[heatherslightbox]

I definitely do like the idea of the 21, but with the price of a new 16-45 now below $300, how about either a K20 or K200 and a 16-45? The 12-24 is a great lens and I had one for a short time, but I found myself using it more at the 24 end than the 12 end. At least for me, it didn't make a lot of sense to have so much money tied up in a lens that didn't quite fit my shooting style, so I replaced it with the 16-45 which works a lot better.

Heather

[JCSullivan]

I personally, if in YOUR shoes, go for the body unless, like Peter says, you have a need for that wide a lens. It is a specialty lens and would have to ask yourself the question "How much WILL I use it?"

[Yonnie]

When it came to the decision of the 12-24 or the body--and I do shoot wide, I opted for the body. I couldn't beat the price on it at the time. Plus, the 12-24 is a perennial favorite. I'm sure to get lucky one day and be the one to spot a listing first or win an auction on the bay.

[kpfeifle]

Hi Everybody:

Many thanks for all of your well thought out replies! I have decided to go with the K20D and placed the order this morning. My reasions for others that might be considering an upgrade are:

1.) Improved quality of the CMOS sensor
2.) Increased MP - I'm doing a lot of micro stock. This will jump me up a size and allow more cropping options.
3.) Access to SDM lenses
4.) Access to wireless flash
5.) Access to easy screen change (Katseye)

I know the K30 is around the corner (and I'm sure it will be better), but it will also be more expensive. I'm also sure the K40 will be better then the K30 You have to jump in someplace...and here is where I landed.