[deejjjaaaa]

The person behind the Body is so much more important than who makes the body or the glass. Thats my opinion, but hey, I'm an old fart.

But yeah, I've noticed a lot of running to Nikon both here and at DPreview....

yes, so why that same person should stick to Pentax, huh ?

[deejjjaaaa]

This makes me doubt either the guy's judgment, his equipment (bad copy?) or his agenda (justify (to self) moving to new hardware,) because the WB on the K20D is top-notch - better than the K100D, but also better than the Canon 40D & XT, and Nikon D40 & D80 I've shot. Maybe the super high-enders are better, but IMO the K20D is best-in-class when it comes to WB.

K20D is top of the line for Pentax, D3 is top of the line for Nikon... that person wants top of the line - not just "best in class".

[Blue]

K20D is top of the line for Pentax, D3 is top of the line for Nikon... that person wants top of the line - not just "best in class".

Well, in that case, I want to see how the D700 fairs against the 645D.

[philbaum]

Edit: The big thing is that with a big tripod setup, it would be good to have a second body and lens to use for mobility but he is already at 7+ pounds.

You probably know this, but the 7+ lbs was just the fast lens, What does a D3 or D700 weigh, say 2 lbs, the gimbal and tripod, another 8 lbs likely, so a total of 17 lbs plus he had nifty belt that had another lens on it and other debris around his waist.

Nice guy though.

[TiminyCricket]

Is it me, or have you noticed that there seems to be quite a few people defecting to Nikon, particularly the D700, lately?

Other than the fact that it's FF and has some other whiz-bang features, is it really worth spending $2000 more over the price of a K20? I was talking with my husband (more like boring) about the subject and got to thinking what I could do if I had $3000 to blow on camera gear and running some ideas through my head as to what I could do with that kind of money if I had it. Here are some of my ideas:

1. Buy 2 K20s and a couple more lenses and sell the K10 for even more gear money.
2. Buy 1 K20, keep the K10, and buy $2000 worth of lenses and other smaller stuff.
3. Buy 1 K20 and a fast telezoom (70-200/2.8) for myself and spend the rest of the money buying Canon-mount lenses for my dad's Canon XSi.
4. Buy 1 K20 and a fast telezoom (70-200/2.8) for myself and a K20 and a lens or 2 for Dad with the idea that once Dad gets his hands on a K20 and discovers how much better it is than his Canon gear, he'll have Mom put his Canon gear on Fleabay and use the proceeds to satisfy the LBA monster in him that I created.

Yes, if I had $3000 to blow on my photography hobby, there are definitely better ways of blowing it than blowing it all on one body!

Heather

Hmmm... if I had $3,000 to simply blow on new camera gear?
I'd probably go with:

Sigma "Bigma" 50-500mm (I've always wanted a lens that looks like it could shoot down a weather balloon) :P
Sigma 10-20mm (about as wide as i suppose you can get short of going fisheye)
Pentax DA* 200mm f/2.8 SDM (hear it's a superior tele-prime for the price)
Pentax DA 18-250mm (great walk-about lens)
Battery Grip for my K10D

Well, I don't really have $3K to spend on equipment... so now I guess it's back down to reality at this time. :P

[Wheatfield]

I agree completely. I am tired of hearing complaints that the K10D or K20D isn't as good as certain Nikon or Canon bodies that are three times the price. I'm sure Pentax is capable of producing $5000 camera bodies if they could turn a profit doing so. If I had thousands of dollars burning a hole in my pocket I might own one of those high end cameras but I don't. I do have a very good camera that has shake reduction, weather resistant body and excellent lenses at decent prices.

I'm tired of hearing people justifying Pentax's shortcomings by saying their bodies aren't in the same class as the competition, and therefore can't be compared to the competition.
It's a loser argument.
Since they are losing customers to companies that make higher specified bodies, they should be in that market niche to keep people with their brand.
People who buy expensive camera bodies have a tendency to buy expensive brand name lenses, rather than third party Junkmas, which is where the real profit is to be made.

[Blue]

You probably know this, but the 7+ lbs was just the fast lens, What does a D3 or D700 weigh, say 2 lbs, the gimbal and tripod, another 8 lbs likely, so a total of 17 lbs plus he had nifty belt that had another lens on it and other debris around his waist.

Nice guy though.

Yeah thats what the + was for. The tripod setup I use in the field is about 6.2 pounds which is light. Factor in the SuperProgramA and the SMC A 400mm (3.3 pounts) and I can relate to the weight or at least empathize.

[rfortson]

I do see the argument that Pentax could keep customers with something above the K20D. However, directly comparing the K20D to the D700 and D3 is ridiculous, they're not even in the same class. I think it's somewhat valid to compare the K20D to the D300, but you still have to compare the K20D and the $700 in your pocket to the D300, and in that context, I'd much rather have the K20D. I'm not so sure I'd pick the D300 over the K20D if price wasn't a consideration. For me and my use, the K20D is fine.

Back to the original question of what I'd do with a spare $3k lying around, I'd try to find that Sigma 500/4.5 (but I don't think that's enough money). If not, I'd buy a nice assortment of fast lenses and maybe a spare K100DS.

[ftpaddict]

Gentlemen! You are all, as they say, beating about the bush.

[lesmore49]

I had this email sent to me a few days ago.
It might be enlightening.....

"i simply don't trust the Pentax bodies to deliver reliable exposure, WB, and noise control as any of my Nikon bodies. the K20D's noise is not that good and unless shot with very careful exposure, more than any of my current Nikon bodies under ordinary circumstances. long exposures like i am fond of doing with waterfalls and HDR sequences induce sensor heat buildup noise that i have never seen in any other DSLR i have owned, including the K10D. this noise is a huge hassle to deal with and when it occurs, i end up throwing away lots of images. inconsistent exposure, mostly under, just kills noise performance because when the camera is under, it's under by a lot, 2/3 of a stop to as much as 1.5 stops. with a camera that is as noisy as the K10D or K20D, correct exposure is super important. Pentax may use a contrasty tone curve to hide the noise in JPG mode but i shoot RAW and process with a linear tone curve specifically to dig out lots of shadow detail. it's part of my look and i don't like to deal with cameras that don't have the dynamic range i need. the usual numeric noise figures for the K20D are misleading because they aren't sensitive to low spatial frequency chroma noise that the camera produces.

messed up AWB is an inconvenience as i shoot only RAW, but it's annoying to do the extra step of overriding WB on just about every shot in tricky lighting. i'm not talking about tricky white balance, just unusual patterns of light and dark in daylight. tricky color balance problems seem to be beyond the camera's ability to recognize.

shooting essentially 7 days a week with my D3 has made me very unsatisified with the speed and noise of the K10D and K20D. i'm talking general handling speed as well as my more specific complaints about AF speed and FPS. i haven't yet bought any DA* lenses with SDM, and i will eventually. that will address lens AF noise, but not its speed. it's hard to describe to someone who has never used one what it's like to get used to a 9FPS camera's responsiveness. most of my shooting, although not much of my selects yet, are done with my D3 set to its highest FPS and high shutter speeds. simple things like quick review and so on follow from the D3 generally being a speedy camera. even on a tripod with long exposures, the D3 just lets me work faster.

i get what i feel are better results from the K20D only under relatively limited circumstances because of the body's shortcomings. these shortcomings degrade the lens advantage over Nikkor lenses to the point where i just don't feel like using the body more than i have to. i find myself prefering to use the K10D more to avoid the sensor heating problem. for the moment, i am solving my dissatisfaction with Nikkor short tele to wide prime problem by buying Zeiss lenses. i consider high end Nikkor zooms better than Pentax ones in most areas except flare and am happy with them otherwise. the one area where i have to do some experiments on are my B&W people photography. the K20D chroma noise basically disappears, but i am not sure of the general sensor heating problem. the K10D was excellent for this when i shot with the 43 and 77. i want to use the K20D with the same lenses but i am not sure i will get the results i want. when i get back from vacation, i will try a couple of sessions with the K20D to see how things work out. i may go back to the K10D from which i have had excellent results.

i just feel so disappointed and occasionally angry at Pentax for just not getting it when they had a chance to lead and now i don't see much chance of them ever doing more than eternally playing catch-up, even with Samsung in there. i just shouldn't have so much hassle to get consistent high quality results from the bodies. VPN on the K10D is a near-fatal problem for me. the K20D reduced VPN but not to the point where i am happy. however, the K20D adds noise overall by using cheap ADCs and then not providing adequate cooling for the sensor so that long exposure aficionados like me have the dark-field NR become essentially useless. inconsistent exposure and AWB just aggravate things. when i use the Pentax bodies, i just spend too much time working around their shortcomings and for many things, it's just not worth it."

I dunno...since Nov. /07 I have been using my K10d, with 16-45, 55-300, battery grip, 360 flash....old 35-105 A Macro...all Pentax.

I take pictures of custom/hot Rod / retro-rebuild cars, landscapes, portraits, fauna..from Pelicans to Sparrows.

The pictures are, IMHO, great....having taken pictures both as a hobby and limited professional use-since 1968.

I've really learned how to use this camera, poring over the manual and two other K10D books, trying out new settings, experimenting and I am extremely pleased.

In my 40 years of photography, owning and using everything from a variety of Pentax 35mm SLR's, Leica rangefinder, Mamiya medium format...etc....I have to say, I'm happier with this camera than others.

I think if I was going to go into photography as a profession (I'm just retired + not from photography) I would not be getting Nikon.

If you're going to use DSLR for your professional work, the system to get, is Canon.

Much more lenses, accessories and the bodies are incomparable, albeit Nikon, very lately is coming up strong. But Nikon can't compete with the huge Canon professional system.

It used to be , say 20-40 years ago that Nikon was the pro Camera, but the last decade + or so....Canon is the overwhelming choice.

For advanced amateurs and photogs who do a bit of pro work...Pentax will fill the bill.

I have not noticed people going to Nikon from Pentax. I would say this was the case before the K100/K10D came out, but not so, anymore. I think Pentax holds it's own, now.

If anything there has been a swing from Nikon to Canon, by those who want access into the Canon system.

[kenyee]

If I had the money...D700/D3 just for ISO2500 and their 200-400/4...check these out:
Best Seat in the House | The Seattle Times
but I figure next year, Pentax's 645D or D700 will be out and I'll be happy and not have to pay that much ;-)

[Blue]

. . .
Back to the original question of what I'd do with a spare $3k lying around, I'd try to find that Sigma 500/4.5 (but I don't think that's enough money). If not, I'd buy a nice assortment of fast lenses and maybe a spare K100DS.

The Sigma 800mm f5.6 would be interesting also but its more like $7K or more.

[Wheatfield]

I do see the argument that Pentax could keep customers with something above the K20D. However, directly comparing the K20D to the D700 and D3 is ridiculous, they're not even in the same class.

Ridiculous? No, it isn't. If I walk into a camera store and ask to see the best that Pentax, Nikon and Canon make, I am going to be making that comparison.
Or worse, I walk into a camera store, look at the k20 and it's direct competitors, and then get told that this is the best Pentax does, but it's direct competition is 2 or 3 tiers downs from the best that Canon or Nikon can do.
This isn't going to instill a lot of confidence in Pentax for most buyers.

It's unavoidable that these types of comparisons will be made until the best that Pentax makes gets better.

[*isteve]

Ridiculous? No, it isn't. If I walk into a camera store and ask to see the best that Pentax, Nikon and Canon make, I am going to be making that comparison.
Or worse, I walk into a camera store, look at the k20 and it's direct competitors, and then get told that this is the best Pentax does, but it's direct competition is 2 or 3 tiers downs from the best that Canon or Nikon can do.
This isn't going to instill a lot of confidence in Pentax for most buyers.

It's unavoidable that these types of comparisons will be made until the best that Pentax makes gets better.

Well apparently since this is a Pentax forum enough people realise that such comparisons are meaningless and bought a Pentax anyway.

Why are you here? Did you just think you should sign up to remind us all how stupid we are to buy a second rate product from a second rate company?

Sounds like it.

[Lance B]

Well apparently since this is a Pentax forum enough people realise that such comparisons are meaningless and bought a Pentax anyway.

Why are you here? Did you just think you should sign up to remind us all how stupid we are to buy a second rate product from a second rate company?

Sounds like it.

Succinctly put, mate.