Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 22, 2007, 4:33 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
inneyeseakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,379
Default

I have a K10d now and would really like the faster burst and AF of the Canon 20/30D because I would really like to get bigger into shooting sports. I can sell all my Pentax equipment and get the same in Canon EOS mount and not spend any extra money... should I do it? Why or why not?
inneyeseakay is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 22, 2007, 5:24 PM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

What kind of sports (outdoors in daylight, outdoors under the lights at night, indoor sports...)?

What lenses are you trying to use now with your K10D?


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2007, 9:31 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

inneyeseakay wrote:
Quote:
I have a K10d now and would really like the faster burst and AF of the Canon 20/30D because I would really like to get bigger into shooting sports. I can sell all my Pentax equipment and get the same in Canon EOS mount and not spend any extra money... should I do it? Why or why not?
You sure?

Like used cars, second-hand photo equipment doesn't always hold it's value so well. The things that will sellbetter than anything are the better lenses that are in demand, but you need above everything, to be realistic in your expectations. Look on eBay, see what equipment you have is selling for. The thing I've found in both buying and selling is, if the piece of equipment is in demand, you'll get your price. If it isn't, you won't. Just because you paid a lot of money for it (at least to you), that doesn't mean you're gonna get as much for it as you expect.

I would imagine all the PentaxLimited lenses will get good to very good prices, and something like the currentPentax 50-200 won't do so well because, to be honest, there's nothing special about it. If your lenses are third party, unless it's one of the much better versions, third party lenses are about as bad as it gets in terms of return on sale of second-hand units. People are looking for value in those, and will pay higher prices for OEM equipment, again, that's in demand.

Camera bodies, on the whole, don't sell worth a darn compared to what they cost new. You'll get your least amount of investment back onyour body, even with it being a K10D. There's just not a market for Pentax equipment like there is for Canon & Nikon. You need to know when you buy Pentax equipment that that iswhat you want. I have a feeling if you decide to dump your outfit, you're about to find that out.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2007, 10:31 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
inneyeseakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,379
Default

I have actually done quite well... Every piece of equipment I own has less money invested than the current market value. Even my K10d has less invested than they are bringing used. Therefore getting my money out of it isn't going to be a problem. I have been trying to find a 70-200/2.8 and 77 Lmtd for my K10d, but the zoom brings 1100+ and the lmtd brings 500+ on the used market, where as, the Sigma HSM 70-200 for Canon sells for 550-700 used, and the 85/1.8 sells foraround 300-350. Get what I'm saying?

I have been shooting baseball, and the K10 has done alright with my Sigma APO 70-300 f/4-5.6, although I would like something faster for a smaller DOF. But I would really like to get into basketball and volleyball, but the 50/1.4 is not quite long enough and is a little sluggish in locking AF. Football is my dream to shoot, but I certainly don't have anything now to get the results I want.

Current Lineup:
K10d
DA 18-55
FA 50/1.4 (Sold)
Tamron 28-75/2.8 (Sold)
Sigma 70-300
Phoenix 100/3.5 Macro (Sold)

inneyeseakay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2007, 11:06 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

Why not try and run down the new f2.8Pentax zooms they're coming out with....eventually? I know that older 70-200 f2.8 Pentax has been very short in supply and isvery highly priced when it's available somewhere, but the two newf2.8 zoomsare supposed to be sealed to go with the K10D aren't they?

There's also theSigma 100-300 f4 with the super fast and silent HSM motor that I think is about as good as you can get, OEM or third party.

Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 22, 2007, 11:14 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
inneyeseakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,379
Default

Yeah, but in my original argument... I can get an L70-200/2.8 for around $900 for the Canon, where the DA* 50-135/2.8 is going to run around $1000. Plus, when Pentax releases a FF dSLR, that DA* is going to be useless...
inneyeseakay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 23, 2007, 12:24 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Dallas, Texas USA
Posts: 6,483
Default

inneyeseakay wrote:
Quote:
Yeah, but in my original argument... I can get an L70-200/2.8 for around $900 for the Canon, where the DA* 50-135/2.8 is going to run around $1000. Plus, when Pentax releases a FF dSLR, that DA* is going to be useless...
I'm not so sureI'd expect a "full frame" Pentax DSLR in the near future. Their newlens lineup for the reduced sensorbodiesthey sell now is about non-existent compared to even Olympus, except for those outstanding primes, and if you everbuy a Canon "full frame" camera, you'll need to buy an actual 300mm lens to get 300mm reach, or a 400mm lens, and you still won't be at the reach youget with your 70-300 zoom now. Using the reduced sensor in the Canon like the 20/30D you mentionedwill allow you to use the high quality, lower pricedL zooms and still get the reach you want without having to lay out for the REALLY expensive glass and weight trainingclasses you'll subsequently have to take at the gym to be able to haul them around.

If I ever do get into a DSLR again, I've said I'm not doing the massive zooms that weighted me down for 4 years and eventuallyled me toselling my outfit....weighty bags are a royal PIA to haul around for any amount of time unless you're actually making money doing this....and just buying a Panasonic FZ50, whichdoes pretty darn good jobfor 90% of yourtypical shooting and vacation pics...

http://gmchappell.smugmug.com/gallery/3547385#200886345

But a Pentax K10D, 31 and 77mm f1.8 primes would be a cool, light-weight available light outfit.
Greg Chappell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 23, 2007, 4:08 AM   #8
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

inneyeseakay wrote:
Quote:
Yeah, but in my original argument... I can get an L70-200/2.8 for around $900 for the Canon, where the DA* 50-135/2.8 is going to run around $1000. Plus, when Pentax releases a FF dSLR, that DA* is going to be useless...
Let me also add a few things as a sports shooter:

1. I honestly couldn't say what sport a 50-135 2.8 would be good for. Maybe Div I college level basketball from the floor. But if you're shooting that you're likely credentialed and can afford or be supplied with a pro level body. In HS and below, 2.8 isn't bright enough. For field sports - no way is 135mm (even on a crop body) long enough. You've hit on a very important limitation of Pentax - a very serious lack of available lens options for the sports shooter.

2. Let's not forget the camera body and it's part in sports shooting. First and foremost - AI servo focusing. More than anything else your images have to be in focus. I haven't seen any concrete evidence or informed opinion (from a sports shooter I would trust that has used both Pentax AND either Canon or Nikon) that suggests Pentax is anywhere close to Nikon or Canon in the SERVO focus department. Secondary is burst rate 6.5 or 5.0 in the medium-range Canon / Nikon offerings. PLUS if your successful and save money you have legitimate professional sports cameras out there. I started with a Canon 300d - then bought a 20d and saved up enough money by selling my work to by the 1dmkIII. Canon & Nikon both have that upgrade path for a sports shooter. No other system does - not for a SPORTS shooter.

Look Pentax is a nice system. But it isn't a system designed around a sports shooter. Look at all the people lementing the ability to find suitable lenses. And, suitable lenses with fast focus motors to boot. Pentax offers a lot to certain types of shooters I just don't see the system offering the sports shooter anything. The bodies don't compete with Canon/ Nikon in that department and neither do the available lenses. Please, I'm not bashing Pentax - It just isn't a good system for a serious sports shooter. Canon or Nikon offer much better.

Having said all that - here's the next question: can you wait and can you afford the Nikon D300 when it comes out? If the camera performs as advertised it's a serious hobbyist'sports shooter's best friend. Pro grade action focus system plus a plethora of lenses (really same options as Canon has). It's easily head and shoulders above the Canon 40d - which is probably the best non-pro sports body currently available (since you want indoors, the D200 is a lesser choice since it has more noise but the D80 with better noise performance has lesser burst rate and not the same grade focus system as the canon - i.e. not as many cross-type sensors).

In either system though - you know you have commitment to the sports shooter. Sony may have the focus system but they don't yet have the upgrade path or the lenses. So in another 3 years or so Sony may become a big player. Oly is making some great noise right now about their new camera but it's impossible to say whether the camera lives up to it's promise - again I would have to see a SPORTS shooter test the camera and lenses - preferably one familiar with Canon / Nikon. Remember - SERVO focusing is the key. it doesn't matter if a camera can focus fast on a static subject - it must be able to track it. Hopefully the E3 will turn out to be a good sports camera. That's better for everyone. But right now it's an unknown commodity and Oly doesn't have any track-record in sports shooting that competes with the current Nikon / Canon offerings.

Just my .02 - others may (and likely will) disagree. (sorry meant to say disagree the first time :G)
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 23, 2007, 4:19 AM   #9
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Greg Chappell wrote:
Quote:
and if you everbuy a Canon "full frame" camera, you'll need to buy an actual 300mm lens to get 300mm reach, or a 400mm lens, and you still won't be at the reach youget with your 70-300 zoom now. Using the reduced sensor in the Canon like the 20/30D you mentionedwill allow you to use the high quality, lower pricedL zooms and still get the reach you want without having to lay out for the REALLY expensive glass and weight trainingclasses you'll subsequently have to take at the gym to be able to haul them around.
Greg - In my experience a smaller sensor camera doesn't mean the lens focuses farther. Just because a 100mm lens on a 1.5 body has the same FOV as a 150mm lens on a full frame - doesn't mean that 100mm lens will focus from as far away as the 150 does.

When I use a lens on my 1.3 sensor Canon camera vs. my 1.6 sensor camera - I don't get more 'reach' out of the lens. In other words my 85mm 1.8 lens focuses from about 15-20 feet no matter what camera body it's on. Putting that lens on the smaller sensor camera doesn't allow it to suddenly focus to 25 feet. what it DOES do is put more pixels on the image at maximum focus distance. So that's great for wildlife shooters shooting a static subject. But for sports, using a 1.6 sensor body doesn't allow me to shoot subjects farther away - the lens just doesn't accurately focus after a certain distance.

Also - your post would imply that focal length is the only determination of quality. The sigma 70-300 isn't even as good as the canon / nikon 70-300 lenses are - much less their more expensive brethren. But the bottom line is a 70-300 lens of any kind is not a great sports lens. The sigma 100-300 f4 is a definite step up (and available in Pentax mount ) - but not useful for low light. For outdoors that's where the 70-200 2.8 comes in and sigma 120-300 2.8. For indoors (at least in canon) that's where the 50mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 100mm 2.0, 135mm 2.0 and now for the ultra rich the upcoming 200mm 2.0 - but that's expected to be around $4000-$4500.

And speaking from Canon only - the benefits of going to their APS-H cameras (1.3 crop) FAR, FAR outweigh the 'limitations' of having a larger sensor. But those pixels I think are exactly why canon is committed to keeping the 1.3 sensor body. Even if they could do full-frame with 10fps burst and buffer handling and even if they could magically do it for the same price - I think they'd stay at aps-h for their sports / wildlife camera just so you get more pixels on your subject at a given focal length.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 23, 2007, 8:04 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
inneyeseakay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 1,379
Default

Thanks John. The price of the newest Canon and Nikon bodies is what pushed me to Pentax in the first place. I just pulled the trigger ona 20d/BG-E2. I got a good deal on it, and hopefully one day, I will sell enough pictures and buy your MkIII

Nick
inneyeseakay is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:01 AM.