[Robert S Donovan]

I used to shoot a 5D (MK I). Now I shoot a K10D. The main difference for me was having to spend 2X as much for Canon's L glass to come even close to being able to get the most out of the 15MP sensor. Pentax's lenses (espicially the DA Limiteds) are better matched to their cameras. I'd invest in more Pentax glass before making the jump to Canon. You can always get your money back selling them off later if you're not convinced.

[Ratmagiclady]

I was never talking about switching to Canon I was just thinking about upgrading to a K20D if it would get me faster focus/continous mode. I was never planning on doing this at the expense of my lens collection. I was never doing this with the assumption that I would be a better photographer. And I repeat: I was never planning on buying a Canon.

I compare pictures from the K200D to the K20D and I can't really tell a difference. I didn't look all that closely, I'm not a pixel peeper. I looked at both and while I could tell they were probably taken on different days one did not neccesarly look better. So I came to the conlclusion that I had no need to go though the messy process of selling my camera and buying a new one.

Well, with cameras, and systems, what's really most important is, is a thing a good fit. The K20d is certainly a wonderful machine and a worthwhile upgrade. I don't doubt the IQ is improved over the K200d, though it may be hard to tell at Internet sizes.

If you're happy with the K200d, but for wanting faster, it might be worthwhile to wait and see what Pentax comes out with, next. I'm personally very pleased with the K20d, (More control dials and a nice finder=very good. ) More Fps than this just isn't a worry for me, and the AF speed is adequate for me, but I'd tend to expect these are places the engineers have been hard at work.

[OregonJim]

Good check...I looked at the comparison and I think the Pentax has it all over the Canon in that test shot. I'm glad I bought my K10D and not the 40D...after that view.

Be careful when evaluating side-by-sides - there are more variables at play than just the camera body.

When I did my own comparison between the Nikon D80 and Pentax K200D, I used the same Tamron Adaptall lens on both bodies (since I have both Nikon & Pentax adapters). That eliminated the glass variable. I used a separate light meter to measure the exposure, and shot each camera in manual mode with exactly the same shutter/aperature/ISO settings. And, as best as I could, I set the custom settings for both cameras as equal as possible. The resultant RAW images were hard to tell apart - except that the Pentax produced slighly more saturated and pleasing colors (subjective opinion - both cameras were set to AdobeRGB). At high ISOs, the Nikon had somewhat less noise, but the Pentax had more detail (and a more acceptable noise pattern - again, subjective). I'm not at my normal computer right now, or I'd dig up the images.

Oh, and it helped that I already owned both cameras - was just doing it for giggles (boredom, really), so I had no axe to grind while setting up the test.

My point is that you really need to know a lot more about the set-up before making an 'x is better than y' judgement. Also, a comparison like this doesn't take into account things like ergonomics, usability, reliability, durability, range of compatible optics, upgradability, performance in extreme lighting, etc...

[Robert S Donovan]

Be careful when evaluating side-by-sides - there are more variables at play than just the camera body....

Also, a comparison like this doesn't take into account things like ergonomics, usability, reliability, durability, range of compatible optics, upgradability, performance in extreme lighting, etc...

YES! Add value. All reasons I returned to the K10D.

[Riktar]

The equipment is as only as good as the person who's using it...

And to me that is the inevitable kernel of truth in the whole "does equipment matter" argument.

I am by no means a great photographer. Oh sure I sometimes get a "Oh wow" shot when I try to (and properly) apply what rules of light I understand.

Once I wrapped my head around the symbiotic relationship between (any) gear and my abilities, I was able to start critiquing my results without bias.

The bottom line is, I can screw up a shot just as well on a $5000 camera as a $500 camera. Once my skills start to improve the opposite will hold as well.

[losecontrol]

They are indeed close...

I was looking and comparing these two cameras for a long time...I could afford both of them..

Now I am a pentax k20d owner, so there you got my answer.

Get a 50d is like get 16 kids....it cost a lot to own. Every lenses you buy need to be super (L-serie) to get super good sharpness images from it...

I bought a 50mm m-lens for my k20d and it costed me 30$. The result is stellar and the sharpness is crispy as a cookie.

But im with JON in this case: The equipment is as only as good as the person who's using it...
Superb words...think about this and you will see that k20d will save you money and you will still be able to take those great photos

Enjoy!

[pentaxmz]

Try here to compare images of different cameras: Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page

Take their results with a 'grain of salt'. Cool concept but there are too many, seemingly uncontrolled, variables that diminish the usefulness of this site. Example: they do not compare like to like lenses (very important) and lighting, exposure, aperture, etc. are not consistent. Note: This assessment is based on my review of this site from a while ago. I have not visited this site in over four months so perhaps it has improved.

I can post some side-by-side comparisons (K20D vs D50) but I don't believe they would serve any useful purpose and especially because I do not have the appropriate lenses to compare like to like.

IQ is virtual the same in normal lighting conditions. In adverse lighting (e.g. low light, long exposures) the D50 definitely excels, but, this is one of the poorest abilities on the K20D. Low light, short exposures... the cameras are nearly equal in IQ... splitting hairs IMO.

If you are choosing between the Canon and the Pentax, it is far more useful to compare features and overall price differences because the typical photo IQ is close. If money is important, choosing Pentax is a no-brainer. If money is no object, look at which features are most important. Don't want the bulkiness of in-lens IS? Choose Pentax. Don't care about IS or SR? Choose Canon.

[lesmore49]

Be careful when evaluating side-by-sides - there are more variables at play than just the camera body.

When I did my own comparison between the Nikon D80 and Pentax K200D, I used the same Tamron Adaptall lens on both bodies (since I have both Nikon & Pentax adapters). That eliminated the glass variable. I know you were comparing body to body...but I think a more thorough test would compare similar factory lenses attached to the cameras...rather than a aftermarket...although your test is certainly interesting and would be good in addition to testing factory bodies/factory lenses.For example the Pentax 18-55 vs the Nikon 18-55...same type and range of lens...lenses that come with the cameras.I used a separate light meter to measure the exposure, and shot each camera in manual mode with exactly the same shutter/aperature/ISO settings. And, as best as I could, I set the custom settings for both cameras as equal as possible. The resultant RAW images were hard to tell apart - except that the Pentax produced slighly more saturated and pleasing colors (subjective opinion - both cameras were set to AdobeRGB). At high ISOs, the Nikon had somewhat less noise, but the Pentax had more detail (and a more acceptable noise pattern - again, subjective). I'm not at my normal computer right now, or I'd dig up the images.
Sounds like you established fair and reasonable criteria for the test.
Oh, and it helped that I already owned both cameras - was just doing it for giggles (boredom, really), so I had no axe to grind while setting up the test.

My point is that you really need to know a lot more about the set-up before making an 'x is better than y' judgement. Also, a comparison like this doesn't take into account things like ergonomics, usability, reliability, durability, range of compatible optics, upgradability, performance in extreme lighting, etc...

I was commenting on the quality of picture by each camera....according to my subjective eye and in that I thought the Pentax did better than the other make...for that picture, light, etc.. Admittedly I do have Pentax K10D...but I was very close to purchasing a Nikon D200 or a Canon 30-40 D and I did compare those other factors before choosing the K10D. I think they're all wonderful cameras. I did try the 'lesser' bodies like the Rebel (too small, too plasticky IMO), the Nikon D 70 and D80....not bad and the Pentax Ist ( didn't care for...subjective I realize).

In making my choice I considered all those other factors you mentioned...they're very important....I liked the K10D because of the excellent sealing, the share reduction in the body and my previous experience with the quality of Pentax lenses...although by that I'm not saying that Canon / Nikon don't make good lenses...they do, as we all know.

Great post BTW....made me think about my choice in equipment and what I like in a picture.