Entry-Level Digital SLRs
If $720 is still too rich for an interchangeable lens digital SLR there is still good news for buyers. Since 10 megapixel cameras have launched, the entry SLR is now 6 megapixels.
You can find the Pentax K110D with the 18-55mm lens with metal mount for around $400 for the kit after rebate. For more money you can buy the new Nikon D40 for about $600 with lens, or the Pentax K100D with body-integral anti-shake for about $510. There is even more good news in that these new low-priced entry SLR camera kits are much faster than the models they replace. In fact the Nikon and Pentax models use image processing systems similar to their 10 megapixel models. You can also find closeouts of earlier 6 megapixel models, and the savings you find will likely be substantial. Just keep in mind that the older models are often slower and have fewer features than the newer models that replaced them.
A particularly excellent buy in the entry level is the new Pentax K100D. With the Sony purchase of Minolta the entry level Maxxum 5D was discontinued and it was the only entry level SLR with body integral anti-shake. Now that Pentax has developed their own integrated ant-shake the Pentax K100D is the only entry model with built-in anti-shake that will work with any lens you can mount. Since entry SLR buyers often get just the kit lens the anti-shake really matters as it makes the most difference with slower zoom lenses like you always find included as the kit lens.
The K100D is also much faster in operation than the *ist models it replaced. Significantly, you still get 11 point autofocusing with 9 cross sensors even on the $510 K100D, ISO range to 3200 with user programmable auto ISO, and you also get a 2.5" rear LCD and top LCD like the top-line K10D. The only negative, which will be a positive for some, is that the camera uses four AA batteries instead of a rechargeable lithium-ion battery. The good news is you can find AA batteries - disposable, rechargeable, NiMH - almost anywhere, even in rural areas off the beaten track. The bad news is that the battery life with alkalines is horrible, about 100 shots in our testing. You get much better life with high-capacity rechargeable batteries, four AA or two CRV3. Users report battery life with high-capacity rechargeables that is comparable to Li-Ion with other cameras.
The Nikon D40 is a significant upgrade to the D50 it replaced, with a larger LCD and faster operation. However, like all the other entry SLRs you get a dimmer penta mirror instead of a brighter pentaprism viewfinder. All of the Canon Rebel cameras have used penta-mirrors instead and they have improved over time. Casual users will not likely notice the dimmer viewfinder. The D40 has just three autofocus sensors, but they are spread wide for broad AF coverage. There is no means to auto-clean the sensor and anti-shake requires dedicated and expensive lenses - a stretch for most budget buyers. If you already have Nikon autofocus lenses, however, the D40 is an easy recommendation. It is a fast and capable entry SLR.
With 10 megapixels at the top, two models at 8 megapixel resolution are also selling in the $600 range with a kit lens. The Canon Rebel XT is still an excellent performer and a real bargain at the new $600 price. It is a bit slower than the XTi, but it still provides an excellent 7-point autofocus module. The Canon 8 megapixel CMOS sensor is still the lowest noise sensor in the market, so photo quality is excellent.
Olympus E500
Pentax K100D/K110D
The Olympus E-500 is an 8 megapixel SLR that also sells for about $600 with the normal kit lens. The viewfinder is one of the worst we have seen - mainly because of the difficulty of building a viewfinder for the 2X multiplier of the 4/3 Olympus lens system. Olympus has also placed a pretty low priority on autofocusing sophistication. As you can see above, the 3-sensor E-500 autofocus looks rather crude beside the 11-point Pentax SAFOX AF available at the same selling price. The photo quality of the Olympus, however, is excellent as long as you don't need high ISO, and Olympus pioneered auto sensor cleaning. If you decide to go Olympus be sure to buy the 2-lens kit at just $100 more. It is an excellent value you will fully appreciate after shopping for other 4/3 mount lenses. They are generally hard to find and most are very expensive compared to offerings from the competition.
There is only one model, and a rebadged sister, available at the very bottom of the entry level market. For around $400 (after the current Pentax $50 rebate) you can buy a Pentax K110D with an 18-55mm lens (or the sister Samsung GX-1L without a rebate). It would be a mistake, however, to dismiss the K110D as basic since it is the exact same camera as the K100D without the anti-shake capabilities. That means you still get the fast 11-pont Pentax AF module and the speedier processing engine used in the K100D. The kit lens is also better build quality than you will get anywhere else for an entry SLR.
Recommendations
Pentax has some really impressive offerings at the bottom of the entry level market. The K100D is the only entry level Digital SLR with body-integral anti-shake. Since the standard kit lens is a slow zoom lens with entry level cameras, anti-shake means you can shoot sharp pictures in lower light with the Pentax K100D. The anti-shake ability also does double-duty for auto-sensor cleaning.
If you already have Canon lenses or prefer the Canon system, the Canon XT is an excellent choice at the new kit price of $600. It was a great buy at the old $900 price, and an even better buy at 2/3 the original price.
The absolute best buy in entry level digital SLRs is the Pentax K110D with the kit lens. For $400 after the current $50 rebate you get a full-featured SLR with a fast processing engine, accurate 11-point autofocusing, and even user-programmable Auto ISO to 3200. It is the exact same camera as the K100D - only the anti-shake feature is missing. The kit lens is also the only entry kit lens with a preferred metal lens mount.
If $720 is still too rich for an interchangeable lens digital SLR there is still good news for buyers. Since 10 megapixel cameras have launched, the entry SLR is now 6 megapixels.
You can find the Pentax K110D with the 18-55mm lens with metal mount for around $400 for the kit after rebate. For more money you can buy the new Nikon D40 for about $600 with lens, or the Pentax K100D with body-integral anti-shake for about $510. There is even more good news in that these new low-priced entry SLR camera kits are much faster than the models they replace. In fact the Nikon and Pentax models use image processing systems similar to their 10 megapixel models. You can also find closeouts of earlier 6 megapixel models, and the savings you find will likely be substantial. Just keep in mind that the older models are often slower and have fewer features than the newer models that replaced them.
A particularly excellent buy in the entry level is the new Pentax K100D. With the Sony purchase of Minolta the entry level Maxxum 5D was discontinued and it was the only entry level SLR with body integral anti-shake. Now that Pentax has developed their own integrated ant-shake the Pentax K100D is the only entry model with built-in anti-shake that will work with any lens you can mount. Since entry SLR buyers often get just the kit lens the anti-shake really matters as it makes the most difference with slower zoom lenses like you always find included as the kit lens.
The K100D is also much faster in operation than the *ist models it replaced. Significantly, you still get 11 point autofocusing with 9 cross sensors even on the $510 K100D, ISO range to 3200 with user programmable auto ISO, and you also get a 2.5" rear LCD and top LCD like the top-line K10D. The only negative, which will be a positive for some, is that the camera uses four AA batteries instead of a rechargeable lithium-ion battery. The good news is you can find AA batteries - disposable, rechargeable, NiMH - almost anywhere, even in rural areas off the beaten track. The bad news is that the battery life with alkalines is horrible, about 100 shots in our testing. You get much better life with high-capacity rechargeable batteries, four AA or two CRV3. Users report battery life with high-capacity rechargeables that is comparable to Li-Ion with other cameras.
The Nikon D40 is a significant upgrade to the D50 it replaced, with a larger LCD and faster operation. However, like all the other entry SLRs you get a dimmer penta mirror instead of a brighter pentaprism viewfinder. All of the Canon Rebel cameras have used penta-mirrors instead and they have improved over time. Casual users will not likely notice the dimmer viewfinder. The D40 has just three autofocus sensors, but they are spread wide for broad AF coverage. There is no means to auto-clean the sensor and anti-shake requires dedicated and expensive lenses - a stretch for most budget buyers. If you already have Nikon autofocus lenses, however, the D40 is an easy recommendation. It is a fast and capable entry SLR.
With 10 megapixels at the top, two models at 8 megapixel resolution are also selling in the $600 range with a kit lens. The Canon Rebel XT is still an excellent performer and a real bargain at the new $600 price. It is a bit slower than the XTi, but it still provides an excellent 7-point autofocus module. The Canon 8 megapixel CMOS sensor is still the lowest noise sensor in the market, so photo quality is excellent.
Olympus E500
Pentax K100D/K110D
The Olympus E-500 is an 8 megapixel SLR that also sells for about $600 with the normal kit lens. The viewfinder is one of the worst we have seen - mainly because of the difficulty of building a viewfinder for the 2X multiplier of the 4/3 Olympus lens system. Olympus has also placed a pretty low priority on autofocusing sophistication. As you can see above, the 3-sensor E-500 autofocus looks rather crude beside the 11-point Pentax SAFOX AF available at the same selling price. The photo quality of the Olympus, however, is excellent as long as you don't need high ISO, and Olympus pioneered auto sensor cleaning. If you decide to go Olympus be sure to buy the 2-lens kit at just $100 more. It is an excellent value you will fully appreciate after shopping for other 4/3 mount lenses. They are generally hard to find and most are very expensive compared to offerings from the competition.
There is only one model, and a rebadged sister, available at the very bottom of the entry level market. For around $400 (after the current Pentax $50 rebate) you can buy a Pentax K110D with an 18-55mm lens (or the sister Samsung GX-1L without a rebate). It would be a mistake, however, to dismiss the K110D as basic since it is the exact same camera as the K100D without the anti-shake capabilities. That means you still get the fast 11-pont Pentax AF module and the speedier processing engine used in the K100D. The kit lens is also better build quality than you will get anywhere else for an entry SLR.
Recommendations
Pentax has some really impressive offerings at the bottom of the entry level market. The K100D is the only entry level Digital SLR with body-integral anti-shake. Since the standard kit lens is a slow zoom lens with entry level cameras, anti-shake means you can shoot sharp pictures in lower light with the Pentax K100D. The anti-shake ability also does double-duty for auto-sensor cleaning.
If you already have Canon lenses or prefer the Canon system, the Canon XT is an excellent choice at the new kit price of $600. It was a great buy at the old $900 price, and an even better buy at 2/3 the original price.
The absolute best buy in entry level digital SLRs is the Pentax K110D with the kit lens. For $400 after the current $50 rebate you get a full-featured SLR with a fast processing engine, accurate 11-point autofocusing, and even user-programmable Auto ISO to 3200. It is the exact same camera as the K100D - only the anti-shake feature is missing. The kit lens is also the only entry kit lens with a preferred metal lens mount.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
89 Comments
View All Comments
astroidea - Sunday, December 31, 2006 - link
You still don't seem to get it.This article isn't about rating lenses or what is the best DSLR to get if you have $2000 to spend. It's to talk about the latest released bodies in the sub $1000 sector, NOT the professional sector.
Just because Canon/Nikon makes multithousand dollar professional equipment, it doesn't mean their consumer product line is the best too.
And as for the 50mm MK1 not being an L, there has been many canon owners that owned the Canon 50mm F/1.0 L and the Pentax 50mm F/1.4, and just about everyone of them will tell you the latter is better.
Many photography review sites tested the 200mm macros, and have all concluded that the Pentax FA* 200mm F/4 macro is the best they've ever seen.
The Pentax DA 14mm F/2.8 is rated to be better than both Nikon and Canon versions, and costs half the price(due to being APS cropped).
Sigma has many lenses that are better than Canon/Nikon's too. All makers have their gems and their dogs. Don't be silly.
Again, if you don't even have the slightest clue about the pentax lenses you are talking about, don't come up with ignorant assumptions.
And you must have some insane brand loyalty if you found wesley's article to be anti-nikon, when he placed their camera has #2 best choice.
Only Canon's was placed last, and deservedly so with the poor viewfinder and flimsy construction. Now don't tell me you're blind enough to defend Canon's subpar build too?
Justin Case - Sunday, December 31, 2006 - link
No, the article is, according to its own author, "not a review of the cameras", it is "a buyer's guide".A "buyer's guide" for SLR cameras must take into account the fundamental difference between SLRs and compact cameras. When you buy an SLR, you do it for the lenses and accessories. Either that or you're a masochist, because SLRs are more expensive, heavier, bigger and harder to use than compacts (and that's why even pro photographers with a ton of high-end equipment often carry around a small P&S).
The only other reason to use an SLR would be speed (faster power-up, faster shooting, etc., so you don't miss any good shots). But, guess what, the "article" doesn't cover that, either.
As to your claims that certain lenses have been very higly "rated", could you post some links or references? To tests with actual images? That's another thing this "buyer's guide" is missing: comparative photos taken with each camera. I guess that's an insignificant detail when comparing cameras, what really matters is the spec sheets and which one is 10% cheaper... sigh...
As to Sigma, they have a couple of lenses that are indeed better than the equivalent ones made by Canon or Nikon (although, to be honest, that's only because both Canon and Nikon have pretty crappy lenses for some focal lengths)... Anyway, Sigma sells nearly all of them in Canon and Nikon mounts, so if you have a Canon or Nikon camera, you have access to pretty much any Sigma model. And that goes for most manufacturers.
Sigma lenses with EOS mounts are part of Canon users' lens selection. As are Tokina or Tamron (or Leica) lenses with EOS mounts. In fact, you can even put Pentax M42 lenses on an EOS camera (but not the other way around). How's that for lens selection?
I'll be the first to agree that both Canon and Nikon have some real stinkers (as does ever manufacturer). But that's not the point. You don't have to buy the stinkers. The point is that when you pick a Canon or Nikon SLR, you have access to pretty much any lens out there. And that particular point (which is a fundamental one when it comes to SLRs) was completely distorted in this "buyer's guide". Maybe this was "Pentax fanboyism", as some people have suggested above, but personally I think it was just ignorance or lack of experience.
And that is why I suggest that anyone who wants to buy an SLR spend some time reading articles in photography sites, first to understand the difference between SLRs and compact cameras, and then to understand what are the ascpects of SLRs that they should be comparing, depending on what they are planning to do with them.
P.S. - I don't like the Rebel XTi, as I mentioned on another post above, and I'd never buy one, mainly due to ergonomics. But it has the best overall image quality of the four cameras tested here, and by far the best lens selection on the tele end.
astroidea - Monday, January 1, 2007 - link
Ok, so you like to tout your high and mighty canon/nikon lens selection.They do have very amazing lenses for professionals that Pentax lacks and dozens of lenses overlapping the same focal range.
However, as of March 2007, they will come out with their own line of DA* lenses, that will directly compete with Canon/Nikon's professional like. They will have the quick focusing USM motors, weather sealing, very high optical quality, and fast apertures.
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06092102pentaxda...">http://www.dpreview.com/news/0609/06092102pentaxda...
This will fulfill pentax's most lacking sector in their lenses.
Now, with the introduction of these lenses, tell me what part of Pentax's lens selection is lacking, that a user will find themselves starving of lens choice?
Pentax may not have a dozen lenses that overlap the same focal range, but they are certainly adequate in covering their bases. Does that make them inferior? Does the lack of dozens of lenses that overlap the same focal range make pentax an unworthy competitor?
I don't see your line of reasoning in that Pentax is inadequate in their lens selection.
But tell me this, does Canon have a high quality 16-45mm F/4 zoom that costs $350? Does Canon have a high quality 14mm F/2.8 prime that costs $600?
Canon has their pro base covered with full frame 17-40mm F/4 L, and a full frame 14mm F/2.8 lens. But what about their semi-pro range for those who don't want to splurge a car worth for a camera? They'd have to pay double for full frame equivalents. How is that a good buy?
That's where Pentax excels in. It may not be the best choice for professionals that depend on their camera system costing five figures that puts food on the table. But for your average consumers, it'll easily give canon/nikon a run for its money.
All in all, each brand has their own strengths and weaknesses. To claim a brand is the end all-be all is just ludicrous. It's up to the consumer to decide what they find is important and to find the brand that best suits their needs.
Justin Case - Monday, January 1, 2007 - link
> However, as of March 2007, they will come out> with their own line of DA* lenses, that will
> directly compete with Canon/Nikon's professional like.
Yes, I'm sure that in March 2007 they'll magically be able to match the line-up that Canon and Nikon (and Sigma, etc.) have put together over the last decades... sigh...
Are you seriously saying that people should pick an SLR system based on some vague marketing promises for the future...?!?
And, as I've written above, what matters isn't the lenses that Canon (or Nikon) makes, it's the lenses and accessories that can be used with their cameras. And virtually every good lens out there comes in Canon and Nikon mounts, if only for economic reasons.
Calling the DA 16-45 a "good quality lens" is stretching it a bit. If that's your idea of good quality, I guess we're playing on different leagues. I've seen Mini DV cameras with less chromatic aberration and better corner sharpenss.
http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/26868740">http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/26868740
http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/26883592">http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/26883592
http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/26883311">http://www.pbase.com/tcom/image/26883311
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/parts/image_for_...">http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/parts/image_for_...
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/parts/image_for_...">http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/parts/image_for_...
etc.
The only "good" (meaning sharp, balanced, CA-free) images I've seen from a DA 16-45 were scaled down to 640x480 and so post-processed that I felt sorry for the original photons.
It's not exactly up to the level of a Canon 17-55 2.8 or even a 10-22 (which isn't even considered very sharp). Yes, I know those are more expensive, but there are also cheaper alternatives for Canon / Nikon cameras (from the original manufacturers as well as from Tokina, Tamron, Sigma, etc.). Canon's 18-55 kit lens costs $100 and if it's not sharper than the DA 16-45, then at least it's very, very close (for 1/3rd of the cost!). Pentax makes a few great lenses, but that ain't one of 'em. In fact, can't say I remember any Pentax zoom that I'd rate as "good" (they do have some good primes).
Anyway, my point is that if you want a good lens, and you have a camera with a Canon / Nikon mount, you can get it. Reading this AT "article", one would get the impression that K-mount cameras not only have the best of the best lenses, but also the widest lens selection, which is simply not true.
If you read my posts above, I've written that every camera body in this test is a good one, and they can all be "the right choice" in some circumstances. My issue is with the way the article is written, and how it distorts or selectively omits facts to support its conclusions (ex., the comparison of lens lineup or the comparison of IS/VR with sensor stabilization).
Either the author did that deliberately, or he's written an "SLR buyer's guide" without understanding the point of SLRs (as compared to lighter, cheaper, smaller, and easier to use compact cameras). Either way, it's not a very good service to readers (as isn't the complete absence of comparative sample photos, but I see that more as a symptom than the cause).
gibhunter - Monday, January 1, 2007 - link
You're right about lens selection. Canon and Nikon win hands down. Though once Pentax comes out with those three DA* gems they will match the former at those focal lengths.Having said that, Canon and Nikon will still have the fast ultra zooms (600mm) and they will still have much faster AF speeds in low light. Lets face it, all dslrs have good speed with adequate light but as light levels fall, Canon, Nikon (from D80 and up) and Sony have fast AF speed. Pentax? They refuse to even acknowledge that they have a problem!
Sony's low light images are too noisy though and Canon XTI has less detail in their ISO 1600 images than the XT had which tells me that they are applying too much noise reduction.
No camera system is perfect. Pentax is good in just about everything but lens selection in pro-level glass and AF speed. Sony has noise issues in high ISO. Canon and Nikon do not have built in SR like Pentax or Sony. Pick what deficiency you can live with and base your decision on that.
For me I get irritated with AF speed on my K100D, but the more indoor shots I take, the more I realize that I could not get by without SR and clean high-ISO images I get, so for me the Sony, Canon and Nikon are out.
Yes, I could get IS or VR in Canon or Nikon lenses, but I would have to pay through the nose for it. 18-50 f/2.8 IS or VR are in the $1500 range, 3 times the cost of my camera and nearly four times the cost of Sigma's brand new 18-50 f/2.8 Macro which will be stabilized on my K100D.
So yeah, go ahead, buy Canon or Nikon, but be prepared to pay extra for it.
Justin Case - Monday, January 1, 2007 - link
I wouldn't describe lenses I've never seen as "gems", especially considering the quality of Pentax zooms I've used (ie, not very good).Sony actually has pretty good noise reduction in their compact cameras, borrowed from their camcorders. I haven't used the Alpha, but the sensor is supposed to be the same as in the D200, and the D200 is pretty good. Still not as good as Canon's, noise-wise, but close enough to be competitive (which, for a long time, Nikon really wasn't). So if the Alpha is noisy my guess is the D200 does good post-processing. It preserves detail very nicely.
The XTi has a higher pixel count than the XT with the same physical sensor size. Less light per photosite means more noise. Overall, you probably have the same detail for the whole image, but less detail "per pixel". I think the XTi also comes with different image processing defaults (i.e. "0" sharpness on the XTi is actually the equivalent to "2" on the XT). But I think you can turn NR off, anyway. My real problem with the XT and XTi is the ergonomics. The menus and buttons are ok, but the viewfinder and the grip are just terrible. Don't know what they were thinking. The sensor is still the best out there, unless you go for (physically) bigger ones (1D, 5D, 1Ds).
Unless you have Parkinson's, image stabilization at 18mm is pretty much useless (even "proper" optical stabilization, which is better than sensor stabilization, and fine-tuned for each lens). Using a faster lens (ex., f/2.8 instead of f/4) will give you much more noticeable improvements than stabilization. Stabilization is only really useful above 50mm or so. Below that, in 99% of cases, blur is caused by subject motion, not camera shake, and a stabilizer won't do anything about that; what you need is a faster lens, good low-light AF and low noise.
People can put the Sigma 18-50 on their Canon or Nikon cameras, and it costs exactly the same as the Pentax mount version, so no, you don't have to be "prepared to pay extra" (for the same). The difference is that if you're willing (and able) to pay extra, you can get something better.
The Sigma 18-50 is pretty good at f/5.6 and above, but if I'm going to pay for an f/2.8 lens, I want it to be good at f/2.8, and at that aperture the Sigma doesn't really come close to Canon's 17-55, for example.
Yes, that extra quality has a price (+200%, in this case). But if you're not going to buy good lenses for your SLR, then chances are you're better off with a compact P&S (some have image stabilization, too, and pretty decent lenses).
A "budget SLR" seems like the worst of both worlds. I don't mean the camera itself; newer, better and cheaper cameras are released every 6 months (and you can pick up last year's model for peanuts, in 2nd hand). I mean the lenses. A top-quality lens doesn't devalue, and will give you better results with future cameras. A so-so lens will only look worse as sensor quality increases, and effectively limits your image quality, crippling your fancy new camera.
mongrelchild - Saturday, December 30, 2006 - link
Yes, you did in an above post, completely without explaining your reasoning and labeling the author as clueless for prefering one.
As for primes, one of the best ever pentax lenses is the 28 f/3.5 and is regarded as being massively better than even the 50mm
Here is what you are: A nikon fan who thinks there are no other viable options and who disseminates misinformation, a la ken rockwell to convince newbies to think like you.
Maybe for you there aren't any other viable options. But I could never choose the oversharened messes Canon outputs to the film-like output of a Pentax. I just don't like the way the Canon pictures look. Having never used Nikon (except for a few minutes), Olympus or Minolta , I can't judge their products.
But to imply that anyone who chooses pentax is a clueless fool is ludicrous. Ask ANY current pentax owner is they're satisfied, they'll say yes. Pentax has up until recently been THE standard SLR, whether you like it or not.
Their lenses are exceptional for ludicrously low prices, and their DSLRs are very capable products.
I didn't like the article even though I mostly agreed with it. But it's important to remember it's not a review. Just the author's opinion and weighting of different specifications.
I maintain that if you are not Ken Rockwell, then you are his child molesting twin brother.
Justin Case - Saturday, December 30, 2006 - link
I see you have me all figured out... except... I don't own a single piece of Nikon equipment, I had no idea who Ken Rockwell was until I searched for it, and no, I never said that "Pentax sucks". So either you got me mixed up with someone else, or you live inside a reality distortion field, or you're the article's author posting under a different name... either way, not really worth the time to read, let alone reply.Wesley Fink - Thursday, December 28, 2006 - link
Thanks for taking the time to post detailed comments.1 - I certainly agree SLRs are about lenses and I talked about this in depth in my earlier article "Digital Photography from 20,000 Feet". I did not feel it needed to be repeated in a Buyers Guide, but your point is well taken.
2 - Sigma makes almost all their lenses in Pentax AF mount. It is true they are not available everywhere for Pentax, but you can find the popular and unusual ones like the 10-20mm on eBay, at Amamzon, and some large etailers. THere are MANY more Pentax KAF mount lenses available from 3rd parties than 4/3 mount lenses for example - if that matters to you. It is true Tamron has fewer Pentax mount lenses available, particularly in their newest designs, where the newest Sigma designs are almost all available in Pentax/Samsung.
3 - Compatability does not mean just older MF lenses. THere are many Pentax AF lenses available that are fully functional on the new K10D, K100D, K110D. There are also many KA lenses that do all metering functions on the new Pentax - everything except AF and there is focus assist built-in for that. Older K-mount lenses from Pentax and many other makers also will meter but they do not provide complete lens info to the body - you need to tell the cmera the focal length for AS with the early K lenses. Any lens you can mount - directly or by adapter can meter manually, focus with viewfinder aids, and utilize AS after providing the camera with focal length. This is certainly more than basic compatibility and is worth praising in my opinion.
4 - I agree metering systems are critically important, and should have been covered in the Guide. The K10D offers accurate 16-segment metering and the ability to select multi-zone, center-weighted, and spot metering. You can also turn on (or off) the linking of the active AF point to metering. I did mention the unique exposure programs like the Sensitivity Value program and Hyperprogram with user adjustable aperture and/or shuter speed.
5 - The Nikon D80 and Pentax K10D both provide the most extensive options in the guide. If you are familiar with Nikon menu logic, as you are, the D80 makes perfect sense. However, many have complained that the D80 has everything buried in mensus and is very complex. I find the K10D very easy to use and particularly like the Fn dial with the most commonly used menu items and the RAW button for when you want to shoot a few RAW shots spontaneously. I find the D80 equally satisfying, with great options.
The rest of your points have been addressed in other comments here. In general we are back to the question of what role AT can play in Digital Camera reviews. While you may not agree with my picks based on your personal situation, I think most people will find my expressing an opinion and rational for that opinion more useful than 4 reviews that all end with the same buying rating.
Computer parts are becoming cookie-cutter similar in some categories, while Digital SLRs still have unique personalities and unique lens capabilities in each lineup of new lenses and in the very active used market for lenses. We hope we can provide information so our readers can better navigate that landscape.
haplo602 - Friday, December 29, 2006 - link
after 3 tries with always an error when posting the reply:I agree for most part. Of course my comment was biased with my own experiences :-)
Anyway since my previous reply to you was lost (probably login timeout), I'll keep this short.
Looking from a lens point of view, Canon and Nikon are the clear winners.
Looking from a body features point of view, the Pentax followed by Sony.
Looking on the price, Sony wins (IIRC).
There are many points to argue in between (like weight and bulk of the Pentax body vs the weather sealing). And many people will come down to price (Sony) and accessory options (Nikon and Canon win here).
If you want a faster P&S and you'll never use any other than the kit lens, you missed 80% of what the SLR can do for you. Image stabilisation is available in fixed lense cameras, you don't have to worry about dust on sensor, they offer larger zoom range than any kit lens (up to 12x). Sure they are slower, there's always a negative point somewhere.
As AT is not a photo site, I'd expect a buyers guide to reflect the PC guides. In those you start with a budget and draw out a picture of the capabilities you expect from the PC in the respective price ranges. Than you start to assemble them to meet the stated minimum functionality. I'd expect something like that also from this SLR BG.
Anyway the article is not that bad, has some nice information.