Pentax K20D or Canon 40D or Canon XSI

Discussion in 'Pentax' started by DrDitto@gmail.com, Apr 6, 2008.

  1. Guest

    I primarily shoot 35mm, medium format and large format. New baby
    coming next month so its time for a dSLR.

    I'm considering the Pentax K20D, Canon 40D, or upcoming Canon XSI.

    Mom has an old Canon EOS film camera she no longer uses. She would
    give me the 28-105mm USM lens and the cheaper 75-300mm lens she has.

    Pentax K20D advantages

    + More detail and usable megapixels (15 megapixels vs. 10 and
    initial test results show that these extra megapixels are quite good)
    + In-body IS works with older, used Pentax lenses (like a 50mm I
    would buy)
    + Extensive weather-sealing
    + 18-55mm II kit lens is better than most other kit lens. I would
    probably at a 50mm prime.

    Canon 40D advantages

    + Free 28-105mm USM lens. Doubt I would ever use the 75-300. What
    other lens would I add??
    + Better/faster low-light AF
    + Better FPS (not important to me)
    + Broader selection of lenses (probably not be important to me)
    + Proven, well-tested and reviewed camera

    Canon XSI advantages

    + $300-350 cheaper
    + Lots of bang for the buck
    - disadvantages: "plasticky" body? pentamirror vs. pentaprism?
    would order site unseen/unreviewed?

    Looking for thoughts/opinions to help my decision.
     
    , Apr 6, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. wrote:
    > I primarily shoot 35mm, medium format and large format. New baby
    > coming next month so its time for a dSLR.
    >
    > I'm considering the Pentax K20D, Canon 40D, or upcoming Canon XSI.
    >
    > Mom has an old Canon EOS film camera she no longer uses. She would
    > give me the 28-105mm USM lens and the cheaper 75-300mm lens she has.
    >
    > Pentax K20D advantages
    >
    > + More detail and usable megapixels (15 megapixels vs. 10 and
    > initial test results show that these extra megapixels are quite good)
    > + In-body IS works with older, used Pentax lenses (like a 50mm I
    > would buy)
    > + Extensive weather-sealing
    > + 18-55mm II kit lens is better than most other kit lens. I would
    > probably at a 50mm prime.
    >
    > Canon 40D advantages
    >
    > + Free 28-105mm USM lens. Doubt I would ever use the 75-300. What
    > other lens would I add??
    > + Better/faster low-light AF
    > + Better FPS (not important to me)
    > + Broader selection of lenses (probably not be important to me)
    > + Proven, well-tested and reviewed camera
    >
    > Canon XSI advantages
    >
    > + $300-350 cheaper
    > + Lots of bang for the buck
    > - disadvantages: "plasticky" body? pentamirror vs. pentaprism?
    > would order site unseen/unreviewed?
    >
    > Looking for thoughts/opinions to help my decision.
    >


    Go to the store and hold them in your hand... See how the menu
    system works. Feel the camera "in your hand".. is it to big or small..

    They all have more features and functions than you can ever use.
    See how the menu system works and looks - do you like it.


    Steve
     
    Steve Sherman, Apr 6, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Robert Coe Guest

    On Sun, 6 Apr 2008 11:47:03 -0700 (PDT), wrote:
    : I primarily shoot 35mm, medium format and large format. New baby
    : coming next month so its time for a dSLR.
    :
    : I'm considering the Pentax K20D, Canon 40D, or upcoming Canon XSI.
    :
    : Mom has an old Canon EOS film camera she no longer uses. She would
    : give me the 28-105mm USM lens and the cheaper 75-300mm lens she has.

    I have the f/3.5-4.5 version of the 28-105 (I think it also once came in an
    f/4-5.6 version) and have found it to be a pretty good lens. I don't use it a
    lot, but it's nice to have when I do need it.

    : Pentax K20D advantages
    :
    : + More detail and usable megapixels (15 megapixels vs. 10 and
    : initial test results show that these extra megapixels are quite good)
    : + In-body IS works with older, used Pentax lenses (like a 50mm I
    : would buy)
    : + Extensive weather-sealing
    : + 18-55mm II kit lens is better than most other kit lens. I would
    : probably at a 50mm prime.
    :
    : Canon 40D advantages
    :
    : + Free 28-105mm USM lens. Doubt I would ever use the 75-300. What
    : other lens would I add??

    On a 1.6 crop factor digital, your 28-105 is a moderately long telephoto. So
    you'll want something wider. I've had good results with my Sigma 18-50 f/2.8.
    It has the advantage of not losing aperture at the long end. It's a bit big
    and heavy, though.

    : + Better/faster low-light AF

    If you're going to shoot in low light and need a lens for that purpose, I
    recommend the Sigma 30mm f/1.4. It would give you about the same field of view
    as a 50mm lens on your 35mm film camera.

    : + Better FPS (not important to me)
    : + Broader selection of lenses (probably not be important to me)
    : + Proven, well-tested and reviewed camera
    :
    : Canon XSI advantages
    :
    : + $300-350 cheaper
    : + Lots of bang for the buck
    : - disadvantages: "plasticky" body? pentamirror vs. pentaprism?
    : would order site unseen/unreviewed?
    :
    : Looking for thoughts/opinions to help my decision.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Apr 6, 2008
    #3
  4. flaming-o Guest

    Unless you routinely print larger than 8.5x11 then, in reality, for amateur
    uses megapixels above 6 in dSLRs are vastly over-rated and invisible in the
    final print.
    If you have no particular manufacturer loyalty/religion/blind faith then the
    things to consider are:
    Lenses you may already own--Canon in your case.
    Camera vs lens image stabilization: not Canon but available in some Canon,
    Sigma and Tamron lenses. Once you use image stabilization you will see the
    value immediately.
    Self cleaning sensor.
    Live view: pointless except for rare occasions in my opinion after using
    many, many P&S and EVF cameras, but what do I know. Bracketing is more
    useful and that is in every dSLR.
    If you plan to get high quality out of your new toy then you need to learn
    how to process raw images and budget for whatever version of Adobe you
    prefer. You also need to invest in a monitor calibration device and
    understand color management.
    If you plan to shoot only jpegs then Nikon has an edge in in-camera jpeg
    processing (in truth I have only Nikons and have no clue how to use the jpeg
    functions as I only shoot raw).
    There is no reason not to consider the higher end Sony as well as the
    Olympus line.
    Noise is an over-rated bugaboo unless you feel the need to shoot at all
    times above ISO 400-800. If you must shoot by candlelight then really the
    only game in town is the Nikon D300. However if Nikon holds true to form
    they will soon release a much less expensive version with essentially
    identical capabilities because they have to defray the costs of the sensor
    and the autofocus module.
     
    flaming-o, Apr 6, 2008
    #4
  5. Wilba Guest

    flaming-o wrote:
    >
    > Bracketing is more useful and that is in every dSLR.


    Not all. See Nikon D40, D40x, and D60 for instance.
     
    Wilba, Apr 7, 2008
    #5
  6. (Steve Sherman) wrote:

    > Go to the store and hold them in your hand


    I agree. My recent move away from Pentax was made because I wanted
    optimum AF performance in action photography. Pentax is improving, but
    the AF system -- while great for most uses -- is not trying to compete at
    the extreme end of performance.

    So if action shots weren't important to me I'd have upgraded my K100D to
    a K20D... those extra pixels give a lot of 'crop zoom' for anyone
    interested in telephoto work.

    Anyway, I spent a long time trying to decide between 40D and D300 for
    reasons which probably won't fit in with the OP's remit. However the
    clincher for me -- apart from Canon's pricing -- was when I went to a
    shop and held both cameras. The 40D's grip felt perfect in my hand...
    *far* more comfortable than my K100D, and more natural -- for my hand
    anyway -- than the D300. In theory I was only interested with technical
    performance, but I had to reluctantly admit that the ergonomics of a tool
    will always play a part in the decision.

    Having said that, I'm sure I'd have coped perfectly well if I's just
    bought one or the other mail order. :)

    Andrew McP
     
    Andrew MacPherson, Apr 7, 2008
    #6
  7. wrote:
    > I primarily shoot 35mm, medium format and large format. New baby
    > coming next month so its time for a dSLR.

    []
    > Canon XSI advantages
    >
    > + $300-350 cheaper
    > + Lots of bang for the buck
    > - disadvantages: "plasticky" body? pentamirror vs. pentaprism?
    > would order site unseen/unreviewed?
    >
    > Looking for thoughts/opinions to help my decision.


    If cost is important, consider the Nikon D40/D40x/D60. Do go to the shop
    and hold the cameras - I was open between Canon and Nikon, having no
    lenses from either, and the Nikon immediately felt more comfortable to me
    than the Canon. I've had my D40 for some months now, and been very
    pleased with the results. Today, I would get the 18-55mm VR (image
    stabilised) lens, or even the 16-85mm VR lens.

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012909nikkor1685vr.asp

    I have also bought the 70-300mm VR lens with which I have been very
    pleased:

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080901nikonafs70-300vrlens.asp

    I got the D40 as I don't really need more than 6MP for my work.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 7, 2008
    #7
  8. Focus Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote in
    message news:%VmKj.3660$...
    > wrote:
    >> I primarily shoot 35mm, medium format and large format. New baby
    >> coming next month so its time for a dSLR.

    > []
    >> Canon XSI advantages
    >>
    >> + $300-350 cheaper
    >> + Lots of bang for the buck
    >> - disadvantages: "plasticky" body? pentamirror vs. pentaprism?
    >> would order site unseen/unreviewed?
    >>
    >> Looking for thoughts/opinions to help my decision.

    >
    > If cost is important, consider the Nikon D40/D40x/D60. Do go to the shop
    > and hold the cameras - I was open between Canon and Nikon, having no
    > lenses from either, and the Nikon immediately felt more comfortable to me
    > than the Canon. I've had my D40 for some months now, and been very
    > pleased with the results. Today, I would get the 18-55mm VR (image
    > stabilised) lens, or even the 16-85mm VR lens.
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08012909nikkor1685vr.asp
    >
    > I have also bought the 70-300mm VR lens with which I have been very
    > pleased:
    >
    > http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080901nikonafs70-300vrlens.asp
    >
    > I got the D40 as I don't really need more than 6MP for my work.


    Very good for the money indeed. I had it before the D40x and now the D300.
    Considering the little difference in money I would now go for the D60. The
    MP difference is pretty big and if not for printing, it still gives
    advantage for cropping and sharper pics.
    I would get it with the 18-135; it gives just enough zoom to keep going for
    some time without having to get an new lens. The picture quality is one of
    the best in it's price range. Even better then the more expensive 18-70.


    --
    Focus
     
    Focus, Apr 7, 2008
    #8
  9. Focus wrote:
    > "David J Taylor"

    []
    >> I got the D40 as I don't really need more than 6MP for my work.

    >
    > Very good for the money indeed. I had it before the D40x and now the
    > D300. Considering the little difference in money I would now go for
    > the D60. The MP difference is pretty big and if not for printing, it
    > still gives advantage for cropping and sharper pics.
    > I would get it with the 18-135; it gives just enough zoom to keep
    > going for some time without having to get an new lens. The picture
    > quality is one of the best in it's price range. Even better then the
    > more expensive 18-70.


    I tend to take quite a lot of telephoto shots, and I find the
    in-viewfinder stabilisation from the VR lenses a great help (particularly
    at 300mm), so VR is almost a "must" when I get lenses. But you are
    right - the 18-135mm is a good general purpose lens, and there is a VR
    offering at 18-200mm for those who want just a single lens with VR.

    Cheers,
    David
     
    David J Taylor, Apr 7, 2008
    #9
  10. Focus Guest

    "David J Taylor"
    <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote in
    message news:XjnKj.3682$...
    > Focus wrote:
    >> "David J Taylor"

    > []
    >>> I got the D40 as I don't really need more than 6MP for my work.

    >>
    >> Very good for the money indeed. I had it before the D40x and now the
    >> D300. Considering the little difference in money I would now go for
    >> the D60. The MP difference is pretty big and if not for printing, it
    >> still gives advantage for cropping and sharper pics.
    >> I would get it with the 18-135; it gives just enough zoom to keep
    >> going for some time without having to get an new lens. The picture
    >> quality is one of the best in it's price range. Even better then the
    >> more expensive 18-70.

    >
    > I tend to take quite a lot of telephoto shots, and I find the
    > in-viewfinder stabilisation from the VR lenses a great help (particularly
    > at 300mm), so VR is almost a "must" when I get lenses. But you are
    > right - the 18-135mm is a good general purpose lens, and there is a VR
    > offering at 18-200mm for those who want just a single lens with VR.
    >


    Sure. At focal lenghts longer than 135 I'd want/need VR too.
    Until that, I got some VR in my body ;-|) I was a sharp shooter for a few
    years with revolver and pistol. The techniques I learned for breathing,
    standing, etc. still help me get sharp shots at up to 1/10 sec. without VR.

    --
    Focus
     
    Focus, Apr 7, 2008
    #10
  11. OldBoy Guest

    "Focus" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "David J Taylor"
    > <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote in
    > message news:XjnKj.3682$...
    >> Focus wrote:
    >>> "David J Taylor"

    >> []
    >>>> I got the D40 as I don't really need more than 6MP for my work.
    >>>
    >>> Very good for the money indeed. I had it before the D40x and now the
    >>> D300. Considering the little difference in money I would now go for
    >>> the D60. The MP difference is pretty big and if not for printing, it
    >>> still gives advantage for cropping and sharper pics.
    >>> I would get it with the 18-135; it gives just enough zoom to keep
    >>> going for some time without having to get an new lens. The picture
    >>> quality is one of the best in it's price range. Even better then the
    >>> more expensive 18-70.

    >>
    >> I tend to take quite a lot of telephoto shots, and I find the
    >> in-viewfinder stabilisation from the VR lenses a great help (particularly
    >> at 300mm), so VR is almost a "must" when I get lenses. But you are
    >> right - the 18-135mm is a good general purpose lens, and there is a VR
    >> offering at 18-200mm for those who want just a single lens with VR.
    >>

    >
    > Sure. At focal lenghts longer than 135 I'd want/need VR too.
    > Until that, I got some VR in my body ;-|) I was a sharp shooter for a few
    > years with revolver and pistol. The techniques I learned for breathing,
    > standing, etc. still help me get sharp shots at up to 1/10 sec. without
    > VR.


    Examples?
     
    OldBoy, Apr 7, 2008
    #11
  12. Focus Guest

    "OldBoy" <> wrote in message
    news:47fa31f3$0$14779$...
    > "Focus" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> "David J Taylor"
    >> <-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote in
    >> message news:XjnKj.3682$...
    >>> Focus wrote:
    >>>> "David J Taylor"
    >>> []
    >>>>> I got the D40 as I don't really need more than 6MP for my work.
    >>>>
    >>>> Very good for the money indeed. I had it before the D40x and now the
    >>>> D300. Considering the little difference in money I would now go for
    >>>> the D60. The MP difference is pretty big and if not for printing, it
    >>>> still gives advantage for cropping and sharper pics.
    >>>> I would get it with the 18-135; it gives just enough zoom to keep
    >>>> going for some time without having to get an new lens. The picture
    >>>> quality is one of the best in it's price range. Even better then the
    >>>> more expensive 18-70.
    >>>
    >>> I tend to take quite a lot of telephoto shots, and I find the
    >>> in-viewfinder stabilisation from the VR lenses a great help
    >>> (particularly at 300mm), so VR is almost a "must" when I get lenses.
    >>> But you are right - the 18-135mm is a good general purpose lens, and
    >>> there is a VR offering at 18-200mm for those who want just a single lens
    >>> with VR.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Sure. At focal lenghts longer than 135 I'd want/need VR too.
    >> Until that, I got some VR in my body ;-|) I was a sharp shooter for a few
    >> years with revolver and pistol. The techniques I learned for breathing,
    >> standing, etc. still help me get sharp shots at up to 1/10 sec. without
    >> VR.

    >
    > Examples?


    No they were all killed... O, you mean the pictures? See new postings..


    --
    Focus
     
    Focus, Apr 7, 2008
    #12
  13. Andrew MacPherson wrote:
    > (Steve Sherman) wrote:
    >
    >> Go to the store and hold them in your hand

    >
    > I agree. My recent move away from Pentax was made because I wanted
    > optimum AF performance in action photography. Pentax is improving, but
    > the AF system -- while great for most uses -- is not trying to compete at
    > the extreme end of performance.
    >
    > So if action shots weren't important to me I'd have upgraded my K100D to
    > a K20D... those extra pixels give a lot of 'crop zoom' for anyone
    > interested in telephoto work.
    >
    > Anyway, I spent a long time trying to decide between 40D and D300 for
    > reasons which probably won't fit in with the OP's remit. However the
    > clincher for me -- apart from Canon's pricing -- was when I went to a
    > shop and held both cameras. The 40D's grip felt perfect in my hand...
    > *far* more comfortable than my K100D, and more natural -- for my hand
    > anyway -- than the D300. In theory I was only interested with technical
    > performance, but I had to reluctantly admit that the ergonomics of a tool
    > will always play a part in the decision.
    >
    > Having said that, I'm sure I'd have coped perfectly well if I's just
    > bought one or the other mail order. :)
    >
    > Andrew McP


    The feel of the camera was very important to me. I wanted a small DSLR,
    something about the size of my Nikon FM-2n and FM-3A. The Olympus E-410
    seemed to be it.. Then I got to hold of a Canon 30D with a battery grip
    and a hand strap. It seems like a monster, but the darn thing just seems
    to hang on to you.

    Steve
     
    Steve Sherman, Apr 7, 2008
    #13
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
  1. frederick

    Pentax K20d sensor

    frederick, Jan 23, 2008, in forum: Pentax
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    794
    frederick
    Jan 23, 2008
  2. Tony Polson

    Pentax K20D

    Tony Polson, Jan 26, 2008, in forum: Pentax
    Replies:
    23
    Views:
    1,424
    David J Taylor
    Jan 30, 2008
  3. RichA

    New Pentax K20D 21 fps??

    RichA, Feb 25, 2008, in forum: Pentax
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    1,940
    John Sheehy
    Feb 29, 2008
  4. Darrell Larose

    Pentax K20D in stock in Ottawa

    Darrell Larose, Mar 6, 2008, in forum: Pentax
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    1,806
    Pete D
    Mar 10, 2008
  5. Tom from WI

    Canon 40D, Xsi or just keep my XT?

    Tom from WI, Apr 18, 2008, in forum: Canon
    Replies:
    20
    Views:
    1,510
    Alan Browne
    Apr 18, 2008
  6. Replies:
    6
    Views:
    2,566
    Pete D
    May 25, 2008
  7. Archibald
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    790
    ASAAR
    Jun 13, 2008
  8. measekite

    Canon 40D vs Canon 450D (XSi)

    measekite, Jun 12, 2008, in forum: Canon
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    602
    measekite
    Jun 21, 2008
Loading...