[felixkh]

hey guys which do you think is better? Should I keep my k20d or upgrade and switched to canon t2i? Need help please!!!!!

The Canon T2i is not the same level with the K20D. It is more on par with the K-x. Why do you want to downgrade ?

Canon glass is more expensive than Pentax glass.

[er1kksen]

I sense a slight bit of Pentax bias here... While you make some reasonable points comparing the t2i to the k20d (top LCD, weathersealing) The t2i is not "mediocrely constructed" and it certainly isn't an "inferior body." I had a k20d and we also have a new t2i and a 7D in the lab. I have used the t2i quite a bit, and find it to be a very good performer. It is also quite surprisingly very well-built and lightweight. Although you would be missing some features of the k20d, the t2i definitely is a more responsive camera. AF is definitely faster than the k20d as well as the k-7. I would also not compare the t2i to the k-x. The k-x would be a step down from the t2i. (That is not to say that the k-x is not an excellent entry-level camera. but I wouldn't compare it to the k20d or the t2i)

I grow tired of reading insecure hyperbole such as "inferior body" and "poor construction" when comparing Pentax cameras to entry-level Nikons and Canons. They are all well built, and have advantages and limitations.

My build-quality rating scale goes from Excellent (1D series) to Poor (the rebel XS). I have handled both of those cameras quite a bit, and while the XS is constructed well enough to be useful, it's the lower end of what I'd accept.

On that subjective scale, the T2i comes in at "mediocre" but not "poor," and I'd place the K-x at about the same level of construction. And at entry level (even upper entry level), what else do you expect.

The K20D is what I would rate as "good," as you might expect from a dense, sealed semipro camera. This is not hyperbole nor is it born of insecurity. I currently use a camera that is inferior in terms of construction to the K20D (like the T2i) and I don't have any problems with it. That doesn't change the fact that the construction is inferior.

I'm brand-agnostic (user of Olympus, Canon, Pentax) and don't feel that I have much Pentax bias. Actually, the T2i is a camera I've been lusting over (7D sensor for under $1K? Sign me up!) since it appeared. I do, however, feel that overall it's on a similar level of actual camera-usability to the K-x, all things considered, and I don't think it would make sense as an upgrade from the K20D unless there's a specific need for advanced video capabilities, especially with all that nice Pentax glass the OP listed.

[PentaxPoke]

This is one of those "mediocre construction" Rebels that fell from 3000 ft and survived:



Here is the CNET story:
Entry-level SLR plunges 3,000 feet--and survives | Deep Tech - CNET News

and here is it happening:
[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rpy1c5xlTso[/YT]

I'm not trying to sell Rebels here. I'm just trying to bring some perspective. I often read here about the "superior construction" of Pentax cameras, but why do people think that they are that much better constructed? How does one prove that? Sure the k20d is heavier, but does that make it better constructed? I had an e-dial go out on my k20d, and all it took to do that was to take it out of the bag and spin the dial with my finger.

I'm just sayin'...

[Rondec]

Not really trying to continue an argument, but I don't think an anecdote of a camera surviving such a fall is proof of anything. Electronics are prone to failure and certainly I would not purchase a camera after such a fall (Pentax or any other brand) whether or not it seemed to be working fine. Would you drop you 7D from even five feet on to concrete? That's what I thought.

There is no doubt that the K20 is better sealed (if you want to separate that from "build quality" you can) and as such is a better value for some people.

[PentaxPoke]

Not really trying to continue an argument, but I don't think an anecdote of a camera surviving such a fall is proof of anything. Electronics are prone to failure and certainly I would not purchase a camera after such a fall (Pentax or any other brand) whether or not it seemed to be working fine. Would you drop you 7D from even five feet on to concrete? That's what I thought.

There is no doubt that the K20 is better sealed (if you want to separate that from "build quality" you can) and as such is a better value for some people.

All I really want to know is how to define quantitatively: "better build quality." It seems to me that can only be judged on failure rates. I had an e-dial go out on my k20d and one of my e-dials on my k-7 went intermittent. Therefore, I am not happy with the build quality of two of the Pentax cameras I owned. The magnesium body and weather sealing didn't prevent my e-dial problem. Material content of the camera is not an indicator of how well it is built, nor how durable it is in use.

[aleonx3]

I don't know the original intention of the OP to switch from a mid-tier camera to entry-level camera - perhaps, the idea of getting a "new" model always sounds better (especially with more advanced video capabilities).

However, I do find that most people assume that if they get better equipment their pictures will be improved - nine times out of ten, that is not true. I have shot along side (many occasions-wedding, parties) with many (so called pros) who have better equipment than my K10D (5D MK2, D300s, D700, you name it). Mine always come out to be better than theirs (not judges by me, but the hosts and guests). Sure, my K10D has limitations that they don't have such as AF speed and high ISO noise etc., but even with the "better" FX and L glasses they have, their pictures can only be limited by their skills and knowledge. The bottom line is that the person behind the camera makes a big difference - once you have mastered the equipment, then it would make more sense to seek better equipment to get the job done.

[Rondec]

All I really want to know is how to define quantitatively: "better build quality." It seems to me that can only be judged on failure rates. I had an e-dial go out on my k20d and one of my e-dials on my k-7 went intermittent. Therefore, I am not happy with the build quality of two of the Pentax cameras I owned. The magnesium body and weather sealing didn't prevent my e-dial problem. Material content of the camera is not an indicator of how well it is built, nor how durable it is in use.

I hate to say that this is anecdotal, but I think that is exactly what it is. I have had no trouble with e dials on four different dSLRs, all made by Pentax. I am sure you could find failure reports on Canons as well. Now, if you want to bring SDM, I wouldn't have any argument, but the camera bodies themselves have pleased me quite well.

[aleonx3]

All I really want to know is how to define quantitatively: "better build quality." It seems to me that can only be judged on failure rates. I had an e-dial go out on my k20d and one of my e-dials on my k-7 went intermittent. Therefore, I am not happy with the build quality of two of the Pentax cameras I owned. The magnesium body and weather sealing didn't prevent my e-dial problem. Material content of the camera is not an indicator of how well it is built, nor how durable it is in use.

PentaxPoke, did you have those problems fixed while it was/is still under warranty? It is unfortunately that you run into those kinds of the issues (which is not common to other Pentax users). Of course, you are entitled to your opinion about the build quality of any camera (it is subjective anyway). It is always going to the case, that potentially there could be many "Canon Pokes" on Canon forum who would complain about the C equipment not being better than the Pentax or N brand. But that does not diminish the fact that T2i is still a Rebel series and if the build quality of T2i is equal to 50D and 7D, then who would buy other two?

[johnmflores]

All this talk of build quality and control dials and stuff is a bit silly and is more about camera ownership than photography. 95% of the time it does not affect the photo that hangs on the wall or gets posted online or published. So unless you are regularly shooting in poor weather or are photographing subjects (i.e., sports, photojournalism) that require instant adjustments, all modern dSLRs are built well-enough and operate well-enough.

And am I the only one that rates the K-x as highly as the K20d? I have the K20d and my wife has the K-x, and I'm frankly a little envious. The K-x focuses faster and is better in low light, which for my kind of shooting are more important than the weather seals and dual e-dials.

So OP, another option might be to sell the K20d and get a K-x. You've already got good Pentax glass.

[PentaxPoke]

Well let me make a proposal then: Let's stop comparing cameras on "build quality" until someone actually defines what that is, and how to quantify it.

[justinr]

I don't know the original intention of the OP to switch from a mid-tier camera to entry-level camera - perhaps, the idea of getting a "new" model always sounds better (especially with more advanced video capabilities).

However, I do find that most people assume that if they get better equipment their pictures will be improved - nine times out of ten, that is not true. I have shot along side (many occasions-wedding, parties) with many (so called pros) who have better equipment than my K10D (5D MK2, D300s, D700, you name it). Mine always come out to be better than theirs (not judges by me, but the hosts and guests). Sure, my K10D has limitations that they don't have such as AF speed and high ISO noise etc., but even with the "better" FX and L glasses they have, their pictures can only be limited by their skills and knowledge. The bottom line is that the person behind the camera makes a big difference - once you have mastered the equipment, then it would make more sense to seek better equipment to get the job done.

Quite so.

Does the guy with the newest typewriter (or latest version of Word) write a better poem?

The reason that people think that to produce a good photograph you need the latest kit is because they are told that by the the manufacturers and the accompanying media pack who may just be a tiny little bit self interested.

[er1kksen]

Well let me make a proposal then: Let's stop comparing cameras on "build quality" until someone actually defines what that is, and how to quantify it.

No one is ever going to come up with a quantitative definition for it. It's subjective. I stated my subjective opinions of several camera's build quality, and I stand by them. It may be hard to quantify that yes, the 1D is better-built than the XS, but I still believe it to be true based on my own experiences, and I will still state that the K20D is better built than any of the rebel series based on my own experiences. Different cameras are built to different standards, generally based on price point, and it makes perfect sense to compare them. Anyone buying a camera wants to know what they're getting for the money.

Also: yes, every camera is going to have some exceptional stories and some downers, like the skydiving rebel and your e-dial failures, or the K20D that takes a swim and survives or the 5D mark ii whose shutter button stops working in antarctica. That's not a commentary on relative quality of construction for those various cameras, it's a commentary on the interplay of chance and the limitations of metal and plastic.

[philbaum]

And am I the only one that rates the K-x as highly as the K20d? I have the K20d and my wife has the K-x, and I'm frankly a little envious. The K-x focuses faster and is better in low light, which for my kind of shooting are more important than the weather seals and dual e-dials.

So OP, another option might be to sell the K20d and get a K-x. You've already got good Pentax glass.

John, I may eventually buy a Kx to get the High iso capabilities. Could you tell me how the Kx shutter rates in sound compared to my K20D, since you have both cameras in your family???? Thanks very much!!!!

[rfortson]

All I really want to know is how to define quantitatively: "better build quality." It seems to me that can only be judged on failure rates. I had an e-dial go out on my k20d and one of my e-dials on my k-7 went intermittent. Therefore, I am not happy with the build quality of two of the Pentax cameras I owned. The magnesium body and weather sealing didn't prevent my e-dial problem. Material content of the camera is not an indicator of how well it is built, nor how durable it is in use.

You also sent a K10D up several thousand feet and survived some extreme conditions, didn't you?

[Raybo]

I agree with PentaxPoke, get the Canon and sell me your Pentax lenses on the cheap!