[opianstate]

I think I know the answer I'm gonna get from this forum, but I want some (reasonably) unbiased opinions on my predicament.

I joined the pentax crowd a little over 3 months ago and bought a K20d. I did it on a whim, as the only local stores carried the Canikon models. I had done a ton of research, and I have to say I wasn't disappointed. I do like the ergonomics of the K20d, the build quality, and most of all (no joke) I like these forums. The ability to talk to other great individuals and buy and sell used equipment from and to trustworthy individuals doesn't seem like its as easy with the "oversaturated" Canikon markets.

What's changed my mind: I've been through two Pentax DA* 16-50mm lenses, and I'm furious that their Autofocus issues are so bad. Not only does it seem to be super common, you'd think they'd have addressed the issue by now because it's ruining their rep and making users like me go back to square one. The fact that it occurs in their "pro" (read: DA*) line, adds insult to injury. The first 16-50 I had was new, would hunt focus almost constantly and was slower to lock focus than my Sigma 17-70mm in low light. The second I bought USED because I wanted to avoid these issues, and it not only had the same focus problem, but it also would get stuck at infinity and just blink the focus light. This is just outrageously ridiculous for a lens that retails for over $1000, IMO. To me, the availability of weather-sealed pro quality lenses with this speed was the biggest selling point to me with Pentax.

Before I bought my Penny, I was basically "set" on either a Nikon D90 or a Canon 40D. I've handled both these cameras, and also really really like them. Most of my photog friends use a 40 or 50d so I've seen what they're capable of, and their beautiful L-glass and USM-equipped lenses.

I think the D90 is light, fits great in my hand, and I enjoy the user interface. My first camera was a D40 so it has a soft spot in my heart. It's high-iso performance seems to be extremely good, and I have to say that from what I've read and experienced, the meter and AF is spot-on with Nikons. The cons: the Nikon feels a little toyish; their lenses are outlandishly expensive, and VR makes them even more so. I'd probably start with a Nikon 16-85mm f/4-5.6 VR and an ultrawide.

I think the 40D is built like a tank; beautiful, and seems to be the "industry standard". Meaning, everyone who's had one has had nothing but great things to say about them. They're also faster fps-wise, and have huge aftermarket and accessory support. The only cons (I think) is the fact that their menu system is confusing (again, my opinion), and their ergonomics arent up to par (a dedicated 'print' button? seriously?) Also their faster glass is stupid expensive, like Nikon's. I'd probably start with a 17-40 f4L and a ultrawide, and the 50 f/1.8.

So the question is - should I go back to square one? Could other Pentax users with these other cameras chime in? Am I just plain ol' crazy?

[Ash]

You're not crazy - you've raised some legitimate concerns.
The forum may be great but you have to be pleased with the gear you purchased first and foremost. I wish that others got the satisfaction and performance I seem to be blessed with having the DA* 16-50 - and I'm sure there are many other happy users out there who could vouch for the lens's brilliance in every aspect.

Nevertheless, I appreciate the SDM AF is not all that fast, and when it hunts it's just that much slower, but I've learnt stopping and restarting AF usually fixes that up faster than persisting with the existing AF attempt. I also wish Pentax gets their act together about the longevity of the SDM motor in these expensive lenses.

None of the mid-range cams are bad choices - it's then all about what lenses you can get. The 16-50 is but one of the many high-end lenses that could rival most other brands' counterparts (at a significantly lower price).

You could, of course, just go for the non-SDM lenses, if you want, and sacrifice WR. Then you have many other options available to you - all with decent IQ.

But if you're bent on going Nikon, brace yourself for the hole in your pocket - fine lenses don't come easy (esp. with that VR label on them...)

As much as we rail on Canikons they are good cameras as is the Pentax. I love my K10D. It does what I need it to do both professionaly and person shots.

You will find that each brand has its drawbacks. There is no perfect system. If there were there would be one brand. Only you can decide which brands drawbacks are not important to YOU.

People talk about FPS. But back with film winders you never got all that fast. I still use film and I still use the winders. I have never missed a shot because of FPS. I missed for other reasons but not that.

My reason for the Pentax is backwards compatibility.

[wlachan]

Yes you are crazy to mention anything bad about the mightly DA* here. Are you posting at the wrong forum?

Seriously, I bought my 40D about 1.5 years ago along with 3 USM zooms. It was between DA* and EF-S 17-85/2.8 & EF 70-200/4L IS before I made the decision. After reading as much as I could in different forums, I felt the ongoing SDM failure and slow AF were genuine and too high the risk for me to dump any cash on them, so I made the hard decision to own a Canon set for certain applications and have not regret one bit. The AF tracking is so fast I cannot imagine Pentax could even come close. Fast forward to today, SDM failure is still not fixed. However, everything Canon just feel bulky, the 9 AF points aren't as well placed as Pentax, and the LCD menus do not make sense to me. My personal take is that Pentax is for small prime lovers, and Canon for practical zooms.

[Ash]

Good quick synopsis there Alan.
That's something Pentax can work on, and if done reasonably well would put them in good stead amongst the top guns.

I wouldn't mind if a DA* 16-50 II and 50-135 II came out with sturdy, fast and accurate AF rather than lots of new little prime additions to the collection - practicality and reliability over novelty for me at this stage...

[nickthetasmaniac]

No crazy at all...

I've been with Pentax for about a year, and bought into the system after 6 months of reasearch and fully planning on staying put.... I love my K20D and DA* 50-135 and the 35mm Macro is the best lens I've used, period.

But 90% of my photography uses the standard zoom, and in the 9 months I've owned it, the 16-50 has been returned one to many times, so I'm off to Olympus...

[Samsungian]

Bummer for you getting two DA* reject lenses.

I read way too many complaints on these. Its one of the basic reasons why I added Canon to my Pentax kit.

I will not spend money on a new or used DA* lens

I keep the K20D around to drive an assortment of older K Mount lenses. Its the backwards compatibility and inbody shake reduction I'm keeping Pentax for.

Alot of Fans will decide you mishandled your DA*. Some of these are simply poorly made from design to actual outsourced manufacture quality control issues. 16-50mm is notorious for users problems. Pentax worst pro caliber lens they've ever made.

If you want best of todays technology, well you've already experienced what Pentax offers, huh?

I'm quite pleased with my Canon Eos 5D stuff , L glass, speedy and accurate USM , teleconverters that autofocus, extension tubes that autofocus, ... all bought out of frustration with Pentax, DA* problems, and most of all a lack of full frame.

March 2008 was my turning point and I jumped in to Eos with both feet. Then I added Nikon D700 in January 2009 , cause I wanted one particular lens of theirs and needed a camera to properly drive it. Both Canon and Nikon make great gear. Theres a reason why Canikon take 81% of the annual Dslrs sales. Repeat customers, friends who also shoot it, availability in local markets...

Pentax is innovative, but the DA* issue is ridiculous from its motor design to it outsourced manufacture quality control problems.

As you know firsthand.

You can add your own poor experiences here in this rather long DA* rant & warning thread:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/22297-da-16-50...-database.html

I think I know the answer I'm gonna get from this forum, but I want some (reasonably) unbiased opinions on my predicament.

I joined the pentax crowd a little over 3 months ago and bought a K20d. I did it on a whim, as the only local stores carried the Canikon models. I had done a ton of research, and I have to say I wasn't disappointed. I do like the ergonomics of the K20d, the build quality, and most of all (no joke) I like these forums. The ability to talk to other great individuals and buy and sell used equipment from and to trustworthy individuals doesn't seem like its as easy with the "oversaturated" Canikon markets.

What's changed my mind: I've been through two Pentax DA* 16-50mm lenses, and I'm furious that their Autofocus issues are so bad. Not only does it seem to be super common, you'd think they'd have addressed the issue by now because it's ruining their rep and making users like me go back to square one. The fact that it occurs in their "pro" (read: DA*) line, adds insult to injury. The first 16-50 I had was new, would hunt focus almost constantly and was slower to lock focus than my Sigma 17-70mm in low light. The second I bought USED because I wanted to avoid these issues, and it not only had the same focus problem, but it also would get stuck at infinity and just blink the focus light. This is just outrageously ridiculous for a lens that retails for over $1000, IMO. To me, the availability of weather-sealed pro quality lenses with this speed was the biggest selling point to me with Pentax.

Before I bought my Penny, I was basically "set" on either a Nikon D90 or a Canon 40D. I've handled both these cameras, and also really really like them. Most of my photog friends use a 40 or 50d so I've seen what they're capable of, and their beautiful L-glass and USM-equipped lenses.

I think the D90 is light, fits great in my hand, and I enjoy the user interface. My first camera was a D40 so it has a soft spot in my heart. It's high-iso performance seems to be extremely good, and I have to say that from what I've read and experienced, the meter and AF is spot-on with Nikons. The cons: the Nikon feels a little toyish; their lenses are outlandishly expensive, and VR makes them even more so. I'd probably start with a Nikon 16-85mm f/4-5.6 VR and an ultrawide.

I think the 40D is built like a tank; beautiful, and seems to be the "industry standard". Meaning, everyone who's had one has had nothing but great things to say about them. They're also faster fps-wise, and have huge aftermarket and accessory support. The only cons (I think) is the fact that their menu system is confusing (again, my opinion), and their ergonomics arent up to par (a dedicated 'print' button? seriously?) Also their faster glass is stupid expensive, like Nikon's. I'd probably start with a 17-40 f4L and a ultrawide, and the 50 f/1.8.

So the question is - should I go back to square one? Could other Pentax users with these other cameras chime in? Am I just plain ol' crazy?

---

Last edited by Samsungian; 10-05-2009 at 05:03 AM. Reason: added link

[opianstate]

Anybody have opinions on the D90? I still really like this camera for some reason, and it would be nice to own the cutting-edge model again like the K20d instead of buying an outdated 40d.

[nostatic]

D90 is a solid camera, though the video implementation is weak (if that matters to you). I'll agree with some of the sentiment above, and offer my take after having owned Pentax as well as both Canikon.

There are three reasons two shoot Pentax. First are the limited primes. They are special and there are no equivalents in Canikon land. Second is if you have a lot of legacy Pentax glass. Third is if you want weather sealed with a reasonably small form factor and price.

Beyond that, you're probably better served with another brand. While I loved my 50-135* and never had a problem, the 16-50* is a thorn in the side, and the rest of the zooms are OK but not stellar. If you like shooting zooms, Canikon is a better choice *if* you spend the extra money on good glass.

When I recently switched I looked at the glass I wanted to shoot and went from there. While I shot almost all primes with Pentax, I found that a couple of L zooms from Canon gave similar results and I could go FF for easier wide shooting and narrower DOF (and better hi iso relative to the Pentax). So pick the glass and style you want to shoot, then decide. I frankly didn't like the Nikon lens offerings for my style. The 12-24 is legendary, but they don't have a good/reasonably priced IS longer lens, nor do they have a very good general purpose zoom. I'm finding the 24-105/4 IS and 70-200/4 IS to give me 95% of what I want - and that's saying something because I'm coming from ltd primes. The 70-200/4 is one of the best lenses I've seen...incredibly sharp.

So if you fit into the three "Pentax sweet spots" then keep the K20d and be happy. If you don't, D90 or for more $$$ the new 7D are pretty compelling choices (as is D300s).

[er1kksen]

I just moved from a K20D to a 40D (under circumstances not entirely unlike your own) and looking at the lens lineup, I have to disagree about Pentax being for the prime lovers and Canon being for the zoom lovers. Canon has a huge lineup of quality, affordable primes. It's just that they're not "special" like many Pentax primes are. That doesn't make them any less excellent, and many of them are relatively cheap, too.

As far as the 40D, I'd say that the AF capabilities and continuous shooting are a step forward, and the meter is possibly a little more consistent, but IQ and usability are a step back. The K20D had noticeably more resolution and was better at high ISO (looking at actual images, not test charts and the like). The UI and menus and options of the K20D also gave you just soooooooooooo much more control and customizability. And Auto ISO on the Canon sucks, it doesn't make any sense from a user standpoint.

I bought the 40D mainly because it was the same value used as my K20D, and it allowed me to use the 85mm f1.8 (currently still my only lens, and I love it). I seriously looked at the D90, and probably would have been more satisfied with that as far as the camera body, but the similarly-priced Nikon 85mm f1.8 simply isn't as nice a lens as the Canon. That's what it really came down to.

The D90 sensor is one of the best available in APS-C, and the ergonomics/UI are a lot more similar to Pentax's, while the speed isn't too far off the Canon. And it does Auto ISO right, like Pentax (maybe even a little better). It even lets you use auto ISO in manual to do the same thing TAv mode does on Pentax. If Nikon has the lenses you want, it's hard to go wrong with the D90. I'm not too sure about their prime selection, though. I haven't checked it out.

[nostatic]

Yes, you can buy Canikon primes, but there is nothing like the 40/2.8 pancake or the 70/2.8, or the FA ltds even (talking build/aesthetic quality). But you can get a good 50/1.4 for Canon with USM (silent focus) for under $400. The "special" primes are damn pricey though. I got a 135/2 for a little over $1K and that is the "bargain" L prime.

For Nikon very few of the primes have silent focus systems and are fairly old designs. Not the end of the world, and the 85/1.4 is legendary. Just depends on what you want. I've kinda gotten used to a quick/silent AF so hearing a screw drive is a little odd.

[opianstate]

A strange development:

I just discovered that in both Nikon and Canon mounts (easier found in Nikon, I believe) that Tokina offers a 16-50mm f/2.8 and 50-135mm f/2.8 that are basically identical in dimesions to the DA* lenses. Are the DA* lenses rebranded Tokinas? The price points on these lenses are great as well. If I could buy the DA* lenses without the SDM focus mechanism I would most likely do so.

[Samsungian]

I noticed both those DA* clones were available before the Pentax version launched.

No idea here on them being better quality build than Pentax. Whether they're sealed ,or not, no idea. I'm only using pentax for crop format & I don't pay much attention to crop format Canikon offers & 3rd party options. You might be best to ask this Tokina brand question on dpreview's canon lens or nikon lens forums. At least you'll locate people who own them, may still own them. Tokina no longer makes Pentax mount lenses. Tokina also offered the "pentax" 10-17mm fisheye in nikon and canon mounts before Pentax made theirs available. I know these three Tokinas cause I was QUITE ANXIOUS to buy pentax lenses brand new back then. Ah, good times... waiting and watching tokina offer pentax lenses before pentax offered up their own originals or clones, who knows.

I've always found this Tokina / Pentax "codesigned" lenses a bit strange but it was the way Pentax and Tokina did business before Hoya's total buy out of Pentax. Seems to me Hoya were operating well inside of Pentax Corp before the "friendly merger"

A strange development:

I just discovered that in both Nikon and Canon mounts (easier found in Nikon, I believe) that Tokina offers a 16-50mm f/2.8 and 50-135mm f/2.8 that are basically identical in dimesions to the DA* lenses. Are the DA* lenses rebranded Tokinas? The price points on these lenses are great as well. If I could buy the DA* lenses without the SDM focus mechanism I would most likely do so.

[Samsungian]

More cheaper Canon primes are USM. Whereas no pentax limited is SDM, which turns out to be a good thing it seems.

My Eos 50mm 2.5 macro is not USM. It makes micro motor sounds when focusing. Its from their first generation autofocus. Well worth the $229 new it use to sell for, well last year. Every other eos lens I own is USM outfitted & USM function is retained thru Canon's two teleconverters: 1.4XII, 2XII. Most any prime except really cheap ones like 50mm 1.8 are all USM outfitted. Ring motors are cool and apparently far more reliable than Pentax 1st version SDM micro motor technology. Give Pentax 10 years and they'll be at where Canon was with USM in 1997. Except 10 years for SDM improved upon technology for Pentax will be 2017:

"Pentax: Wait Around & We'll Get Better, You'll See"

This certainly proved true with K-7.
All those years of Dslrs with slow fps are history now... in 2009

Yes, you can buy Canikon primes, but there is nothing like the 40/2.8 pancake or the 70/2.8, or the FA ltds even (talking build/aesthetic quality). But you can get a good 50/1.4 for Canon with USM (silent focus) for under $400. The "special" primes are damn pricey though. I got a 135/2 for a little over $1K and that is the "bargain" L prime.

For Nikon very few of the primes have silent focus systems and are fairly old designs. Not the end of the world, and the 85/1.4 is legendary. Just depends on what you want. I've kinda gotten used to a quick/silent AF so hearing a screw drive is a little odd.

[Jonson PL]

Remember that the Eos 40D and 50D are crippled, so you loose auto-focus if you add a TC. (Others correct me, if the issue has been fixed).
And as I remember, the 40D is less sealed than the 50D.

Both the Nikon and Canons you're considering are good cams. You can't really go wrong, but you have to decide for yourself.
I understand that you've frustrated regarding DA* lenses that stop working.

I'm sure you can find some fun forums. Else I think this place also has a sub-area for other cam threads.

A strange development:

I just discovered that in both Nikon and Canon mounts (easier found in Nikon, I believe) that Tokina offers a 16-50mm f/2.8 and 50-135mm f/2.8 that are basically identical in dimesions to the DA* lenses. Are the DA* lenses rebranded Tokinas? The price points on these lenses are great as well. If I could buy the DA* lenses without the SDM focus mechanism I would most likely do so.

I believe the Tokina ones are without SDM and sealing.

Else just switch your 16-50/2.8, to the one of the other Pentax offerings, if you want to stay.