Only YOU can tell me what to get...

[Buschmaster]

Have you handled each one? How does each one feel? I found that the Pentax was a bit less of a reach in my hand than the Nikon, I liked the menu structures and layouts better as well.

The K100 also has a shake reduction as mentioned earlier.

The Pentax and the Nikon are both great cameras, I've never dealt with the other. With travel on your agenda you should also consider weight and size.

 

[Clix Pix]

A couple of thoughts occurred to me, prompted by this remark by the OP: "I would love to know the correlation between what people use and what they recommended (doing that is fair enough - I recommend what I know as well), since almost nobody likes the Pentax option - I really thought it would be a closer vote..."

Well, it's clear that most people voted for the Nikon D50 for two reasons: (1) they didn't have a Pentax and don't know anything about them and (2) No Canon DSLR was on the list.

It is the first reason which should make you sit up and take notice. Yes, many people do NOT shoot with Pentax. Why? What implications does this have for you? Nothing to do with the perceived quality or non-quality of either Pentax bodies or lenses, but simply that as this poll has demonstrated (as well as many discussions on this site), unless finances are a consideration, Pentax doesn't seem to be the choice which first pops into people's minds when they are ready to buy camera gear. Nikon and Canon rule the roost when it comes to reputation. My very first SLR camera waaaay back in the 1970's was a Minolta. Nice little camera, and I learned a lot with it. My heart, however, was already lusting for a Nikon, and sure enough, when I later had the money, I went out and bought my first Nikon 35mm film SLR.

Anyway, I think you will find that most serious photographers own and use either Nikon gear or Canon gear (either 35mm rangefinders and SLRs or digital SLRs). Many not-so-serious photographers own either Nikon or Canon DSLRs. Both manufacturers have long-established reputations (Nikon's slightly longer, I believe). So more people have Nikons or Canons than Pentaxes. What does this mean for you?

Since we're addressing the possibility of a Nikon purchase, let's get on with specifics here. An advantage of getting the Nikon D50 is that you are much more likely to find that some of your friends are also shooting with Nikon lenses.... It's fun to go out shooting with others and to be able to swap lenses, see how a different lens can work for you. I've known people to lend others a lens when one is needed for a special occasion. Another advantage is that major photo stores such as Penn have rental services, too, so that you could walk into Penn and come out with 70-200mm VR that you've rented for the weekend. (I know the downtown store and the Tyson's store have rentals available, but I'm not so sure that the others do now that I am thinking about it. Chip can clarify this for us.)

For instance, you could come over to Virginia and go shooting with Chip and me and see how various lenses work on the D50: go from one extreme to the other and what fun you could have with the 10.5mm fisheye and the 200mm f/2 (Bertha) and the 80-400mm and the 300mm f/4..... You could also discover the wonders of IR conversion (Chip has had this done to his D50) and see how different lenses work with that.... This would give you an idea of the flexibiity of the Nikon system lenses. (Only problem is that it undoubtedly would give you a rip-roaring case of "Lens Lust!")

Seriously, though, if you do want to go out shooting before you make your decision and purchase, I would be happy to get together with you and let you try out the 18-200mm VR, the kit lens 18-70mm, and the 50mm f/1.4 (don't have the f/1.8) on either the D200 or the D70s (don't have a D50) so that you can get an idea of how this all works and feels and looks....

Getting back on-topic here, the other thought which was prompted by that comment also obviously occurred to others, and that is the advantages of a DSLR over a fixed-lens "pro-sumer" camera. That's why the Panny didn't rank too high in the poll. This has been addressed above so I'll just say that, yes, there are numerous advantages of a DSLR over a pro-sumer such as the Panny, the CP 8800 or the Sony R-1. One is the obvious (being able to change lenses to achieve specific photographic effects), another is that usually the pro-sumer cameras are a bit slower with the shutter lag and shot-to-shot. They often are not good performers in low light. As for viewfinders: there is nothing like a good optical viewfinder!! I hated the EVF on the CP 8800. So while these pro-sumers may have seemingly awesome zoom range they do have their liabilities, too and in the end are still not as satisfactory as a DSLR.

So there's where I'm coming from: a Nikon user from way back, having come to the DSLR from using SLRs back in the day, then a series of Coolpixes.....it was my less-than-satisfying experience with the CP 8800 which finally jolted me into buying my first DSLR. One thing I must add, though, is that while I was not particularly happy with the CP 8800, it was more to do with its incompatibility with my shooting style than it was anything to do with quality. We've seen some stunning images right here on this site by Seenew, who managed to work magic with his CP 8800..... That camera is definitely capable of super macros and excellent images (it has a fantastic lens) but it just wasn't the camera for me. And that's important to realize, too, that sometimes a particular camera or lens just isn't the right one for the photographer....

 

[kwajo.com]

You're definitely getting more features in a better camera with the Pentax, so go with that.

exactly. And as someone mentioned, you can get higher quality lenses from Pentax without having to jump up to pro-level prices. The K100 is in a higher class than the D50, the body is made of better materials, the build quality is better, the viewfinder is bigger and brighter, not to mention the SR, metering points, autofocus, etc.
But I'm tired of defending my system all the time, so if you want Nikon or Canon, go nuts, they're both great choices and you most likely won't be disappointed

 

[Buschmaster]

exactly. And as someone mentioned, you can get higher quality lenses from Pentax without having to jump up to pro-level prices. The K100 is in a higher class than the D50, the body is made of better materials, the build quality is better, the viewfinder is bigger and brighter, not to mention the SR, metering points, autofocus, etc.
But I'm tired of defending my system all the time, so if you want Nikon or Canon, go nuts, they're both great choices and you most likely won't be disappointed

I'm just glad someone around here likes Pentax as much as I do.

 

[FocusAndEarnIt]

D50 all the way.

 

[Cheese]

Panasonic works for me. No worries. I am not planning to publish photos of my young-uns, or do color seperations or incorporate any o f my images into video game animation. I have the LZ2 and it is really good FOR ME. My only, ONLY negative comment about it is the lack of a viewfinder, but that was my choice to select a camera without one wasn't it... Easy decent pix without a lot of fuss. My 2 cents.

 

[maxi]

After reading some reviews and general comments all over the net about digital cameras in general, let me express my frustrations in here:

Digital SLR cameras are photographic cameras 1st and electronic gadgets 2nd. NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

I'm sick and tired of people comparing and judging cameras on totally unrealistic tests. The most important part of a camera is the person holding it. The "camera X has much more features than camera Y" argument is complete BS, features in a photographic cameras are to be judged individually.
Most of the features evaluated in so called "reviews" are stupid, I won't be taking pictures of a test pattern all day, nor will I doing ridiculously huge crops of little parts of the picture to find out a certain lens is not as sharp at the borders. And don't even get me started on megapixels.
The important thing here is the picture. Just buy whatever helps you get better pictures,
ie: If you like to change WB, ISO and exposure compensation a lot, then having those as individual buttons (not having to use a menu) will be worth it more than having the ultimate super-duper image stabilization gimmick.
If you constantly find that your current camera gives you blurry pics because you like to shoot in low light without a flash, then a high speed lens OR Image Stabilization will be worth it FOR YOU.

I, for example have a D70. It does everything I want it to do: I can change WB and ISO for every shot at the touch of a button, I can use a whole lot of different flashes at a very nice sync speed (though non iTTL ones will have to work in auto mode only), I have 5 AF zones and an intuitive and extremely well built body. It also takes nice pictures (matrix metering is the ****).

So, the bottom line, and what I'm trying to say here is that cameras are not computers. You cannot realistically judge them one against the other. There is no "better" camera, there's simply a "better camera FOR WHAT I WANT IT FOR". Go and look at what some professional photographers have been doing for decades and take the time to realize that the camera they used didn't matter one bit. You could probably have given Ansel Adams the ********* digital today and he would have blown you away with the results.

my opinion for your situation??
VR doesn't matter as much. VR is much more effective at long zooms. So if you are not going to shoot a whole lot at super tele distances, I wouldn't really say it's a decisive feature. Camera makers may want you to think it is, but it really isn't.
I really give the Nikon lay out (incl. 2nd LCD) a very high value. Since I don't know the pentax, I can't judge it. But do some research, how do you go about activating the features you need?
As far as optical and build quality, Nikon lenses are some of the best. BUT will it really make a difference in your case? I personally would go the nikon route more because of the huge amount of lenses out there and to come... don't forget you can get really competitive Tokina and Sigma glass for your nikon quite a bit cheaper than original lenses.

That's why I voted D50. I'd say, get a D50 and a 50mm 1.8. Not because you will get "better pictures" but because of the whole package.

 

[serpent]

I voted D50.
I personally would go with a D70s tho or if you got a few xtra bucks go with the new D80. I wouldn't bother w/the boxed lens and save up your $$ for:
1-17-35 f/2.8 ed-if af-s
2-28-70 f/2.8 ed-if af-s
3- 70-200 f/2.8g ed-if af-s vr

Serpent

 

[nbs2]

exactly. And as someone mentioned, you can get higher quality lenses from Pentax without having to jump up to pro-level prices. The K100 is in a higher class than the D50, the body is made of better materials, the build quality is better, the viewfinder is bigger and brighter, not to mention the SR, metering points, autofocus, etc.
But I'm tired of defending my system all the time, so if you want Nikon or Canon, go nuts, they're both great choices and you most likely won't be disappointed

Something I have noticed in my quest for the right camera for me is that it seems to be a bit more difficult to find as vast a lens catalog for the Pentax, compared to the Canon, Nikon, and even the Sony (thanks to the Minolta buyout). If I did go with the K100, where would I look to find lenses? For example, I just glanced at the Ritz site, and found pages and pages of lenses that mount on the latter three, and only a page or so for the Pentax. I know that I won't need all the fancy lenses and such (as if Lori would let me buy them), but...

Also, maxi brought up a good point when he mentioned the Tonika and Sigma lenses. What TP makers do I trust? I understand that I "get what I pay for", but 360 vs. 400 doesn't seem like a lot of money when you compare the Quantaray and Tamron 17-200 lenses, but people treat Tamron like they are almost perfect and while I have yet to see anyody say anything nice about the Quantaray. Also, who else is out there (or should I stick with the lenses from Nikon/Pentax)?

 

[bousozoku]

The only people who will say anything nice about Quantaray all work for Ritz Camera.

As 3rd party lenses go, I would barely trust Sigma or Tamron, and I think they're better than Tokina. Then again, as I've said in the past, a lot of Canon L-series lenses end up as refurbished.

You must be very careful when buying less expensive glass. There is a definite reason that third parties can sell for less. If you haven't noticed, several people buying Sigma lenses have returned them because they weren't as sharp as they should have been but they've usually managed to get the desired sharpness from the same model eventually.

 

[nbs2]

The only people who will say anything nice about Quantaray all work for Ritz Camera.
...
If you haven't noticed, several people buying Sigma lenses have returned them because they weren't as sharp as they should have been but they've usually managed to get the desired sharpness from the same model eventually.

Just because while I was at Ritz the other day looking at the FZ7, I saw one of their people trying to sell some guy every accesory and plan in the store with his new camera (another Nikon, I believe), even though he didn't want it, doesn't make them bad people. Ok, it does.

Actually, I hadn't noticed. Everywhere I go, the suggested TP lens has been Tamron. But, I can understand that with any lens manufacturer, you can have bad eggs - my problem is sorting them out. What sort of initial battery should I put a lens through to see if it is "good" or not?

 

[maxi]

Just because while I was at Ritz the other day looking at the FZ7, I saw one of their people trying to sell some guy every accesory and plan in the store with his new camera (another Nikon, I believe), even though he didn't want it, doesn't make them bad people. Ok, it does.

Actually, I hadn't noticed. Everywhere I go, the suggested TP lens has been Tamron. But, I can understand that with any lens manufacturer, you can have bad eggs - my problem is sorting them out. What sort of initial battery should I put a lens through to see if it is "good" or not?

here, check out this link:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/digital-wide-zooms/comparison.htm

Ken reviews all 4 wide angle zooms (Nikon 12-24mm, Tokina 12-24mm, Sigma 10-20mm and Tamron 11-18mm). Look at the differences he finds between the lenses and ask yourself it they are important for you. I like to have Nikon lenses, but I probably wouldn't be able to tell it apart from a Tokina in most situations.
I believe the "you get what you pay for" part is true, Nikons have better build quality and better optical quality. Period. But will you be able to notice that optical difference in your day to day photography? that's something you have to figure out for yourself.

 

[Abstract]

Everywhere I go, the suggested TP lens has been Tamron. But, I can understand that with any lens manufacturer, you can have bad eggs - my problem is sorting them out. What sort of initial battery should I put a lens through to see if it is "good" or not?

I don't know where you're reading, but "TP" lens makers are usually fine.

I wouldn't just trust Tamron, though. I look at each lens specifically. Tokina may make a fantastic 12-24 mm wideangle, while Tamron may make another lens that's better than all the others. Even Nikon, Canon, and Pentax are going to have lenses that aren't as good as their 3rd party alternatives. You just need to be careful like you would with any expensive purchase.

Pentax makes lenses for Pentax, but many of the Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina lenses with Pentax K-mount are going to be good too. Just do your research.

If you need to do lens research on any lens, go to Fred Miranda's forum reviews. There are other sites as well, but these people do give some good user reviews and explanations.

 

[xPismo]

Rebel XT or used 10D. I have the 10D, best camera I've ever used.

 

[Clix Pix]

Prior to buying any lens the best thing to do is check reviews online and check user forums (dpreview.com, steves-digicams.com, imaging-resource.com) to see what people are saying about specific lenses.... If you purchase the D50 you would get a lot out of reading the forums at Nikon Cafe (nikoncafe.com). Fred Miranda's site is another excellent resource. Even with all the reading, though, yes, you have to evaluate the individual copy of any given lens and run it through a shooting session or two to see if it is performing the way you think it should. If you see that the focus doesn't seem right or that the images all appear to be "soft," then this suggests problems with the lens and any good camera dealer will take it back and let you try out another one in its stead.

As has been mentioned, no one lens manufacturer is going to turn out absolutely perfect lenses all through their line and that is why it is important to check out reviews and user comments. Tokina may have an outstanding lens in one particular prime or zoom while some of their other lenses might not be that great; ditto for Tamron, Sigma, etc.

Something to consider, though, and I think it's been mentioned here already, so I'm just reiterating: resale value on Nikon lenses is always going to be significantly higher than on any third-party lens, even many years later.

 

[bousozoku]

Just because while I was at Ritz the other day looking at the FZ7, I saw one of their people trying to sell some guy every accesory and plan in the store with his new camera (another Nikon, I believe), even though he didn't want it, doesn't make them bad people. Ok, it does.

Actually, I hadn't noticed. Everywhere I go, the suggested TP lens has been Tamron. But, I can understand that with any lens manufacturer, you can have bad eggs - my problem is sorting them out. What sort of initial battery should I put a lens through to see if it is "good" or not?

I'd suggest taking a number of photos appropriate to the use of the lens. As long as you've done your best with the lens, print them as large as is reasonable and check the quality in the centre and at the edges.

If the focus appears terribly soft in places or if it appears to have unreasonable areas of light or dark that are inconsistent with the original scene, I wouldn't accept it. Of course, you have to pay attention for the comparison to work.

Any product can have a problem, no matter the price or brand. Camera lenses tend to have a long life, so you could be stuck with a problem for a long time.

That Ken Rockwell guy...he's funny. There are other, more reliable sources.

 

[fivetoadsloth]

D50 or rebel

 

[Clix Pix]

That Ken Rockwell guy...he's funny. There are other, more reliable sources.

Definitely! Ken Rockwell has put out opinions on lenses....in some cases these are lenses that he's never even used or put on his camera. He is definitely opinionated but not always accurate in what he says on his site. Read what he says but don't take it for "gospel." Large grain of rock salt.

I heard that now he is planning to "review" Canon lenses.... Huh!

 

[bousozoku]

Definitely! Ken Rockwell has put out opinions on lenses....in some cases these are lenses that he's never even used or put on his camera. He is definitely opinionated but not always accurate in what he says on his site. Read what he says but don't take it for "gospel." Large grain of rock salt.

I heard that now he is planning to "review" Canon lenses.... Huh!

You need to test lenses on a camera? I thought that you could merely look at the specifications to determine how well it functions. Even more important is the styling of the exterior, as is the included case or pouch.

 

[sjl]

You need to test lenses on a camera? I thought that you could merely look at the specifications to determine how well it functions. Even more important is the styling of the exterior, as is the included case or pouch.

Yup - it's absolutely vital that it sport a silver ring for that luxury touch! And you don't want to be lugging around a lot of weight - the lighter the lens, the better it'll be!

*ahem* Excuse me, I think it's time for my medication.

 

[maxi]

That Ken Rockwell guy...he's funny. There are other, more reliable sources.

Ohhh... Absolutely, I like his site but you need a HUGE grain of salt to read it (he often contradicts himself too...). But I pointed to that review because you can actually see what kind of differences you can expect between lenses.