[kenyee]

lot of people complaining about the autofocus speed. How bad can it be?

Think about all the photos you've taken and what you'd like to take, especially the ones w/ the dimmest lighting and most action.
Go to a store (or see if you can find a friend/coworker w/ a Pentax) and try it in those conditions (ditto w/ a Canon or Nikon). Try to use the lens you'll most likely get.

As others have mentioned, low light is where Pentax is the weakest. I shoot mostly landscape/nature photography so the K10D was a no brainer to me. If you do a lot of indoor photography (e.g., weddings in a dim church w/ or w/o flash), I would have said just get a Nikon...that's an example of why subject matter influences what system you ened up with.

[Geekybiker]

My main issue with pentax right now it the complete lack of mid grade lenses. We have the super cheap kit quality zooms covered. We have the uber zooms that are midpriced but make alot of compromises. Then we have the pro glass which is super expensive. I'd love to see more lenses along the lines of the pro quality but with a more budget friendly constant f4 aperture. Looking for a tele zoom recently the prices end about $200 and started again at about $700.

[BPT]

I upgraded from the Canon S2 to the K100D, the k100D is faster then the S2 in pretty much all areas including AF so if you can do what you want with the S2 you will be good to go for the pentax. The only place you will notice lacking when compared to your S2 is the buffer size. The S2 can fire off 2 photos a second until the memory card is full, I know the K100D lacks here and I think the K10D might as well. Then again I have never used that feature so it is no skin off my nose.

In regards to focus you will notice you will be able to lock on focus where you never could before with the S2. I couldnt focus on my dog with the S2, no problem with the K100D and low light focusing of the S2 is horrible in comparison.

I am not comparing with Nikon or Canon SLRs since I have no experience with them

[Lambda_drive]

Thanks guys for all the help, I really appreciate it.

I'll try to go to a few strores this week and test out a few cameras.

[montezuma]

I spent months looking at DSLRs to find a good one. I found the K10d pretty early, but I kept looking. I read reviews and compared it to the Nikon D80, and Olympus E 510. All of them were great cameras but the D80 was much more than the K10D and the really good Nikon lenses cost a fortune. But the K10D had weathersealing and it was cheaper than the D80 and had the same resoultion Pentax doesn't have that many lenses right now but I bought a sigma lens and sigma has a lot of lenses for pentax. Olympus had really expensive and few lenses so I didn't buy olympus. Nikon is an amazing brand but is very expensive. Pentax is a less expensive way to go into photography and the cameras are amazing. I don't know about the lenses because I only have one sigma lens but the sigma lenses are pretty good too. If you're a noob like me I thing Pentax is the way to go. For the price the quality of product is amazing.

[mi2nc]

Man I am getting bummed out reading this thread. I have a k10d bought almost exclusively for shooting hockey games and pictures of my 2 boys. I am currently saving for a 2.8 lens for the hockey. Should I even invest in the lens or cut my losses now and get a 40d? I guess the real question is if I shoot at an ice rink, will I miss a boat load pics b/c autofocus is slow?

[GoneToTheDogs]

Lambda-

I've got both the K10 and the S2IS. From my perspective, if you appreciate quality and value for the money, you won't make a mistake with the K10.

If you've shot the S2 at anything other than the scenes or auto mode, you shouldn't have a problem doing the same thing with a K10. In fact, manual mode is even easier with the K10 because you get a meter scale to read in the viewfinder, not just an exposure number in the corner!

I was just like you, in that I had to start over too. I still have a bunch of Nikon 35mm gear, but the lenses were too old to use with the digital bodies. I got into the Canon P&S (S2 was my second digcam) but I got frustrated with the limited ISO, and not being able to work in RAW.

I wouldn't have even paid attention to Pentax, but was introduced to the brand by a salesman who has a K10. I was actually looking at CanNikon at the time. When I went though all of the K10 features, I was blown away. If you have read any of the previous posts (and I'm sure you have) this camera is equal to many cameras at much higher price points- that sold me!

As far as lenses go, I have a very sweet smc-50 f/1.4 that I got for about $100, and I just picked up a smc-28mm f/3.5 last weekend for $40. Now these are manual focus lenses (metal and glass, heavy and great!), mind you, but once you've worked with them the newer composite (plastic?) lenses just don't feel as good (my opinion). That being said, I will tell you the new Pentax DA lenses "feel" much better than other brands (also my opinion- I've got a couple of the DA lenses too). If the "feel" issue isn't important to you, that's okay, but you certainly can outfit yourself with a range of lenses much more cheaply than the other brands. And if you get into the older lenses, you'll find the resulting pictures are just as satisfying.

I'll still bring the S2 with me to my son's drumline competitions, because the video mode is just too cool! But, for quality shots nothing beats the K10.

Hope this helps.

-Matt

[ricardobeat]

The S2 can fire off 2 photos a second until the memory card is full, I know the K100D lacks here and I think the K10D might as well. Then again I have never used that feature so it is no skin off my nose.

The K10D can shoot at 3fps until the card is full in JPEG, 9 frames for RAW.

[BPT]

The K10D can shoot at 3fps until the card is full in JPEG, 9 frames for RAW.

Thanks that is a lot better then the k100D

[WMBP]

Man I am getting bummed out reading this thread. I have a k10d bought almost exclusively for shooting hockey games and pictures of my 2 boys. I am currently saving for a 2.8 lens for the hockey. Should I even invest in the lens or cut my losses now and get a 40d? I guess the real question is if I shoot at an ice rink, will I miss a boat load pics b/c autofocus is slow?

I can't tell you that you should NOT cut your losses and buy a Canon 40D. The 40D looks like a very sweet camera, better than the K10D, a little better than the Pentax K20D in most respects. Canon's auto-focus speeds are considerably better, and its low-light performance beats the K20D's as well. I shoot events and weddings (and indoor sports) and I have been toying with the idea of getting a 40D myself.

But I won't. It's not as simple a couple of numbers. For one thing, like me, you've got a Pentax already, and it's a fine camera. You certainly can shoot sports with your K10D. The auto-focus on the K10D is NOT bad, it's generally very good. It's not as good as the higher-priced competition these days in low light, but the rest of the time it's just fine, especially once you learn how to use your camera. That good f/2.8 lens will help.

And for taking photos of your sons, well, the Pentax is hard to beat.

As I said, I can't tell you NOT to switch. And I can't even tell you not to be bummed, in fact, with respect to being bummed, my advice is that you get used to it. We're all victims of the consumerist marketing culture that we live in. You buy a K10D and before you've finished paying the Visa bill, the K20D comes out, and it's marketed in such a way that you suddenly regret having ever bought the K10D because now you realize that what you really wanted all along has just arrived. But the more you think about it, the more you realize that, while the K20D looks great, the Canon D40 looks even better and costs less. But darn, the Nikon D300 looks even better. In fact, it's the best there is in its class. But why stop there? If you can afford a D300, why not spring for a Canon 5D? But it's not as good as a Nikon D3. Aaaarrrrgfghhhghhh! YOU CANNOT WIN.

Ah, but if you can't win, you can't really lose, either. The truth is that practically every dslr camera on the market right now is pretty good or better. Every one of them can shoot landscapes, portraits, fashion, sports, street photography, nightclubs, flowers, eagles on the wing and bison on skateboards, fish jumpin' and the cotton when it's high. Every new model is touted as revolutionary but almost none of them really are. Some of them do have special features for special needs. But in decent light, in the hands of a decent photographer, all of these cameras are within a stone's throw of one another in terms of results.

You've got a very good camera, with great controls, a good sensor, with shake reduction (which you want) built in. Great lenses are out there waiting for you to buy them. Life is tough, but make the best of it.

And if this pep talk doesn't work (and I bet it won't!), chew on this: What you really really need is a Nikon D3 with an image stabilized 50-150 f/2.8 zoom, top quality. And those two items will set you back eight to ten grand.

Feel better?

Will

[christinelandon]

...snip...So here's my question, Would a Pentax make a good choice for someone who wants a good camera system, but who doesn't want to spend an arm and a leg on lenses, or should I just get a Nikon or canon?...snip...

Lambda drive, I've shot Graphic 4X5s; Rolleiflex 6X6cm; Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Olympus, Minolta, Miranda (remember those, old timers?), and Leica 35mm; Olympus, Sony and Nikon digicams; and an assortment of oddball formats in cameras made on three continents between 1920 and 1980. I've spent my own money on Pentaxes and one Nikon system. I've kept the Pentaxes. So, you get a sense of what I like.

FWIW, in light of my experience, I think the K100D Super, if you can find one, is about the screamingest deal right now in a beginner's (D)SLR since the fabled Spotmatics and K1000s of the past century. Like its honorable ancestors, the K100D Super and its bigger brother, the K10D, are built to last and will help you learn how to be a better photographer as you work with them. They're straightforward and part of a system of good-to-great quality lenses that delivers a great deal of photographic goodness for the money.

So, they're not perfect. So, what is? Like the guys say above, get to a store, check out a bunch of the entry-to-mid level DSLRs, and see what makes you smile...as Sylvester Stone used to sing, "different strokes for different folks." Happy hunting and happier shooting!

[jake123]

My main issue with pentax right now it the complete lack of mid grade lenses. We have the super cheap kit quality zooms covered. We have the uber zooms that are midpriced but make alot of compromises. Then we have the pro glass which is super expensive. I'd love to see more lenses along the lines of the pro quality but with a more budget friendly constant f4 aperture. Looking for a tele zoom recently the prices end about $200 and started again at about $700.

We're getting a ~300-400 55-300 soon.

[Geekybiker]

We're getting a ~300-400 55-300 soon.

I'm interested in the f/4 60-250 thats is theoretically coming this summer. Its coming along slowly, but you just sort of have to accept that pentax is the last one to get glass. Luckily you can use a wide range of old lenes which is more than you can say for canikon.

[rparmar]

Ah, but if you can't win, you can't really lose, either. The truth is that practically every dslr camera on the market right now is pretty good or better. Every one of them can shoot landscapes, portraits, fashion, sports, street photography, nightclubs, flowers, eagles on the wing and bison on skateboards, fish jumpin' and the cotton when it's high.

Excellent post and sage advice. Can I buy you a drink?

[WMBP]

Excellent post and sage advice. Can I buy you a drink?

Thanks, but I'll tell you what: You buy my plane ticket from Texas to Dublin, we'll head to the Guinness "studio," and I'll buy YOU a drink. ;-)

Will