[lol101]

I am not an expert in photography at all...my $0.02.

3)questionable lowlight focusiing (I've never had a problem)
.

If you never had a problem with low-light focusing, why mention it?

I know, I know, it's "common knowledge" that Pentax's AF is slow in low light but isn't common knowledge made of what people read and write on forums over the internet?

Sometimes I wonder if some of the "weaknesses" of the Pentax system are not self-sustained by people (and I'm one of them, see bellow) posting what they read from people posting what they read from ... ...


I'm saying that because I have posted in another post that Pentax tracking AF was next to useless...

Now, after receiving my DA*50-135 yesterday, I stopped on the side of the road and took pictures of cars traveling towards me.

The cars were going approximately at 50-60km/h and, to my great amazement, I was able to get 90-100% in focus pictures series (C-AF + drive) from 150m to 3-4m (I lost the cars when they passed in front of me on the other side of the road)...

I have to test it again with some other lens since only two days ago, I would have swore the K10 was unable to do that... or so I've read ...

[kenyee]

The cars were going approximately at 50-60km/h and, to my great amazement, I was able to get 90-100% in focus pictures series (C-AF + drive) from 150m to 3-4m

Very nice...now I wonder if this is lens related and whether it performs best if you have f/2.8. I haven't been able to that high a percentage of in-focus pics w/ my Tamron 70-300 lens...now I'm going to have to try my other lenses...

[matsoberg]

No reason you can't have two systems.

Agreed.

I´ve been shooting Pentax SMC glass since they came in Takumar versions and I really like them. I use my K10D with older manual focusing SMC lenses and I wouldn´t even think of getting rid of them. I enjoy manual focusing and the K10D with a Katz Eye split screen in addition to a magnifying eye piece and the "focus trap" convinience makes it a good creative "old school" tool.

Then, I have the Canon 40D which is THE auto focus, 6 fps, fast shot gem for me. Add the wonderful current EF-line of lenses to that....

Two different cameras for different photography. I´m very pleased.

// Mats

[pcarfan]

If you never had a problem with low-light focusing, why mention it?

I know, I know, it's "common knowledge" that Pentax's AF is slow in low light but isn't common knowledge made of what people read and write on forums over the internet?

Sometimes I wonder if some of the "weaknesses" of the Pentax system are not self-sustained by people (and I'm one of them, see bellow) posting what they read from people posting what they read from ... ...


I'm saying that because I have posted in another post that Pentax tracking AF was next to useless...

Now, after receiving my DA*50-135 yesterday, I stopped on the side of the road and took pictures of cars traveling towards me.

The cars were going approximately at 50-60km/h and, to my great amazement, I was able to get 90-100% in focus pictures series (C-AF + drive) from 150m to 3-4m (I lost the cars when they passed in front of me on the other side of the road)...

I have to test it again with some other lens since only two days ago, I would have swore the K10 was unable to do that... or so I've read ...

That is impressive. A vehicle driving towards you is the toughest scenario...these shots can be even taken with film camera with no tracking algorithm built in, the k10d makes it very much easier, but according to consensus () others are even better, but at the end it's up to the user though. I don't think I claimed the AF-C to be next to useless, if someone does so, we all know what part of that eqaution is actually useless

You are right about the first part. It was just so he knows all potential issues from all sources that I have heard,....I have no idea how the pro-section works either. That's why I said 'questionable' etc., but I get your point.

[m8o]

Now, after receiving my DA*50-135 yesterday, I stopped on the side of the road and took pictures of cars traveling towards me.
The cars were going approximately at 50-60km/h and, to my great amazement, I was able to get 90-100% in focus pictures series (C-AF + drive) from 150m to 3-4m (I lost the cars when they passed in front of me on the other side of the road)...

Hmmm... quite compelling. Just really [ r e a l l y] wish it was longer. (no need to mention Pentax felt it equates to the 80-200mm , yes I know , even regardless tho that crop isn't perspective)

[pcarfan]

Hmmm... quite compelling. Just really [ r e a l l y] wish it was longer. (no need to mention Pentax felt it equates to the 80-200mm , yes I know , even regardless tho that crop isn't perspective)

Lots of 'reliable' rumors claim that you don't have to wait too long....the promised glasses may be coming soon (jan/08 for some soon after for others),...good times are a comin....

[*isteve]

Personally I would not switch unless for some reason I was failing to get what I wanted or needed from a camera system or the company that made it. Switching a bunch of lenses and flashes is a major investment and I would only do it if I could justify the cost financially.

On the other hand, if I was starting out from scratch on a reasonable budget I would not hesitate to buy a K10D again. Why? Because nothing else offers the same feature set for the price and what it lacks is not something I would regard as a priority for the shooting I do.

I do a lot of shooting outdoors in not so good weather so weather sealing is a big deal for me. I also like shooting interiors. Having reliable shake reduction with wide angle and prime lenses is a hoot. I can shoot with my 12-24 at 1/4 second hand held! For anything except sports, its better than using high ISO.

I also prefer SR in the camera because (a) I believe that VR and IS do have a noticeable effect on lens performance and reliability (b) it keeps lenses smaller and lighter with fewer elements (c) third party lenses seldom support any form of antishake and (d) each new body seems to improve by another stop - we are only just beginning to see the potential of this system - so each time I upgrade my body, 12 lenses get upgraded too!

I also like Pentax's little ergonomic touches. The removable section of lens hood to allow you to rotate a polariser, the cut-out on the left for your nose, the TAv exposure mode and hyper-manual mode all make using the camera that bit easier. I have got so used to these I could not live happily without them any more. The simple implementation of mirror lock is also less hassle than Canons and something I use frequently.

As for lenses, Pentax are making a whole range of lenses specifically for the cropped format. Whereas most Canon eFS and Nikon DX lenses are consumer grade, Pentax are making high quality glass for a cropped format - for users without the budget for a FF camera (most of us) you dont have to buy expensive and heavy FF compatible lenses to maximise sensor performance. Within months there will be four new lenses and within a year several more, so the lens shortage is a temporary issue at best. And I also have the three FA LTD primes, which are irreplaceable. They cover most of my studio work and they are fine walkabout lenses too.

But would I swap from a Canon 20D to a K10D? No. Not if I had a bunch of decent Canon glass already. Canon have more than enough to keep anyone on-side and I would instead trade up to a 40D or the 5D replacement for the money it would cost to swap. Even if I did NOT have that much investment in glass I would be tempted to wait and see what the K10D's replacement looked like before finalising my decision. I can also understand why people who predominantly shoot sports and wildlife would choose Canon. They have the big glass and the fast frame rates as well as clever AF and clean high ISO. Sport is not Pentax's forte now, and never has been. Like Leica, they have always been the sturdy reportage and landscape camera, rather than the touchline tommygun.

I shoot mainly on the street or in a studio in single shot mode and I dont really care as long as it focuses accurately on a dark street or under modelling lights (it does). On the occasions I have used AFC mode (on racing cars) it worked perfectly so I have no idea whether its really any better or worse than anyone elses (at least at the price point) but I would like cleaner high ISO for the rare occasions I am out at night without a tripod or gorillapod or so I can do a better job at freezing motion when I need to, but thats about my only complaint.

So, you wont get me to swap my Pentax for a Canon but equally I would not recommend anyone with a large investment in Canon (or Nikon) to swap to Pentax unless they really understood why they were doing it.

Hello All,

I am a long time, if not lifetime, Canon shooter currently shooting with a Canon EOS 20D and a variety of lenses at different focal lengths. Ever since the K10D has come out though it has intrigued me. It seems to be a good "bang for your buck" proposition with the weather sealing, anti shake technology and the backwards compatibility with so many early Pentax lenses. It would be quite an ordeal at this point to switch my equipment over to Pentax, but I would be willing to do it if the return on investment of the effort would be worth it. (Honestly, just not owning Canon or Nikon in itself in appealing to me!)

I know that I am talking to a somewhat biased crowd here, but what would be the major advantages (or disadvantages) in your mind in converting my equipment to Pentax from my current stable of Canon equipment. I shoot mostly with Sigma lenses currently as they in a lot of cases are a better bang for your buck performance wise than their Canon counterparts. And I would be able to continue with Sigma if I switched to Pentax, which is a positive as well.

Let me know what you think and what your opinions are on the subject. I would be interested to hear from anyone that has made a similar switch with regards to image noise and overall image quality from the two systems. Thanks!