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
creidhmeach - Wednesday, January 17, 2007 - link
This article is not up to the usual standard. There are too many instances of phrases in the vein of "from a brief comparison" and "the Pentax image stabilisation is said to improve by four stops..." without any corroborating evidence.Anandtech wouldn't publish a comparison of an nVidia and ATI graphics card with "from a brief comparison" and "the nVidia card is said to have..." without any comprehensive testing, and Anandtech normally never believe published specifications and advertising without proof from testing first.
Anandtech has built a reputation for well balanced, comprehensive reviews; I understand your point in publishing a brief buyers guide for first-time dSLR buyers, but please endeavour to make them a little more comprehensive in the future. In particular, please don't utilise advertised specifications as a recommendation to buy a product without showing us that they actually perform as the manufacturer says.
dsumanik - Wednesday, January 17, 2007 - link
Someone let this thread die, the article was not very thorough, there wasnt any hard testing, and nikon/canon are the best and youll pay for that.pentax is bang for the buck...but not a long term solution if you are really into photography.
the end.
dextro - Monday, January 8, 2007 - link
Thanks for the great guide Wesley. I've been an AT reader for a couple of years for good reason. I used to patronize many more sites including and Tom's Hardware, as well as AT and Tech Report and others. After spending a good amount of time on all of those sites, I generally find myself only visiting AnandTech and The Tech Report for reviews. I'm a young guy and I don't have that much cash, so I especially appreciate the attention to price/performance and value without compromise in quality.I was going to go for the Nikon D40 originally, but after reading this article and doing a bit more research to verify, I picked up the Pentax D100 at B&H, and I love it. Yes, this is my first SLR, but the price and features were right for me. I really enjoy using hardware with high build quality, and the camera fits me very nicely. I like it so much that after having it for only a couple of weeks I'm already about to buy my first new lens, a 50mm f/1.4 pentax prime which I hope will serve me well.
I think most people who go to AT know that its not smart to judge purchases based only on the brand, so ignore the fanboys man. Thanks again for the great article and you should know you've made at least one person very happy and perhaps helped to start a future career in photography.
aljohnso - Saturday, January 6, 2007 - link
Not with the review - with most of these comments.1. You could tell that the author knew what his conclusion was going to be before you reached the end of the article? You mean, you are surprised that the author did his tests, reached his conclusions, and then wrote the article? You were expecting something more stream-of-consciousness style? "I then tried the Canon, went to the bathroom, had a peanut butter and jelly sandwich...."?
2. Ad hominem attacks normally mean that the attacker is compromised, either in his own standing or in the argument he is bringing... shame on you (and you know who you are).
Which brings me to what I expect is the major conflict here - the article is not complementary to Canon products to the level to make people who have spent several thousands (sometimes on a single lens) to feel validated in their life choices.
I have owned both Pentax and Nikon equipment - I found, in my limited way, that the pentax pancake lens was wonderful, but that since I wanted to do a fair amount of macro work the Nikon lens selection was better. I gave my Pentax kit to my brother - who has a much better handle on picture composition than I have.
I studied the resolution of my Nikon lenses in some detail (I do know the difference between a double gauss and a tessar - both in terms of design and in results) and have posted results to usenet in the day.
I have stayed out of the fray in the digital realm since only recently has Nikon had a DSLR that looked like it had hit a sweet spot in terms of moderate price and usability (something between the D80 and the D200), and since Canon changes mounts and such in a way that did not allow me to consider the lenses as general optical elements in the way you can with Nikons (there is good reason why you can get c to T to N mount adapters, and almost no adapters to Canon).
The item I found interesting (and non-obvious) was the problem with sensor dust - I shall have to get more information on that. In verses Out of body camera shake compensation is rather trumped if in keeps the sensor clean and out does not.
The difference in Canon and Nikon lenses in the film days (and here I am primarily speaking prime lenses - zooms are interesting and useful compromise lenses), (other than that derived from Nikons longer back focal distance) can general be said that Canons have better sharpness over the field edge, and somewhat better color rendition. Nikons have better center sharpness and a less "artistic" color balance.
All of that may have shifted - computer design and more exotic glass choices shift the compromise balance, and in particular the smaller field being taken from the lens by the smaller digital sensor (as well as the shift in effective sensor thickness) make the design process and optimization results much less challenging in digital, until perhaps recently where sensor size and pixel size starts to get close to film again.
You have old lenses to mount? I would expect Nikon old stuff to work better than Canon - better center sharpness. Longer back focal distance also means deeper sensor active regions can be accommodated. I may be wrong - I would be interested in finding out.
However, the authors stated purpose/point-of-view was more along the line of "if you were going to spend a few hundred (and not too far back, more than several hundred) on a prosumer TTL fixed lens camera - you know, 10x zoom, slr like body... say, the Canon PowerShot S3 IS... and now consider if you could get similar capabilities from a DSLR with the kit lens or cheap upgrade".
Certainly this guide was not focused on those looking to spend ~$2k+ to get into the business... so for DSLR "newbees" function with kit lens is important, quality of exotic lenses (such a super telephoto or wide or macro) is not important, and brand loyalty is a very low priority.
The author was surprised with the quality of the Pentax product. It did have the examples of the majors to work with before release, it must be mentioned (which he did).
A useful review for me - your mileage will, of course, vary.
It might have been improved with some links to other sites with more detailed reviews, but Does Macy's tell Gimbel's?
Allen
Clones123 - Sunday, December 31, 2006 - link
Wesley,Thanks for an interesting and informative amateur’s buying guide. I'm shocked at how heated and nit-picky the comments have been. I fail to see how a brief DSLR buyer's guide on a computer web site can be faulted for not having been far more detailed and analytical than it was ever intended to be. I have forwarded your buyer's guide to numerous friends who, after seeing my photos, are interested in perhaps buying a DSLR themselves. I strongly suspect that NONE of those friends have either the time or the desire to read a long, complex and detailed comparative analysis of entry level DSLR's had you written such a thing.
You’ve introduced AnandTech to some new people who may not have previously visited AnandTech for it’s computer-related content. So, THANK YOU for your efforts which, I assure you, ARE appreciated by a silent majority of visitors to this web site.
skyyspam - Sunday, December 31, 2006 - link
Overall, your review is unsatisfactory. Your tone is more subjective than objective, and the content you did provide was superficial. You could learn a bit from reading Jeff Keller's reviews over at dcresource.com--he runs one the most objective digicam comparison programs around. Every camera he gets is put through exactly the same rigors, and those tests are designed to make it very easy for a reader to differentiate between a camera's performance in distinct categories.Quite dismayingly, you never show your readers any sample photos of your tests; you only report your own observations. For example, instead of just telling your readers, "From brief comparisons the Pentax and Canon XTi are the best at controlling noise at high ISO ("film") speeds," why not show us actual images from each camera, taken of the same subject at different ISO speeds? Going back to Jeff's reviews at dcresource.com, I've probably seen his Chicago skyline ISO comparison so many times that I can practically draw the city scene freehandedly. When he reviews a new camera, without reading a word, I can go directly to the ISO comparison samples and say, "Damn! That's one hell of a noisy picture, for only being ISO 200!" The same goes for his Mickey Mouse macro subject, which brings me to the question: did you ever compare the macro performance of the cameras? In more areas than I feel like discussing, you seem to have overlooked the importance of providing us with substantial review content.
In conclusion, your review lacks enough content to make it worthwhile, and I'm further annoyed by its overall subjective tone. For digital cameras, proof of performance is most easily shown and comprehended by using test images, and you provide your readers with no such examples.
haplo602 - Thursday, December 28, 2006 - link
I creted a forum login for just this one post :-)The article is interesting, funny and inacurate at times.
I respect it is a buyers guide, however you cannot do a buyers guide on SLRs by just comparing the specs.
1. SLRs offer GREAT FLEXIBILITY. Macro, landscape, sports, wildlife, architecture etc. Depends mainly on the lens you use, the camera is mostly irrelevant (except some areas, focus speed and sports f.e.). This is nowhere even considered in the whole article.
2. SLRs are all about lenses (as mentioned above). Now I know this may be disputed by many, but you totaly forgot 3rd party lens manufacturers (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina to name a few). True they may not have the same quality as genuine brands, but are still a consideration. Now most offer Canon, Nikon, Minolta mounts. That's all. Pentax is almost non-existent. This widens the lens selection for the named 3 brands.
3. In some parts you are praising Pentax for lens compatibility with older lenses. So you are buying an AUTOFOCUS camera to use with MANUAL FOCUS lenses? Come on. There are adapters for M42/canon/nikon mounts made by 3rd parties. This is not even a point. Check out ebay for lenses and compare the amount available for each brand. Canon leads by a horse lenght followed by Nikon. This is the true benchmark for lens availability.
4. Metering system comparison? Metering systems are NOT MENTIONED in the whole article IIRC. This is on of the MOST important points of SLRs and make a buy or leave difference.
5. Pentax K100D. A friend bought this camera recently and I got to use it for a couple of indoor shots. Being used to Nikon I was lost with the controls. Focus point selection for example? I can do it blind with Nikon and after a brief look on Canon. I did not figure out on Pentax without consulting the menus.
6. I guess you miss the Nikon viewfinder picture in the review.
7. VR/IS/AS or whatever you want to call it. With lenses you don't loose it when changing bodies. It is the number 1 reason for pentax and sony miserably batery lifetime. VR lenses from Nikon are made cheap these days. Check out the new 70-300 AF-S VR.
8. Image format options ? RAW+JPEG ? Service centers availability ? f.e. you can find Canon gear in almost any village at the end of nowhere. Try that with Sony/Pentax.
All the above points are more or less relevant. However what you realy missed is the 1st point. You can do specs comparison on a P&S small digicam because you can 100% sure say it will be used for snapshots on vacation and parties, so the purpose is very limited. Not so with SLRs which fill many roles.
Just to end my rant, do it in reverse next time. Do extensive reviews of each camera and then make a buyers guide as a summary after all of them. With references to the previous articles. Will be much better.
Justin Case - Thursday, December 28, 2006 - link
> Now I know this may be disputed by many,> but you totaly forgot 3rd party lens
> manufacturers (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina to
> name a few). True they may not have the
> same quality as genuine brands, but are
> still a consideration.
And then there's Leica, Zeiss and Voigtlander, and I suppose one can say that those don't have the same quality as most Canon or Nikon lenses, either, but they're only a consideration if you robbed a bank recently. ;^)
BTW, compact digicams offer great flexibility, too. The difference, as you point out, is that with a compact, it's the camera that matters. With an SLR, it's the lens selection. So, when you buy an SLR, you should buy the SLR that will take the lenses you want to use, not the other way around.
astroidea - Friday, December 29, 2006 - link
Have you ever even bothered to read about Pentax lenses before you brushed them off as being inferior?It sure doesn't seem like it.
Because if you have, you'd realize that Pentax is legendary in making primes, and their lenses are often considered as poor-man's leicas as the offer nearly the same quality for a fraction of the cost.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-02-05...">They only make the best autofocus lenses in the world
And this link is from luminous landscape, one that you said is credible.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic2/238813/0">Oh and here is a 40yr old Pentax lens blowing the socks off a modern canon lens
If you want to argue about pro equipment, then yes, a Canon 1DS MK2 or a Nikon D2X with multi-thousand dollar pro zooms that costs more than a car, would blow the socks off anything Pentax has to offer. But we're not talking about pro equipment here. We're talking about sub $1000 prosumer cameras. And that's where Pentax shines.
What you're saying is basically if I argued that Canon and Nikon was junk because Hasseblad's 39MP MF back destroys anything Canon/Nikon has to offer. It's simply comparing apples to oranges.
Justin Case - Friday, December 29, 2006 - link
Pentax has some very good primes in the 35-135 range. Nikon has had better wide angle lenses for a long time, and Canon has had better teles for a long time (Canon's 50 mm MkI is nothing to write home about, BTW - it's not even an "L" -, so that comparison is hardly surprising). And both Canon and Nikon have been improving their "weak ends" recently (ie. Nikon has improved their teles and Canon has improved their wides), and both make much better zoom lenses than Pentax (arguably, even Sigma does).When you go SLR, you're buying the system (unless you plan to replace your camera and all your lenses each time something new comes out). So the fact that Canon's and Nikon's high-end stuff is the best out there (unless you're willing to use manual focus, anyway) should definitely weigh on your decision, no? And should, at the very least, be mentioned in a "buyer's guide".
If I was going to buy something today, on a low budget, know what I'd get? A second-hand Digital Rebel (yes, the prehistoric one), and one good lens (ex., an 18-55 f/2.8). And I bet I could take better pictures with it than I could with a brand new $1000 Pentax (or Canon, or Sony, or Nikon) camera and the kit lens.
The whole point of SLRs is lenses and accessories. Picking a system based on a single camera and a single (cheap, kit) lens is missing the point. People who aren't planning to buy more lenses would be much better served with a compact camera (cheaper, lighter, smaller, easier to use). Unless this is a buyer's guide for posers and masochists, it's a very poor buyer's guide.
In fact, as other people have pointed out before, it seems that the "conclusion" of this "buyer's guide" had been decided long before it was written, and information is selectively omitted or twisted to support that conclusion (i.e., dishonest comparison of Pentax's lens lineup with other manufacturers', dishonest comparison of IS/VR with sensor stabilization, lack of comparative sample images, lack of objective performance measures, etc).
So, no, I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, that "Pentax sucks". I said this article sucks, and I'm saying it again. Bigtime.
Go read the articles about these cameras on DPReview, for example, and you'll see that they are all very good cameras (each with certain strengths and weaknesses, but all very capable). The issue isn't the cameras; the issue is the article itself, which seems to be a 20-minute job based on a previously decided "conclusion" and marketing leaflets. The K10D can be the best choice, under certain specific circumstances. As can any of the others. But the "blanket" anti-Nikon and anti-Canon statements in this "article" only show the author's lack of experience and understanding of pro photography (and yes, any of the cameras in this review can produce professional results, in the hands of a good photographer - in fact, pretty much any dSLR released in the last 3 years can). There is a reason (several reasons) why 95% of professional photographers pick Canon or Nikon. They are not all completely stupid. And if you're buying an SLR, maybe you should be paying some attention to the choices of the people who use them every day, and depend on them for their work.
P.S. - Unfortunately, there's no such thing as a poor man's Leica. :P