[vdubbin099]

pardon me for the neophyte statement. honestly speaking, that statement is the most commonly used by neophytes, no offense intended.

Why because I stated Nikon has more lenses of high quality(being pro quality), you prove me wrong on that one and I will believe you that it was a neophyte statement.

[Nass]

Hah!

Do any of you actually think that those people who stereotype Canon or Nikon users do so on any factual basis or might it reveal more about those people themselves in the first place?

Honestly, this term Canikon - can I just be really honest and point out that it's one of the least appealing aspects of various online forums I've started looking at since acquiring a dslr recently - this idiotic brand 'tribalism' and the chips held on some shoulders.

Why are we here? We're here because we love photography and there a lot of fabulous tools out there. Some are always going to be better at some things than others. But, people shouldn't forget that they're just tools, some people act as if they're their servants

Sacrilege! Burn me at the stake! Heretic!

[kristoffon]

Do any of you actually think that those people who stereotype Canon or Nikon users do so on any factual basis or might it reveal more about those people themselves in the first place?

Oh, yes!

I personally have two close friends who jumped on the DSLR bandwagon after me, being dissatisfied with the sorry quality of compact cameras.

I pointed out to them that they could have a K-m + couple lenses for half the price of the XSi + kit lens and have as competent a setup. Or get a K7 + a couple premium lenses for the price of a XSI + a couple non-L lenses, with a huge quality advantage. My advice fell on deaf ears and both went the XSI + kit lens route. Neither bothered to learn more about photography other than pointing the camera and pressing the shutter. Yet, somehow, they didn't mind spending double the price of the K-m + kit lens to get a "cool" camera.

[HGMonaro]

Hah!

Honestly, this term Canikon - can I just be really honest and point out that it's one of the least appealing aspects of various online forums I've started looking at since acquiring a dslr recently - this idiotic brand 'tribalism' and the chips held on some shoulders.

it just saves you writing both words. that's how I view it.

[Blue]

it just saves you writing both words. that's how I view it.

I look at it as a play on the sheeple-heard-lemming behavior of many people.

[bogiesbad]

.

Interesting little discussion happening on the dpreview D90 forum - someone (forum member here maybe?) asked about switching from Pentax--> Nikon. I expected a bunch of 'dump on Pentax' posts, but so far, some surprising sanity from the Nikonians has ensued.

From Pentax To Nikon?


.

I wonder if a similar exchange would happen here should a Nikonian ask the same question.
Tip of the hat to the D90 forum.

[*isteve]

I wonder if a similar exchange would happen here should a Nikonian ask the same question.
Tip of the hat to the D90 forum.

Several have asked and the answer has always been pretty sensible - like "why are you bothering and have you considered all the pros and cons".

If you like primes and small packages, but also want a full spec SLR and only top quality hardware, then Pentax is the ONLY game right now. Its drawing people in from everywhere.

The Nikon and Canon advantages are real in specification terms if money is not an issue. But if you are looking at their mid-range and mid-priced gear then Pentax is competitive and theres not much point in switching.

[Pentaxor]

I have yet to see a post which says that the reason for him to shift is because Pentax lenses are sharper.

for as long as I could remember, the people that made the transition here knew exactly what they wanted from the camera. cheap lens (before the price hike, but there are still cheap lenses), in-body SR, and the weather-sealing.

sorry but honestly speaking, the word of mouth that was/is Pentax never is considered or had that brand superiority distinction brought about by ineffective or lack of marketing. CANIKON had that distinction and had somewhat that notion stucked. this is what successful marketing can do. so most often than not, most people are blindly led to believe that a so and so is the best, not by virtue of experience but by how it was marketed.

so all in all, people came to Pentax because of what it can do, but not because it is believed or advertised to be the best camera.

[Ash]

people came to Pentax because of what it can do, but not because it is believed or advertised to be the best camera.

Brilliant summary.
Couldn't be put any better.

[B Grace]

I shoot both Pentax and Nikon so I do see both sides. First, the Nikon users I know who are pretty well versed in lenses do know the results Pentax gear is capable of producing. A couple of guys in my photo club who shoot 1D's (Canon, I know) have asked me several times what I think of my old Pentax primes on my K200D and they are interested in seeing my shots. They've told me several times they might track down some fast primes for their cameras because they like my shallow DOF shots.

Secondly, most of the Nikon and Canon cameras out there are being used by young moms, indeed, but that's a great thing because they are taking pictures of their kids. What could be better than that? So what if they chose Canon or Nikon because that's what is sold at Wal-Mart or Best Buy? I have the 18-55 and 55-200 kit-zoom Nikkors for my D40x precisely because my wife enjoys using them. The most important part is for folks to enjoy taking pictures.

Finally, while the two Nikkor zooms I mentioned can sing at the right apertures and my three Nikkor primes are fantastic, overall, for the money, my Pentax lenses are better lenses. If I should talk myself into buying a used 17-55DX Nikkor that might change but it isn't cheap.

[Rondec]

Several have asked and the answer has always been pretty sensible - like "why are you bothering and have you considered all the pros and cons".

If you like primes and small packages, but also want a full spec SLR and only top quality hardware, then Pentax is the ONLY game right now. Its drawing people in from everywhere.

The Nikon and Canon advantages are real in specification terms if money is not an issue. But if you are looking at their mid-range and mid-priced gear then Pentax is competitive and theres not much point in switching.

I think this is the point. 2000 dollars doesn't get you very far in any line up. High end lenses cost a lot of money. You have to pay to play. Prosumer lenses are the same across the board -- some of them a little better and some a little worse.

The reasons to go with Canon/Nikon are for full frame, high end specialty lenses, and maybe the ability to rent lenses. As far as image quality, I think the K20 and any of the limiteds will measure up pretty well to any of the other brands out there.

[MikePerham]

Several have asked and the answer has always been pretty sensible - like "why are you bothering and have you considered all the pros and cons".

If you like primes and small packages, but also want a full spec SLR and only top quality hardware, then Pentax is the ONLY game right now. Its drawing people in from everywhere.

The Nikon and Canon advantages are real in specification terms if money is not an issue. But if you are looking at their mid-range and mid-priced gear then Pentax is competitive and theres not much point in switching.

Precisely! As one of their own put it, Nikon's advantage in lenses is only with their more exotic line ...in primes for APS-C Pentax has no peer. Also, I really like the 50-135 as it is an extremely useful focal range, and compact lens. Just as the 70-200s were/are in the 35mm/FF arena. Nikon has no lens in that range although you can pick up the Tokina version. Also what makes the fellow think Nikon glass has better IQ than the DA* lenses ...these are as good as any out there.

Even if I won the lottery, I think I would hang in there for a 645D to get better IQ and keep my K-7 and limiteds for day to day and travel use.

[ll_coffee_lP]

Hah!
Honestly, this term Canikon - can I just be really honest and point out that it's one of the least appealing aspects of various online forums I've started looking at since acquiring a dslr recently - this idiotic brand 'tribalism' and the chips held on some shoulders.

The term Canikon has little to do with "tribalism", and more to do with the use of internet search engines. This is a Pentax fan site (nothing more)...the less Canikon users coming here to cause shi7 for no reason the better.

c[_]

[Zarkon]

I think the term Canikon is kind of cute. Don't really think of it too much as being a pejorative term (at most a little bit for those in the know). As Kristoffon pointed out, it is amazing that there are so many people who think that the brand of their tool will help them take better pictures. Or that a BMW will make them a better driver isn't of learning to use the tool better.

[ll_coffee_lP]

I think the term Canikon is kind of cute. Don't really think of it too much as being a pejorative term (at most a little bit for those in the know). As Kristoffon pointed out, it is amazing that there are so many people who think that the brand of their tool will help them take better pictures. Or that a BMW will make them a better driver isn't of learning to use the tool better.

That's consumerism. All companies advertise that their products are superior to their competitors. The sheep believe it. The ones that can combine this with the selling of a lifestyle are the one's that really reel in the sheep.

c[_]