Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-14-2008, 11:24 AM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
I switched from Pentax to Canon. My K10D's AF got stuffed with my 50-135, so I did some "soul searching" while it was in Colorado. I always had some problems autofocusing in low light (especially with my FA 50mm f/1.4) and I was frustrated by a lack of a 70-200 (although the 50-135 was a nice lens)....So I said "what the heck?"

Sold off everything Pentax (most of it here) as well as a guitar and a high-end microphone preamplifier, and outfitted myself with a 40D and a bunch of nice lenses (including two big white Ls) and a flash.

What I like about Canon - FAST autofocus, even in really low light. Excellent high ISO quality (at least for a non-FF camera), lens availability (Pentax still has nothing new above 300mm, I have the very nice 100-400mm L now). ring-USM is awesome

What I liked about Pentax - Ergonomics (I prefer how Pentax does things, but I got used to the Canon), SR for all lenses (oh how I wish my EF 85mm f/1.8 was stabilized), the K10D/grip was a much better matchup than the 40D/grip, the lenses were optically excellent (I had the FA 35mm and 50mm and had used some of the Limiteds and FA* 85mm on occasion) Ability to use the pop-up flash to trigger external flashes (Nikon also does this, it's a mystery why Canon doesn't do this)

I found the 580EXII more or less on par with the 540FGZ, except the 580EXII has a better locking foot.

So in some areas, the grass is greener, in others, it's still filled with weeds

10-14-2008, 05:00 PM   #17
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,873
[QUOTE=egordon99;367327]
snip.... (oh how I wish my EF 85mm f/1.8 was stabilized),
QUOTE]

Just curious what is your take on this situation... my friend has the Canon system and the same EF 85mm f1.8 (touted as one of the sharpest non-IS lens). He is having problem using that lens with the flash indoor. To keep from camera shake, he has to keep the shutter at 1/90 or about without using a tripod. OTOH, with inbody SR, I can drag the shutter to catch more ambient light with the flash, two, three or four stops below 1/90 using my 77mm ltd. Without using tripod, his pictures are soft whereas mine are sharp. Same can be said for the 50mm lens. I could be wrong, but I do find that inbody SR has some advantages especially on mid-tele or short focal length lens.
10-14-2008, 05:11 PM   #18
Damn Brit
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by mel Quote
Ahem.
Ashton who?
lol
You're one of the younger and smarter soccer moms.
10-14-2008, 05:32 PM   #19
mel
Veteran Member
mel's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,531
QuoteOriginally posted by Damn Brit Quote
You're one of the younger and smarter soccer moms.

uh thanks but no, actually i think I DO qualify as older. where's the cut off age?

10-14-2008, 06:30 PM   #20
Damn Brit
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by mel Quote
uh thanks but no, actually i think I DO qualify as older. where's the cut off age?

Can't you take a compliment?
10-14-2008, 07:19 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
With flash, I tend to keep the shutter speed at 1/250s so shake isn't much of a problem, especially since the flash freezes most motion/shake. I usually don't go slower than f/2.8, so I still get a decent ambient/background exposure.

Without flash is where I wish I had some sort of IS. I try to get at least 1/80s, which can be tough when the light gets really low (even with high ISO). My Sigma 30mm f/1.4 is more forgiving, giving me sharp shots down to 1/30s.

If I can use flash, I prefer to go that route so it's not TOO big of a problem. It's a great lens regardless (especially for the price) and I see no need to spend $1300 more for the f/1.2 L

You're not wrong at all, IS can come in handy at ANY focal length. IS is great on my 17-85mm, giving me VERY sharp shots at 1/10s along the entire range.

QuoteOriginally posted by aleonx3 Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by egordon99 Quote
snip.... (oh how I wish my EF 85mm f/1.8 was stabilized),
Just curious what is your take on this situation... my friend has the Canon system and the same EF 85mm f1.8 (touted as one of the sharpest non-IS lens). He is having problem using that lens with the flash indoor. To keep from camera shake, he has to keep the shutter at 1/90 or about without using a tripod. OTOH, with inbody SR, I can drag the shutter to catch more ambient light with the flash, two, three or four stops below 1/90 using my 77mm ltd. Without using tripod, his pictures are soft whereas mine are sharp. Same can be said for the 50mm lens. I could be wrong, but I do find that inbody SR has some advantages especially on mid-tele or short focal length lens.
10-14-2008, 07:54 PM   #22
Veteran Member
KungPOW's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,702
I can go to Best Buy, pick up a 40D, play with it, and buy it right there.

With a K20D, most people need to order it, sight unseen. Not allot of places you can handle the K20D before buying.

Sure my example has nothing to do with taking pictures. But then most people buy into Canikon for reasons that have nothing to do with taking pictures.
10-14-2008, 09:28 PM   #23
Veteran Member
philmorley's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia
Posts: 472
QuoteOriginally posted by mel Quote
uh thanks but no, actually i think I DO qualify as older. where's the cut off age?
the 'soccer mom' thing always amazes me.
(my kids play hockey and the local journo and I are often the only ones there with cameras, so I am probably missing a lot of the culture?).

Someone wants to take great / stunning photos of kids, buying nice portrait gear and doing portraits is all ok, but not catching them playing their sport? and going to a triathlon / cycling / <insert favourite sport> event with the same gear to take photos of random people who you dont know is deemed ok

10-14-2008, 09:29 PM   #24
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: usa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 68
QuoteOriginally posted by jeffkpotter Quote
........My expensive Canon IS zoom lens hoovered up more dust than a vacuum cleaner in the Utah desert. When I sent this lens, obviously flawed in it's design, back to Canon to be cleaned they charged me $150.00 for the privilege. I also found fine dust in the unsealed CF compartment. That was the end of it for me.
..........
I have owned a Pentax K100D/K10D but currently own a Canon 40D with a 70-300 IS Zoom. I have never had an issue with dust being sucked inside and I have had it in the Galapagos Islands for 2 weeks. I am not arguing that the Pentax K20D is not an excellent camera. I am sure it is, but I have heard very little and have no experience with dust being a problem with the Canon 40D or its lenses. Maybe your lens in particular was defective, but it is not generally the case.
By the way, the reason I switched from Pentax to Canon after owning the K100D/K10D was not primarily the body, but the lack of suitable telephoto zooms available for it. When it was obvious that the new DA* 60-250 was nowhere in sight, I decided to buy a Canon 40D. The Canon 70-300 lens is superb for being non-L. I also have noticed much improvement in autofocusing in lower light with the 40D compared to the K10D, and of course the 6 fps was very useful in the Galapagos when shooting birds. Its a fine camera, but I do not plan on upgrading to the 50D. The K20D, from what I have read, is a fine camera in its own right too. I just prefer the 40D for my uses. --Terry
10-15-2008, 02:37 AM   #25
mel
Veteran Member
mel's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,531
QuoteOriginally posted by mel Quote
uh thanks but no, actually i think I DO qualify as older. where's the cut off age?
Okay okay, fine fine. Thanks Gary. Ya big liar you!

QuoteOriginally posted by philmorley Quote
the 'soccer mom' thing always amazes me.
(my kids play hockey and the local journo and I are often the only ones there with cameras, so I am probably missing a lot of the culture?).

Someone wants to take great / stunning photos of kids, buying nice portrait gear and doing portraits is all ok, but not catching them playing their sport? and going to a triathlon / cycling / <insert favourite sport> event with the same gear to take photos of random people who you dont know is deemed ok
The comment came from the fact that I DO shoot my kids playing soccer. And other people's kids. And baseball. And now football. With my older son's team I shoot the games and post the photos for the other parents to see and download as they wish. It's becoming something of a team "thing" now and they all really enjoy it.

At my twins' games (they're 8) there are several other moms with cameras but they dont' share their shots so I quit sharing mine with that team. It's a lot of work and they all have their own.

I really don't do formal portraits, or the "freeze and cheese" kind of shots of my kids. People think I'm weird.

And in spite of what is said about Pentax vs Canon, I think I've gotten some farily decent shots of the fast game of soccer, and these are teenage boys so they move pretty darn fast.
10-15-2008, 03:31 AM   #26
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,794
Switch to Canon 50D.
10-15-2008, 03:34 AM   #27
Veteran Member
philmorley's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia
Posts: 472
I dont have a problem, I have been taking photos of my kids doing pretty much anything and everything, but around the net in photography there seems to be some problem / dislike for "soccer moms". (I once saw a guy comment that local 10 year match had 3 journos and over 20 soccer moms most of whom had $5000-$10000 of camera gear - I think he was just jealous of their pics and 500mm lenses )
10-15-2008, 03:47 AM   #28
mel
Veteran Member
mel's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,531
QuoteOriginally posted by philmorley Quote
I dont have a problem, I have been taking photos of my kids doing pretty much anything and everything, but around the net in photography there seems to be some problem / dislike for "soccer moms". (I once saw a guy comment that local 10 year match had 3 journos and over 20 soccer moms most of whom had $5000-$10000 of camera gear - I think he was just jealous of their pics and 500mm lenses )
I WISH I had $5-10K worth of gear. Sheesh. And I HATE that term soccer mom. I don't like the category that term implies. Sure I have kids and they play soccer. But they do other things. And I play soccer still after how many years? (former university player). And I coach. And I'm a certified ref. But I hate to be called a soccer mom. I don't sit in my chair and yell wooooooo whenever the players do something.

Aside from that, I've never handled the 40D but the higher ISO of 50D is tempting. And if I had the funds, the new 5D is singing a very inticing siren song (yes I know, blasphemer!). However, I love my Pentax and it's doing the job.

Last edited by mel; 10-15-2008 at 04:37 AM.
10-15-2008, 07:34 AM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
Speaking of "Soccer Moms", I shot my first soccer game with my 40D/100-400L (Varsity High School) and found 400 too short to cover the entire field. A mom in the stands had a Nikon DSLR and the $$$$$$$$$$$ 70-200mm f/2.8 VR without the hood (it was a bright sunny day) AND had the pop-up flash popped up
"But the guy in the camera shop said this was the best way to get sports photos, and it cost me $3K, so why are my photos no good?"
10-15-2008, 07:35 AM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
And I'm pretty sure this Mom was yelling "woooooooooooo" from the stands. My wife got me this "gig" and she said the only requirement was not to cheer (if I was shooting on the field)
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, canon, dslr, k20d, pentax, pentax k20d vs, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-X vs Canon 40d 171farm Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 40 08-05-2010 11:42 PM
Canon 40D vs. Pentax K20D - from a wildlife photography perspective Marc Langille Pentax DSLR Discussion 56 01-30-2009 08:06 PM
Was asked Canon 40D or Pentax K20D? benjikan Photographic Technique 2 06-24-2008 10:25 PM
K20D VS Canon 40D High ISO (Not 56K Friendly) codiac2600 Pentax News and Rumors 42 03-11-2008 04:01 PM
Canon 40D vs Pentax K10D Images codiac2600 Post Your Photos! 11 11-03-2007 05:36 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:16 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top