Pentax k20d Underdog? or Just not that good?

[NateWagner]

As the saying goes, you most certainly get what you pay for.

Well, this is true, but there is also the rule of diminishing returns. So the camera that costs twice as much may not be twice as good, it may merely have incremental benefits which are worth it to some, but not to others.

 

[Village Idiot]

Yes but it's not as established as the Pentax K or Nikon F mounts.

"Despite the wider aperture, you're still not going to get a shallower DOF because of the crop sensor, as I said in my previous post. You also need more light since the Olympus line uses the 4/3 sensor and has terrible high ISO performance compared to pretty much anything else."

No but you'll be able to cope with darker conditions better which is the main reason for wanting a quicker lens. It might also perform better wide open.

Granted the Olympus sensor is far from the best but even so the chances are the lens is more expensive due to higher speed. You were comparing lenses to make an argument but chose two lenses that don't directly compare ( due to the aperture ).

You're right. Even with f/2.0 the Olympus can't match the DOF of the Canon 70-200 f/2.8L IS. Plus the Olympus claims something like 2 stops with in body IS where Canon claims 3 in that lens, making it equal in terms of aperture basically, but with poorer overall performance based on the sensor vs. the Canon.

And it's still about $500 more for the Olympus lens.

This isn't the case with all lens, but saying IS lenses are more expensive than non IS lenses may be true if you compare between lenses in a company's line up, but not necessarily if you compare between different companies.

 

[inTempus]

This isn't the case with all lens, but saying IS lenses are more expensive than non IS lenses may be true if you compare between lenses in a company's line up, but not necessarily if you compare between different companies.

That's what I meant. I don't plan on buying Nikon lenses for my Canon.

 

[ANDS!]

*scratches my head a little*

I think your first statement makes slightly more sense than this one. You mean that in dpreview the cons of some cameras ( not specifically pentax ) can highlight some severe flaws?

What I mean, is that whenever I am looking at perhaps helping someone out in their camera hunts, I will go to DPReview.com who does a fairly good job of pointing out the positives and negatives of a camera body, that fall in line with what I would consider genuine positives, or negatives.

To make this relevant, to me, the Pentax system's have too many personal negatives (which may well be made moot by the cost of individual bodies) for me to truly be able to get behind their system versus the competition.

 

[Village Idiot]

That's what I meant. I don't plan on buying Nikon lenses for my Canon.

I've had people try and argue that you get off cheaper by having in body IS because when a lens it built with IS, it's more expensive than comparable lenses without IS from a system that has IS included in the body.