Sixteen Reasons to choose a Digital SLR over a Point and Shoot
SMS
1. You shoot in low light. Modern digital SLRs are able to produce low
noise images at ISO speeds up to 1600, depending on the camera. Point
and shoot cameras, with their small sensors, begin to exhibit noise at
ISO 200, with some poorer models being too noisy even at 100 ISO.
2. You want to use flash attachments. While a few higher end point and
shoot digital models have hot shoes for an external flash, most do not.
Some Canon P&S models without hot shoes can use a wireless flash, but
it's not a great flash unit.
3. You need an extreme wide-angle lens. Digital SLRs have
super-wide-angle zoom lenses available with an effective focal length of
as little as 16mm. There are no point and shoot digital cameras with
lenses that wide. With some point and shoot cameras you can add on
adapters to increase the wide-angle range, but even the best adapters
are of mediocre quality. Some ZLR cameras do give you a moderately wide,
28mm lens.
4. You need a long telephoto lens. Whether it�s doing wildlife
photography in Alaska, or shooting at sporting events, only a digital
SLR can use long telephoto lenses. If you only need a specialty lens for
rare occasions, you can even rent one for a couple of days. With some
point and shoot cameras you can add on adapters to increase the
telephoto range but even the best adapters are of mediocre quality. Some
ZLR cameras do give you a long telephoto lens, but the quality is not great.
5. You need fast auto-focus. Most digital SLRs (with the exception of
Pentax) use lenses with internal high-speed focusing motors). Point and
shoot digital cameras cannot focus nearly as fast.
6. You need low shutter lag. Whether it�s photographing your child on a
merry-go-round, or capturing the crack of the bat against the baseball,
you cannot obtain these shots with a digital point and shoot camera
because the time between when you press the shutter and the image is
captured is far too long. A digital SLR has a mechanical shutter that
opens instantaneously when the shutter release button is pressed. In a
point and shoot camera, the sensor is activated electronically after it
is used to focus the shot.
7. You want to produce images that can be printed in large sizes. Only a
high-resolution digital SLR is suitable for poster size prints.
8. You want an optical viewfinder. While a few point and shoot cameras
have retained an optical viewfinder, it�s been cost-reduced out of most
models. Composing a picture on the LCD screen, in bright sunlight, is
very difficult.
9. You want full manual control. While some high-end point and shoot
models have retained some level of manual control, most have
cost-reduced it out. On some Canon models, there is third-party software
that can get some of the manual control back, but it's very flaky and
complicated.
10. Expandability and upgradability. Not only a wide variety of
specialty lenses, but flash attachments, filters, vertical grips, remote
shutter releases, etc. If you eventually want to upgrade to a better
D-SLR body, a lot of the lenses and accessories can be used on the new
body if it�s from the same manufacturer.
11. Rapid sequencing. For action shots, both of sports and people, you
can get the exact shot you want, even when the people are moving.
12. Cost. Say what? Yes, it�s true. With the free-fall of digital SLR
prices, you can now buy a D-SLR and a decent lens for less than the cost
of a high end point and shoot camera.
13. Weight. There are now D-SLRs that are the same weight, or lighter
weight, than ZLRs, even with the lens weight included. So while most
users will still want to use a pocket-size point and shoot digital
camera when portablity is more important than quality, there�s no reason
to sacrifice quality and get a large P&S camera.
14. Size. There are now D-SLRs that are the same volume, or smaller
volume, than ZLRs, even with the lens volume included. So while most
users will still want to use a pocket-size point and shoot digital
camera when portablity is more important than quality, there�s no reason
to sacrifice quality and get a large P&S camera.
15. Wide-range walk-around lenses. It used to be that people would buy a
wide-range �SLR-like� P&S because they could achieve a wide zoom range
from wide-angle to telephoto without needing to change lenses, even
though the quality of these wide-range lenses wasn�t very good at the
ends. Now with several new wide-range D-SLR lenses, there is the option
of not having to change lenses. You can still use higher quality wide
angle and telephoto lenses when the need arises, while enjoying the
simplicity of a wide-range zoom lens when you choose to not carry extra
lenses.
16. Complexity. While a D-SLR does give you the ability to have a great
deal of control, you also have the option of setting it to automatic
mode, making it no more complex than a simple point and shoot camera. If
you have the desire to expand your creative control in the future, that
capability is built in. Most point and shoot cameras lack the option for
manual control, though some Canon cameras can use a freeware program to
add some limited control.
The bottom line is that most consumers would benefit from owning both a
pocket size point and shoot model for when portability is more important
than quality, and a digital SLR for when quality, speed, and control are
more important than portability.
House of Frauds
> Sixteen Reasons to choose a Digital SLR over a Point and Shoot
>
> 1. You shoot in low light. Modern digital SLRs are able to produce low
> noise images at ISO speeds up to 1600, depending on the camera. Point
> and shoot cameras, with their small sensors, begin to exhibit noise at
> ISO 200, with some poorer models being too noisy even at 100 ISO.
>
> 2. You want to use flash attachments. While a few higher end point and
> shoot digital models have hot shoes for an external flash, most do not.
> Some Canon P&S models without hot shoes can use a wireless flash, but
> it's not a great flash unit.
>
> 3. You need an extreme wide-angle lens. Digital SLRs have
> super-wide-angle zoom lenses available with an effective focal length of
> as little as 16mm. There are no point and shoot digital cameras with
> lenses that wide. With some point and shoot cameras you can add on
> adapters to increase the wide-angle range, but even the best adapters
> are of mediocre quality. Some ZLR cameras do give you a moderately wide,
> 28mm lens.
>
> photography in Alaska, or shooting at sporting events, only a digital
> SLR can use long telephoto lenses. If you only need a specialty lens for
> rare occasions, you can even rent one for a couple of days. With some
> point and shoot cameras you can add on adapters to increase the
> telephoto range but even the best adapters are of mediocre quality. Some
> ZLR cameras do give you a long telephoto lens, but the quality is not great.
>
> 5. You need fast auto-focus. Most digital SLRs (with the exception of
> Pentax) use lenses with internal high-speed focusing motors). Point and
> shoot digital cameras cannot focus nearly as fast.
>
> merry-go-round, or capturing the crack of the bat against the baseball,
> you cannot obtain these shots with a digital point and shoot camera
> because the time between when you press the shutter and the image is
> captured is far too long. A digital SLR has a mechanical shutter that
> opens instantaneously when the shutter release button is pressed. In a
> point and shoot camera, the sensor is activated electronically after it
> is used to focus the shot.
>
> 7. You want to produce images that can be printed in large sizes. Only a
> high-resolution digital SLR is suitable for poster size prints.
>
> 8. You want an optical viewfinder. While a few point and shoot cameras
> models. Composing a picture on the LCD screen, in bright sunlight, is
> very difficult.
>
> 9. You want full manual control. While some high-end point and shoot
> models have retained some level of manual control, most have
> cost-reduced it out. On some Canon models, there is third-party software
> that can get some of the manual control back, but it's very flaky and
> complicated.
>
> 10. Expandability and upgradability. Not only a wide variety of
> specialty lenses, but flash attachments, filters, vertical grips, remote
> shutter releases, etc. If you eventually want to upgrade to a better
> D-SLR body, a lot of the lenses and accessories can be used on the new
>
> 11. Rapid sequencing. For action shots, both of sports and people, you
> can get the exact shot you want, even when the people are moving.
>
> prices, you can now buy a D-SLR and a decent lens for less than the cost
> of a high end point and shoot camera.
>
> 13. Weight. There are now D-SLRs that are the same weight, or lighter
> weight, than ZLRs, even with the lens weight included. So while most
> users will still want to use a pocket-size point and shoot digital
> to sacrifice quality and get a large P&S camera.
>
> 14. Size. There are now D-SLRs that are the same volume, or smaller
> volume, than ZLRs, even with the lens volume included. So while most
> users will still want to use a pocket-size point and shoot digital
> to sacrifice quality and get a large P&S camera.
>
> 15. Wide-range walk-around lenses. It used to be that people would buy a
> from wide-angle to telephoto without needing to change lenses, even
> ends. Now with several new wide-range D-SLR lenses, there is the option
> of not having to change lenses. You can still use higher quality wide
> angle and telephoto lenses when the need arises, while enjoying the
> simplicity of a wide-range zoom lens when you choose to not carry extra
> lenses.
>
> 16. Complexity. While a D-SLR does give you the ability to have a great
> deal of control, you also have the option of setting it to automatic
> mode, making it no more complex than a simple point and shoot camera. If
> you have the desire to expand your creative control in the future, that
> capability is built in. Most point and shoot cameras lack the option for
> manual control, though some Canon cameras can use a freeware program to
> add some limited control.
>
> The bottom line is that most consumers would benefit from owning both a
> pocket size point and shoot model for when portability is more important
> than quality, and a digital SLR for when quality, speed, and control are
> more important than portability.
12. Which cameras are you thinking about ?
SMS
>> 12. Cost. Say what? Yes, it�s true. With the free-fall of digital SLR
>> prices, you can now buy a D-SLR and a decent lens for less than the cost
>> of a high end point and shoot camera.
> 12. Which cameras are you thinking about ?
For the high end P&S, something like the Cano sx10IS, which is about the
same price as an Olympus E420 with lens. Yeah, you don't get that
ridiculously wide range, mediocre lens. Actually I'm wrong about the
price, since the sx10IS has come down to $377, while the E420 with lens
is $399, both on Amazon.
I'm no big fan of Olympus D-SLRs, when compared against other D-SLRs
they fall far short, but by the same token they're much better than most
P&S cameras, and because sales of 4:3 are in the tank, the prices are
very reasonable.
House of Frauds
I see an Olympus 590uz for about the same money....26 - 676 mm, I'd
say that was a bargain
Alfred Molon
> For the high end P&S, something like the Cano sx10IS, which is about the
> same price as an Olympus E420 with lens. Yeah, you don't get that
> ridiculously wide range, mediocre lens. Actually I'm wrong about the
> price, since the sx10IS has come down to $377, while the E420 with lens
> is $399, both on Amazon.
The E-420 is cheap because it is being replaced by the new model, the E-
450, and stores want to get rid of their inventory.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
SMS
> In article <4jgQl.15866$jZ1....@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>, SMS says...
>
>> For the high end P&S, something like the Cano sx10IS, which is about the
>> same price as an Olympus E420 with lens. Yeah, you don't get that
>> ridiculously wide range, mediocre lens. Actually I'm wrong about the
>> price, since the sx10IS has come down to $377, while the E420 with lens
>> is $399, both on Amazon.
>
> The E-420 is cheap because it is being replaced by the new model, the E-
> 450, and stores want to get rid of their inventory.
Very marginal changes, so I doubt if the price will go up by more than a
few bucks.
Doug Jewell
> 5. You need fast auto-focus. Most digital SLRs (with the exception of
> Pentax) use lenses with internal high-speed focusing motors). Point and
> shoot digital cameras cannot focus nearly as fast.
Pentax bodies from the K10D and later support in-lens
focusing, and several lenses released since the K10D have
internal focus motors.
Not that it matters a great deal - I don't notice any
difference in speed between my Pentax system and my Canon
system for autofocus speed. The Canon may be faster, but in
practice it isn't noticeable. With lenses of the same
aperture, the Pentax is able to lock focus in lower light
levels where the Canon will give up.
One advantage of the Pentax system is that they have
maintained compatibility, so even if you have a lens with
in-lens motor, it still has the screw drive so it will still
have AF on older bodies. Likewise the bodies that support
in-lens motor have the body motor, so they will still have
AF on older lenses. Also, focus-confirm works with all
manual lenses, so even if you use a non-pentax lens via
adaptor, you will still have focus confirm.
IMO the way the Pentax system works is the best system on
the market. Unfortunately it is let down by not having as
many and varied lenses available compared to Canon/Nikon.
Although there is a broad enough range to suit most needs.
--
The Australian Labor Party couldn't run a pay dunny. They'd
have a queue half a mile long, and no-one on the seat.
SMS
> I'm kinda looking at what to buy, and this is the second
> strong endorsement I've seen recently about Pentax. The
> other was from a local guy I know who is in love with his
> K10D, which isn't even the latest model. If I understand
> correctly, the image stabilization is built into the camera
> body and operates directly on the sensor, which means no
> lens has to have that feature. But I think mainly he just
> really likes the pictures he gets. It's hard to argue with
> that.
Pentax isn't the only DSLR body with built in IS, Sony (Konica-Minolta)
and Olympus also have it.
In-lens stabilization is less effective, especially for long telephoto
lenses where it's needed the most. But it is a cheap way to get IS on
every lens.
It'd be nice if they offered long telephotos with internal IS that
over-rode the in-body IS, but I suppose that that would be acknowledging
the limitations of in-body IS.
If you already have a collection of Pentax lenses then it makes sense to
get a Pentax D-SLR, but other than that scenario, stick with Canon or Nikon.
J�rgen Exner
>Peabody wrote:
>
>> I'm kinda looking at what to buy, and this is the second
>> strong endorsement I've seen recently about Pentax. The
>> other was from a local guy I know who is in love with his
>> K10D, which isn't even the latest model. If I understand
>> correctly, the image stabilization is built into the camera
>> body and operates directly on the sensor, which means no
>> lens has to have that feature. But I think mainly he just
>> really likes the pictures he gets. It's hard to argue with
>> that.
>
>Pentax isn't the only DSLR body with built in IS, Sony (Konica-Minolta)
>and Olympus also have it.
>
>In-lens stabilization is less effective,
I think you meant in-camera?
>especially for long telephoto
>lenses where it's needed the most. But it is a cheap way to get IS on
>every lens.
jue
nospam
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> In-lens stabilization is less effective, especially for long telephoto
> lenses where it's needed the most. But it is a cheap way to get IS on
> every lens.
wrong. in-lens is more effective than in-camera as the focal length
gets longer. on the other hand, in-camera works with any lens. both
systems work.
another advantage of in-lens is that the viewfinder is stabilized,
which makes composing easier, as well as providing for more reliable
metering and autofocus. also, people generally keep their lenses far
longer than their cameras.
nospam
<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> 2. You want to use flash attachments. While a few higher end point and
> shoot digital models have hot shoes for an external flash, most do not.
> Some Canon P&S models without hot shoes can use a wireless flash, but
> it's not a great flash unit.
several p&s cameras can use flash attachments, including nikon and
canon. nikon's top of the line sb-900 will work with a coolpix, for
example.
> 3. You need an extreme wide-angle lens. Digital SLRs have
> super-wide-angle zoom lenses available with an effective focal length of
> as little as 16mm. There are no point and shoot digital cameras with
> lenses that wide.
wrong. nikon makes a fisheye attachment for coolpix cameras. how much
wider did you want?
> With some point and shoot cameras you can add on
> adapters to increase the wide-angle range, but even the best adapters
> are of mediocre quality. Some ZLR cameras do give you a moderately wide,
> 28mm lens.
they're actually pretty good and an excellent bang for the buck.
> 4. You need a long telephoto lens. Whether it嚙編 doing wildlife
> photography in Alaska, or shooting at sporting events, only a digital
> SLR can use long telephoto lenses.
wrong. a 300mm equivalent coolpix can fit in a jacket pocket. try
that with a slr. also, slr lenses beyond 300mm start to get really
expensive, really fast.
> If you only need a specialty lens for
> rare occasions, you can even rent one for a couple of days. With some
> point and shoot cameras you can add on adapters to increase the
> telephoto range but even the best adapters are of mediocre quality. Some
> ZLR cameras do give you a long telephoto lens, but the quality is not great.
they're actually pretty good and an excellent bang for the buck.
> 5. You need fast auto-focus. Most digital SLRs (with the exception of
> Pentax) use lenses with internal high-speed focusing motors). Point and
> shoot digital cameras cannot focus nearly as fast.
pentax has in-lens motors now.
> 6. You need low shutter lag. Whether it嚙編 photographing your child on a
> merry-go-round, or capturing the crack of the bat against the baseball,
> you cannot obtain these shots with a digital point and shoot camera
> because the time between when you press the shutter and the image is
> captured is far too long. A digital SLR has a mechanical shutter that
> opens instantaneously when the shutter release button is pressed. In a
> point and shoot camera, the sensor is activated electronically after it
> is used to focus the shot.
actually, the shutter lag of a p&s is shorter, it's the auto-exposure
and metering that adds lag. preset both, and the cameras are fairly
fast. of course, if you just want to 'point and shoot' then ironically,
an slr is faster.
> 7. You want to produce images that can be printed in large sizes. Only a
> high-resolution digital SLR is suitable for poster size prints.
tell that to nikon who made a billboard from a coolpix
> 8. You want an optical viewfinder. While a few point and shoot cameras
> have retained an optical viewfinder, it嚙編 been cost-reduced out of most
> models. Composing a picture on the LCD screen, in bright sunlight, is
> very difficult.
most people don't use optical viewfinders. just look at the demand for
live view on dslrs, as well as electronic viewfinders. and with modern
lcds, it's not that hard to use in sunlight.
> 9. You want full manual control. While some high-end point and shoot
> models have retained some level of manual control, most have
> cost-reduced it out. On some Canon models, there is third-party software
> that can get some of the manual control back, but it's very flaky and
> complicated.
people who buy low end p&s cameras don't *want* manual exposure.
> 10. Expandability and upgradability. Not only a wide variety of
> specialty lenses, but flash attachments, filters, vertical grips, remote
> shutter releases, etc. If you eventually want to upgrade to a better
> D-SLR body, a lot of the lenses and accessories can be used on the new
> body if it嚙編 from the same manufacturer.
yes, slrs have zillions of lenses and accessories, which most people
never get.
> 11. Rapid sequencing. For action shots, both of sports and people, you
> can get the exact shot you want, even when the people are moving.
some p&s cameras can do that too.
> 12. Cost. Say what? Yes, it嚙編 true. With the free-fall of digital SLR
> prices, you can now buy a D-SLR and a decent lens for less than the cost
> of a high end point and shoot camera.
different tool for a different job.
> 13. Weight. There are now D-SLRs that are the same weight, or lighter
> weight, than ZLRs, even with the lens weight included. So while most
> users will still want to use a pocket-size point and shoot digital
> camera when portablity is more important than quality, there嚙編 no reason
> to sacrifice quality and get a large P&S camera.
sometimes there is. you don't speak for everyone.
nospam
<wo...@woger.net.ru> wrote:
> Far to many Problems with DSLR's Dirt being one, SLR is great for film use
> but how does one clean the sensor/mirror with a DSLR,
a puff of air from a $10 rocket blower, if the automatic sensor cleaner
doesn't do it. on occasion, a brush is needed but that's fairly rare.
the dust problem is vastly overblown.
> Plus the problem with
> Direct View, you have to flick the mirror out of the way, Plus lenses are very
> poor high apertures, gee even my old Pentax has a 1.8 lens.and the Total
> costs are very high..
bullshit.
Ray Fischer
>Sixteen Reasons to choose a Digital SLR over a Point and Shoot
_____________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Do not feed the |
/ O O\__ | trolls. Thank you. |
/ \ | --Mgt. |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
tn...@mucks.net
>Sixteen Reasons to choose a Digital SLR over a Point and Shoot
Trolling again?
bugbear
> Sixteen Reasons to choose a Digital SLR over a Point and Shoot
>
> photography in Alaska, or shooting at sporting events, only a digital
> SLR can use long telephoto lenses. If you only need a specialty lens for
> rare occasions, you can even rent one for a couple of days. With some
> point and shoot cameras you can add on adapters to increase the
> telephoto range but even the best adapters are of mediocre quality. Some
> ZLR cameras do give you a long telephoto lens, but the quality is not
> great.
try googling "digiscoping"
BugBear
bugbear
>> 9. You want full manual control. While some high-end point and shoot
>> models have retained some level of manual control, most have
>> cost-reduced it out. On some Canon models, there is third-party software
>> that can get some of the manual control back, but it's very flaky and
>> complicated.
>
> people who buy low end p&s cameras don't *want* manual exposure.
And the Canon A590 has it "out of the box" if they do.
BugBear
Doug Jewell
> Doug Jewell says...
>
> > IMO the way the Pentax system works is the best system
> > on the market. Unfortunately it is let down by not
> > having as many and varied lenses available compared to
> > Canon/Nikon. Although there is a broad enough range to
> > suit most needs.
>
> strong endorsement I've seen recently about Pentax. The
> other was from a local guy I know who is in love with his
> K10D, which isn't even the latest model. If I understand
> correctly, the image stabilization is built into the camera
> body and operates directly on the sensor, which means no
> lens has to have that feature. But I think mainly he just
> really likes the pictures he gets. It's hard to argue with
> that.
rebadged samsung version, but they are the same camera), and
the Canon 450D. If I was to nitpick, I'd say the photos from
the Canon are slightly better out of the camera, but there's
not much in it. I think the main difference is that the
Pentax produces slightly softer JPGs.
The big difference to me is in the operation. Everything
about the Pentax just works for me - the position of the
dials is in the right place, the buttons are in the right
place, you can configure what function is assigned to each
dial etc. Actually one of the key reasons I got the 450D
instead of the 40D was because I absolutely despise the
dial/button layout of the higher end Canons.
As I said, the AF speed on the Canon is probably technically
faster, but the Pentax feels just as fast, and in lower
light the Pentax will still lock focus where the Canon will
give up - eg with an 18/3.5 lens the Pentax can reliably
focus on stars, the Canon just hunts and gives up.
Build quality is another area where the Pentax excels, it
feels solid in your hand, whereas the Canon feels light and
cheap. The Pentax lenses, even the kit lens, feel well made
and solid.
>
> You keep hearing about Nikon and Canon, and I guess Sony.
> And maybe Olympus for 4:3. But not much mention of Pentax,
> which may turn out to be a really good alternative for a lot
> of folks.
I'm certainly happy with mine.
Mr. Strat
> Far to many Problems with DSLR's Dirt being one, SLR is great for film use
> but how does one clean the sensor/mirror with a DSLR, Plus the problem with
> Direct View, you have to flick the mirror out of the way, Plus lenses are very
> poor high apertures, gee even my old Pentax has a 1.8 lens.and the Total
> costs are very high..
Stick with your kiddie toy.
Bob Larter
<looks it up>
I can see the appeal, but for terrestrial use, you're still not going to
get the same image quality as with a long 35mm tele. And you don't get
the telescope for free either.
--
W
. | ,. w , "Some people are alive only because
\|/ \|/ it is illegal to kill them." Perna condita delenda est
---^----^---------------------------------------------------------------
rwalker
Ah, the point and shoot troll is still alive and well, I see.
Mr. Strat
<rwa...@despammed.com> wrote:
> Ah, the point and shoot troll is still alive and well, I see.
If you want a P&S...fine. DSLRs are not for everyone. Just stop
spreading lies and half truths.
Pete Stavrakoglou
"Mr. Strat" <r...@nospam.techline.com> wrote in message
news:210520091811369657%r...@nospam.techline.com...
John Turco
>
> Doug Jewell says...
>
> > on the market. Unfortunately it is let down by not
> > having as many and varied lenses available compared to
> > Canon/Nikon. Although there is a broad enough range to
> > suit most needs.
>
> strong endorsement I've seen recently about Pentax. The
> other was from a local guy I know who is in love with his
> K10D, which isn't even the latest model. If I understand
> correctly, the image stabilization is built into the camera
> body and operates directly on the sensor, which means no
> lens has to have that feature. But I think mainly he just
> really likes the pictures he gets. It's hard to argue with
> that.
>
> And maybe Olympus for 4:3. But not much mention of Pentax,
> which may turn out to be a really good alternative for a lot
> of folks.
Hello, Peabody:
I've owned a Pentax K100D, since September of 2007. In my
opinion, its build quality is significantly superior to that
of the Canon and Nikon bodies, in the same price range.
Plus, the K100D's in-camera image stabilization performs well
and allows the choice of vast numbers of affordable Pentax
"film" lenses, which have been produced over the past several
decades.
Good luck and happy hunting!
Cordially,
John Turco <jt...@concentric.net>
John Turco
<heavily edited for brevity>
> Build quality is another area where the Pentax excels, it
> feels solid in your hand, whereas the Canon feels light and
> cheap. The Pentax lenses, even the kit lens, feel well made
> and solid.
<edited>
Hello, Doug:
Precisely! My Pentax K100D feels like a tank, compared with the
"plasticky" Nikon and Canon DSLR display models I've handled, in
local stores.
Cordially,
John Turco <jt...@concentric.net>
Bob Larter
Shit, you wouldn't say that if you picked up my Canon EOS 1Dmk2. It
weighs a ton, & is built like a tank.
tony cooper
wrote:
From the comments I've read, the K100D is an excellent camera.
However, I fail to see why holding a tank in your hand is something to
brag about. My Nikon feels sufficiently solid to me.
I'd consider buying a K100D, but not because I want a heavy camera.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
John Turco
>
> John Turco wrote:
> > Doug Jewell wrote:
> >
> > <heavily edited for brevity>
> >
> >> Build quality is another area where the Pentax excels, it
> >> feels solid in your hand, whereas the Canon feels light and
> >> cheap. The Pentax lenses, even the kit lens, feel well made
> >> and solid.
> >
> > <edited>
> >
> > Hello, Doug:
> >
> > Precisely! My Pentax K100D feels like a tank, compared with the
> > "plasticky" Nikon and Canon DSLR display models I've handled, in
> > local stores.
>
> Shit, you wouldn't say that if you picked up my Canon EOS 1Dmk2. It
> weighs a ton, & is built like a tank.
Hello, Bob:
Is the 1Dmk2 an "entry level" DSLR, as is the K100D?
Cordially,
John Turco <jt...@concentric.net>
John Turco
Hello, Tony:
I'd meant the K100D is >built< like a tank, not that it's as heavy as
one!
Then, again, slap a particularly long zoom lens on any DSLR, and the
camera will begin to resemble an M1 Abrams. <g>
Cordially,
John Turco <jt...@concentric.net>
Bob Larter
Of course not. I didn't realise that the thread was only about
entry-level cameras.
John Turco
>
> John Turco wrote:
> > Bob Larter wrote:
> >> John Turco wrote:
> >>> Doug Jewell wrote:
> >>>
> >>> <heavily edited for brevity>
> >>>
> >>>> Build quality is another area where the Pentax excels, it
> >>>> feels solid in your hand, whereas the Canon feels light and
> >>>> cheap. The Pentax lenses, even the kit lens, feel well made
> >>>> and solid.
> >>> <edited>
> >>>
> >>> Hello, Doug:
> >>>
> >>> Precisely! My Pentax K100D feels like a tank, compared with the
> >>> "plasticky" Nikon and Canon DSLR display models I've handled, in
> >>> local stores.
> >> Shit, you wouldn't say that if you picked up my Canon EOS 1Dmk2. It
> >> weighs a ton, & is built like a tank.
> >
> >
> > Hello, Bob:
> >
> > Is the 1Dmk2 an "entry level" DSLR, as is the K100D?
>
> Of course not. I didn't realise that the thread was only about
> entry-level cameras.
Hello, Bob:
I never claimed such a thing. Although, it does seem to indicate that
(unlike Nikon and Canon, apparently), Pentax doesn't compromise build
quality, even on its "base" models.
Cordially,
John Turco <jt...@concentric.net>