Originally posted by Dekka I have never had anything more than a nice point and shoot. I loved to take pics and wanted a DSLR for years.
Almost the same story here.
I came from a Point'n Shoot and got tired of the limitations at higher ISO, among other things.
Originally posted by Dekka I watched as the price came down. I looked at pics on other (non camera/photography) forums and wanted a Nikkon. Thats what all the others had right?
Hubby, from back before we were together, had some pentax lenses. So I reasearched pentax. I was impressed by reviews. So I went to a physical store (Henry's) and went and actually looked at the Nikkon D80 and the Pentax K20. The store people actually told me the Pentax was the better camera overall.
I liked it and bought it. I don't care what the pro's use. I did care what everyone else was using, in a way. Its not that I like to follow the crowd, its just that if hubby hadn't had those lenses it might never have occurred to me to look at Pentax.
This is what really gets to me.
I
do understand why "Pros" choose Canon and Nikon -- from high-end options, available fast telezooms, lens rentals, etc...
If I was a Pro, I'd be tempted to buy a D300 or D3 and some serious Nikon glass, for $5-6k.
What I do
NOT understand is why so many Canon and, even worse, Nikon "fanboys" recommend the Rebel and, God help us, D40/D60 products.
I mean, really, the D40/D60 are crippled POS and at least some Nikon Pros/Semi-Pros know and admit it.
In fact, most of the "chatter" comes from other noobs or only amateur-level Nikon owners who bought the marketing and talk about "what the Pros use" while they are not themselves.
One D40 owner told me I was stupid to have a Pentax K100D, but with 0 technical meat, and when presented with things like lack of bracketing in the D40, his response was, "you don't need it if you know what you're doing."
Then he turned around and told someone else "when you want to do more serious stuff, you'll want to get a higher-end Nikon body with bracketing."
WTF?
I
love Pentax because, as a novice now (trying to move into the amateur arena), I got
all the features I wanted to start with at entry-level.
To get most of those, I had to go mid to high-end on the body, let alone when I bought, the in-lens IS was still costly (it's come down now, because of Pentax and Sony).
I started with a K100D and three (3) lenses: DA 10-17 FE, DA 16-45 and DA 50-200 -- for less than any mid-range Canon or Nikon body alone.
I just ordered the K20D with DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135 because I want after, compact lenses that make the entire system sealed.
I also opted for the AF 360 FGZ flash since it came to just over $100 with the rebate offer as well.
So yeah, I just dropped $2,250 after rebates, and could have had a Nikon D300 plus one good wide angle or one mid-range tele.
But I look at Pentax's history, their "value" for the amateur, those of us that don't have press passes and can't carry in huge telezooms to sporting events.
Those of us who live in Florida and have to worry about weather in the fall during American football season.
And those of us who like to travel, often to costal or other wet areas, and don't want to have to worry about splashes.
That's why I just finally bought into the K20D and DA* lenses, even though I only had about $600-700 invested in K-mount glass prior.
I'm looking forward to the DA* 60-250 f/4 at some point as well as if the forthcoming DA 11-16 is a DA* too.
The reviews on the Tokina 11-16 ATX-Pro are besting most of the Canon and Nikon mid-range stuff.