Reasons to select Canon

[russel_yee]

<p>mariano, interesting about the lens prices, I didn't realize pentax would be mor for those lenses... that said, I switch from canon to pentax because of... the lens selection (contrary to some other here=). Canon just doesn't have many small well built primes, though I love teh 24mm 1.4L. <br>

based on your lens roadmap, i'd say<br>

the 20mm 2.8 eos has a bad reputation, though I've never used it, most say that the corner sharpness is not good, which, for me, makes it a bad landscape lens...<br>

the pentax 21mm has about the same max apeture and is very nice optically.<br>

I never liked the boke of the 35mm 2.0 eos, kinda distracting... I think the pentax version might be better built (don't have one), but it's harder to find now, so this is probably a wash.<br>

I'm getting sidetracked here, what I wanted to say, was that if you buy L lenses, canon is the way to go, but if you aren't I think pentaxes primes are better than canon's non L lenses by virtue of size and build quality (I also prefer the IQ, but that's a bit more subjective). <br>

Finally, I have to agree that you need to shoot in Raw and adjust the white balance in post... I know it's older but I had to in many cases with my 350D and I still do with my KM.<br>

have fun.</p>

<p> </p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Mariano, regarding lens prices, you are comparing apples and oranges. The Canon lenses you list are all plastic, while the Pentax primes (except the 50mm macro) are all part of the Limited series, which offer full metal construction and are much smaller than their Canon counterparts. These Canon and Pentax lenses are very different: The Canons are mid-level lenses while the Pentaxes your own are top-of-the line primes. The question probably isn't why they are more expensive than the Canon lenses, but rather why they aren't even <em>more</em> expensive, given their superior construction and proven IQ.</p>

<p>However, if you don't worry too much about construction, then maybe a cheaper plastic alternative is a good thing. After all, they will all take photos.</p>

<p>As far as camera bodies are concerned, you won't find a better camera than the Pentax K20D at that price point, and it will be a big step up for you from your K110D. And let's not forget that every lens you use on it will be stabilised, unlike with a Canon body. In-body stabilisation is especially well suited for landscape and portraits.</p>

<p>Having said all this, I will recommend that you move to Canon. The fact that you're doing the math on lenses and scouting cameras tells me you have already decided to jump ship. Nothing wrong with that. You should go with whatever makes you happy, and photography is a hobby which should ultimately bring us joy.</p>

<p>But bear this in mind: After your change, your photos will look exactly the same.</p>

[brad_smith8]

<p>The <a href="http://www.dpreview.com/previews/pentaxk7/">Pentax K-7</a> will do nine HDR-ready (multiple exposure) frames at 5fps - just sayin'... After buying a Canon body plus lenses, you could more than pay for a K-7 ($1300).</p>

[laleicasinlente]

<p>Thanks to all of you.<br>

Your advices makes me feel two things:<br>

1.- Doesn't matter the system or the brand that you use (the most important thing is the photographer's eye).<br>

2.- The photo.net comunity is a real "free minds" comunity without influences of the main photographic brands.<br>

My way of thinking is sometimes different or you could call it special. After all I decide to own a 450D mainly because I think that I'm going to feel more confortable with this camera (Don't you ask me why).<br>

I'll hope the best shoots for all of you (and from time to time one good shoot for me).<br>

Thanks again,<br>

Mariano<br>

P.D.: I always shoot in raw and I process all my photos with Lightroom and for Bob, I'm not an advanced user like probably he is but I always read the manuals so I don't agree with his translation. </p>

[peter_popp1]

<p>This has been stated above, but I'll say it again for emphasis. The lens list you show early in the post is comparing very high quality Pentax primes (roughly L equivalents) to non-L Canon lenses. Although the Pentax list is more expensive, they are better lenses (though the EF 85/1.8 is awesome). And most Canon users will concede that one of Canon's shortcomings is wide-angle image quality. The fact that you have are desiring primes makes me think you are looking for a compact setup, and the new K7 is probably the most capable small DSLR out there. At least check it out before you switch.<br>

Having said that, I was a former Pentax film shooter, and now use Canon digital (with a medium format stop in between). When I used Pentax I envied the accessories available from companies like Nikon and Canon, and that's one of the reasons that I went with Canon when I went digital. This effect is even greater now that third-party knockoffs accessories are available on eBay from China.</p>

[michaelavaloke]

<p>hi Mariano,<br>

I am a Canon dSLR user welcome to the world of Canon. I was curious, why 450D and not 40D/50D? Have you tried them out or do research before you decided to switched?</p>

[John Sully]

<p>@Peter Popp: Note that Canon reserves their L designation for zooms and telephoto or super tele lenses. Their primes are quite good quality both in build (except for the 50 f/1.8, which is less than $100US) and optical quality (all of them).</p>

<p>@OP: One thing to remember is that when you buy an SLR you are buying into a system. Canon and Nikon have the most extensive systems and are probably the best long term investment. As far as choosing one or the other -- there really isn't much to choose. However, the Nikon D60 does lack an in body AF motor, and this has been the backbone on the Nikon AF system for a couple of decades. With the D60, you will be limited to Nikon lenses with an internal AF motor, which significantly limits you choice in lenses. </p>

<p>Now, I am a Canonista and have been shooting with Canon equipment for about 20 years. How did I get into the Canon system? When I was getting back into photography after an absence of about 5 years I bought a Canon P+S. Took a few pictures with it and the images were really good, but I just didn't have enough control so onto the SLR. I started out with a Rebel G. Liked the images, found that it was lacking some features I was used to with a fully manual camera. Since I already had a couple of lenses getting an upgraded Canon body was the ticket. I got an Elan II, which had pretty much everything I wanted. Got a few more lenses. A flash. Basically, the Canon system had everything I needed to progress in photography. Macro lens, macro flash. Good tele lens. Angle finder for low angle shots, basically everything I needed to optimize my system for the kind of photography I like to do (in this case nature in all its' forms, think of me as a way less talented John Shaw).</p>

<p>Now some people here will say that the body is only a tool. That was true back in the pre-AE, pre fancy metering modes in the body days. However, sometimes there are better tools than others. For example, if you are roofing a nice pneumatic hammer is much easier to use than a plain old hammer. These days, there are real differences in between bodies as far as AF speed and available metering modes are concerned. For example if you want true spot metering from a low cost body, you just aren't going to get it. This does not mean that you can't use this form of metering, you just need to spend several hundred dollars on an external spot meter and use the camera in manual mode. This is a lot slower than using a body which has 1% or 2% spot metering built into the body (most bodies have a 9% or so "partial spot", this is not a substitute). In a similar vein, AF performance varies considerably between bodies, with most bodies performing better with faster lenses.</p>

 

[peter_popp1]

<blockquote>

<p>@Peter Popp: Note that Canon reserves their L designation for zooms and telephoto or super tele lenses. Their primes are quite good quality both in build (except for the 50 f/1.8, which is less than $100US) and optical quality (all of them).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Huh? There are L primes available in the 14, 24, 35 and 50 mm focal lengths. All quite good from what I understand, though I haven't shot with any of them. I own the 50/1.8 and also agree it is optically very good and a great deal. My point was that the OP's list comparing Canon and Pentax primes isn't an even comparison. Even a comparison with "L" primes isn't fair, because the L primes are considerably faster, so they should cost even more still. But I stand by my original comment that the Pentax lenses in that list are higher quality, and should cost more.</p>

[John Sully]

<p>You are right, I made a mistake. All said, the L lenses are very fast, but the slower standard primes as still very good. Quite frankly, glancing at the reviews of the various lenses on <a href="http://www.photozone.de">www.photozone.de</a> it doesn't seem as though the Pentax lenses are any better or worse than the Canon lenses, both in build quality and optical quality.<br>

However, if the OP can find lenses he likes in the Pentax line, and is not completely turned off by the abilities of the bodies, he should stick with Pentax.</p>

[Brian]

<p>Leaving aside the various pro- and anti-Canon posts cropping up here, the fact remains that you are talking about exchanging one consumer dSLR for another. So the poster that wrote:<br>

<em>But bear this in mind: After your change, your photos will look exactly the same.</em><br>

has probably got it right. This is not a disaster if all you really want is a different camera to fondle, but if you want to move into a different level of image characteristics, then you should be looking at either full frame bodies, or modular systems like the Hasselblads or Mamiya, or go right over to 35mm, roll film or sheet film cameras.<br>

It's OK, these are all valid scenarios - just make sure you are doing what you really want to do before you put down your money.</p>

[laleicasinlente]

<p>This evening I shoot my 450D for the first time and this are my feelings:<br>

1.- I'm the same kind of photographer (just a beginer).<br>

2.- The automatic modes in the canon are better than the pentax ones.<br>

3.- The pictures looks more natural in the canon than in the pentax.<br>

4.- The kit lens has more plastic in the canon but I think that image quality is better in canon too.<br>

5.- The feeling when you press the shooter is better too (smooth and without noise).<br>

6.- Indoor pictures using automatic modes are not a lot of red like in my old pentax.<br>

Thanks,<br>

Mariano<br>

P.D.: For Michael, I think that, for the moment, I have a more complex camera than I can manage.<br>

After all, I'm very pleased with my new camera and when I learn to use it I could pay atention only to the picture that I want to see in my computer.</p>

[c_wyatt]

<p>It's important to note here that the Pentax K110D was a mid-2006 camera, an 'entry-level' DSLR - as they call them - three generations of Pentax DSLR's ago, and the Canon 450D is a 2008 camera, with twice the MP count for a start. Sounds like it's going well though.</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Pentax K110D vd Canon 450D = Oranges vs Limes</p>

<p>:-)</p>

<p>Glad you're enjoying the new camera, though.</p>

[greg_m4]

<p>Canon may or may not be better than Pentax, but switching because of white balance issues makes no sense. I've used several models of both Canon and Nikon, and none of them does acceptable white balance indoors. That's why you use Lightroom!</p>

[g dan mitchell]

<p>Wow, this discussion has gone quite wild while I've been gone. A few more thoughts:</p>

<ul>

<li>It is important to place all of the "advice" seen here against your actual photographic needs. For example, one post includes a paragraph on "spot metering." You almost certainly don't need and will not use spot metering. (Hint: it isn't intended for metering a very small area instead of the whole frame - it is the basis of essentially a zone system approach. For virtually everyone using a DSLR it is unneeded and not used - the histogram is faster and probably better.)</li>

<li>Yes, there are "differences" between cameras. But the question is "are they significant to <em>your</em> photography?" You can go nuts trying to parse out "differences" that don't make any difference to you. (The thread above mine pointing out that "white balance issues" are not significant is a good response to that issue.) </li>

<li>We have in this thread some examples of why you must be very, very careful about trusting the authority of people who post here. (Yes, do apply this to me as well.) When someone tells us that the "L" designation is reserved for zooms and super-telephotos, it might make you wonder a bit about the quality of the other advice from the poster, yes?</li>

<li>There can be a bad sample from any brand and any product. There is one particular angry Canon story in this thread - if you look around I'm sure you can find one equally awful story from a Nikon, Pentax, or Sony user. (This tendency is not, of course, limited to cameras - cars provide many similar stories.) The real question is usually "is there a general sense that the products of this company are good or bad?"</li>

</ul>

<p>You need a decent camera system appropriate for the sort of photography you do. That could be a Canon, a Nikon, a Sony, a Pentax DSLR - or it could be any of a variety of other camera systems. It could be anything from one of the very fine entry level cameras (with which you can do things that photographers could not do with the very best 35mm cameras a few decades ago) to the most expensive "pro" body - but more expensive is not necessarily better for you.</p>

<p>As someone else suggested above, pick one of these systems and get to the business of making photographs.</p>

<p>Dan</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>I'll disagree with G Dan on one thing: Spot Metering. Not just for zone system metering! I use it very often, in fact, I use it every time I shoot a portrait. The histogram comes <em>after</em> the photo is taken, but spot metering gives me the correct exposure <em>before</em> I take the photo. When you're taking candids (not talking about studio applications here), getting the exposure correct <em>before</em> you take the winning shot is imperative.</p>

<p>But maybe that's just me.</p>

[don_bryant2]

<p>Even though I own a lot of Canon gear, I would take a close look at the Pentax K-7. The camera sounds like a real winner and you could probably use your current Pentax glass.</p>