automation, and then unlearn/relearn what those scene modes taught one.

In fact, it seems a lot simpler to just learn it right the first time.

All's a scene mode is is something that specifies to the camera what kind of thing you're doing, so the camera will proceed to try and do the 'textbook' thing. Which I think is fun and great for the incurious (I even used a couple of them occasionally on my little bridge camera, mostly cause in that case it was rather difficult and slow to try and change the settings manually rather than (usually) just point the camera where the setting I wanted would appear and hold that. Some of the scene modes were very useful if for whatever reason, I couldn't do that. (usually this meant the 'snow' mode: that would be when I'd just have to do the same sort of thing the camera would manually, (a pain on that little guy) or even be having a hard time seeing. I'm proud of my ability to meter by eye, but that meter pins at 'Sunny 16,' often sooner than that, owing to my sun-sensitivity. ) Anyway, I was pretty impressed with how those work. (And, yes, OP, one day, you too may get to the point where automation's in the way. It may not even be as far off as you think. Back in the day, your grandfather turned his own aperture and shutter speed rings. Really. )

Another fun thing about scene modes is that now that my pretty-photo-incurious sweetie is the one who uses that little camera most of the time, I can literally phone in instructions on how to choose a scene mode and have pretty good odds of success.

Anyway, scene modes are useful and fun for a lot of people, but not, I think, essential. Maybe we're drawing a line between a 'consumer' and a 'beginner' here. If you're *beginning,* I think a K20d is a great place to start. It's definitely occurred to me as a sometime teacher that these models would be a lot easier to teach on than what's sold as 'entry level' now. If a K20d happens to not be costing 'prosumer' prices, absolutely why not get started off right. I wouldn't have a beginner start by dropping twelve bills, but since one can have this for the price of a Rebel, forget about it.

If you just want to buy a thing and get your photos with the minimum learning possible, then, yes, scene modes are great, and go ahead and go for a K200 or whatever the next hundreds-series type will be, or maybe a K2000 (If that's as far as you want to go, give thought to a Nikon d40, too. You're limited in your lens selection, but they're nice little cameras, too) But if you want to go any further than that, I think you're OK with a K20d. It's not forsaking automation, it's just not organized around it.

(And one thing about the notion of lens-lineups. The glass is all-important to actual photography, but one place where I think the difference between cameras actually can make a big concern these days is as learning tools. )

It's not as if, on the other hand, a few scene modes on an 'advanced' camera would make my ego wilt or anything: seems that's just a few exposure curves and settings keyed to a menu, and they could be of use to someone. Maybe 'green mode' or whatever a brand calls that could kick into a menu with scene choices. Don't see why cameramakers couldn't tuck those away in these somewhere.