Originally posted by zoomdaddy 
But I am considering the K200D as a back up system and possibly to make the switch to a complete Pentax system. My concerns are the longevity or better stated how strong is Pentax for future support? This could be said about fuji and olympus I am sure. Bit I think I may wait until the 1st of the year and see where Pentax is.. What say you?
Hard question to answer. There are so many good choices right now: seems like all of the major makers have a couple really good cameras in their line up. I'd be delighted to have a Canon 40D or a Nikon D300 or a Sony A700 or...
One thing: I would not personally bother buying a K200D. Get the K10D instead. Price will be similar, but the ergonomics are superior. I can't really think of any reason to buy a 200 while the 10 is still available. The K200D's high-ISO performance is emphatically NOT markedly superior to the K10D's. As for batteries, I rather liked using AA batteries in my K100D and was nervous about the K10D's rechargeable battery, but now I will never go back to AAs. Get an extra rechargeable battery and keep it with you and you'll never have a problem.
Pentax as a company seems pretty strong. It's got one of the most illustrious histories in the camera industry, although it could be said that its glory days were 40 years ago. But I'm confident that the company is solid for years to come. And while it's not going out on a limb innovating (no Foveon or 4:3 sensors), what Pentax has been doing is producing REALLY good stuff, bodies with outstanding build quality, great sensors, and ergonomics that rival or surpass those of the much higher priced competition from Nikon and Canon. So the bodies are great, and the Pentax lenses - those that are available - are also excellent.
And the best thing of all is, Pentax is the best-priced system available. And really, that's, in my opinion, THE MAIN reason to go with Pentax. If money were no object, I'd probably be using Nikon. Not because (say) the D300 is all that much better than the Pentax K20D (it does not seem to be), but because it's not any worse, there are more Nikon mount lenses available than Pentax mount, and because the Nikon flash system seems to be excellent while the Pentax system is mediocre (P-TTL doesn't work terribly well and the Pentax flash units, which haven't been updated for years, just don't seem to be well designed or well built - unlike the cameras).
I'm a wedding/event photographer. I probably OUGHT to be using Nikon, because flash is really important to me. Pentax with its outstanding primes seems best suited to photographers whose subjects tend to sit still, say, landscapes or even portrait subjects. Or fashion models.
But money
is important, to me and probably to you. If I'd gone with Nikon in the first place, I would not have been able to buy all the stuff I have bought for my Pentax system. And to replace what I've got now with Nikon equivalents, well, it ain't gonna happen this year, just way too expensive.
Don't let my talk of Pentax vs Nikon mislead you: There are LOTS of other choices out there. One of our members here recently acquired a Sony A700 and is really enjoying its fast auto-focus. Olympus has some good cameras. Canon, the copier company, makes cameras, too, if I'm not mistaken. It's hard to go way wrong.
The biggest problem is that you have to make a decision - unless you're rich enough to buy 'em all.
Will
Similar Threads 
