Hey guys,
Thanks for all the great feedback.
I have been putting off returning to this thread to make this post, because the reasons are so personal to me. I really don't want to come off as though I I am bashing Pentax or Olympus. They are both great camera brands, and they both offer some really awesome cameras.
But, and there is always a but isn't there, they just didn't do it for me. I will start of by saying why I switched, both times. It was really for the same reasons. There are three factors which equate to photographic happiness for me: Cost, fit/feel, and of course, out put, or final product. Canon has always offered me the best balance between the latter two, but cost has always been an issue. I am a perpetual college student, and I just don't have the money for expensive lenses and bodies. So, as a consequence, even though I have loved my Canons, my eyes were always open for a system that would be a better fit in terms of all three factors. Olympus became the first contender when I discovered the E-500. Though it was a step down in terms of build quality, and not in the semi pro level of my D60, I thought, what the hell and bought into it. At first it was great, it was new, it made beautiful images. Then it began to dawn on me how small this dinky little camera really was. How hard it was for me to hold onto it, I have huge hands. The small VF really started to nag me, and the lack of a rear selection dial and no sync port were becoming real issues. I was willing, however, to deal with these drawback, in hopes that I could someday upgrade to whatever pro model Oly would soon put out in the future. That was however until I really started looking at IQ. I couldn't shoot over ISO320 and get anything I was really happy with. This coupled with no real PP adjustment latitude killed Oly for me. So I sold it and bought my 2nd D60.
Flash to almost one year later and the old demons are knocking at my door. Only this time I have a little bit more money to play with. The 30D was my first choice, the 20D was my second. But cost held me back. I would not have been able to sell my D60/batterygrip and get the 20d/30d without selling my lenses too. At the time both cameras were going for more than they are now. Just a few months have passed, but the market has dropped big.
So I started to look at the K10D, and I really got very excited. Weather seals, dust reduction (which doesn't seem to work), and internal shake reduction! Wow! I was sold. So I sold off all of my Canon stuff for $850, and too an additional $500 I had and bought a Pentax system. The body, 3 lenses, 3 batteries, batterygrip, SD memory, the works. And I did this all sight unseen. I knew it was a risk, but when the camera arrived I was so relieved. It was beautiful. Felt great. Just awesome.
Then I tried it out and felt immediate disappointment. I couldn't get a decent image with teh thing. The meter was my biggest issue. It just doesn't work well. It wants to over expose everything, and the slightest bit of compensation makes everything so underexposed that it is almost not worth it. This is a real thinking man's camera. You have to really plan out the shot before you take it, or the light will just be all wrong. For me the K10D worked best when shooting stationary subjects that I had time to sit around and think about. But, I am a nature photographer, I love to shoot fast moving animals. Birds, lizards, snakes, deer, you name it. This camera just doesn't meter in a way that lets me give that function over to the camera so that I can focus on just getting the shot. Focus was also an issue. I have read as much as 45% miss rates have been experienced. I wouldn't go that far, but 25-30%, yeah. And, it is worse in IA servo, I couldn't ever track a subject that was moving faster than a slow walk.
The feel of the camera was pretty good at first, but soon I started to find the weaknesses of the design, again these are in my view only. The buttons are not very well placed and even about a couple of months I am still hunting for them, or even tilting the camera to find them. The camera is small, too small, and even with the grip on it feels small. I have to leave the grip turned off unless I am using it because in normal operation the bottom of my hand actuates the shutter release and either screws with my focus or shoots a frame when I am not ready. That NEVER happened with my Canons. Still, like the Oly before it, I was willing to overlook these issues. But, the one thing that I had tried to ignore from the get go finally caught up with me. Image quality is just not there. I suppose if I had the best lenses available it might have been better, but I was shooting with some fairly decent glass, and even my friends who know nothing about photography were commenting on how much less detailed my images were. How they looked fuzzy, or just not on, and I also noticed a difference in color that really began to bug me after awhile. IQ is the most important issue for any photographer, and in both cases it is the thing that has brought me back to Canon.
There are those who can except lesser image quality in order to own other cameras. There are those who don't see what I do. But, in the end, it's the one thing I can get past. Canon, as I see it, is the best in terms of IQ. When I look at my Canon images I see what I like. When I look at the images from my other cameras, I don't. Now this may seem an arbitrary distinction to most, but to me it's very important.
In the end it all comes down to, are you happy with your equipment, and no, I am not. I was with Canon, yet I went for what looked like greener grass anyway. And, as a consequence, I have learned a valuable lesson. Don't try to fix what ain't broken.
. This, I must say, has been quite the learning experience, and while I have no particular brand loyalty, I think extream brand preference is starting to dawn on me.
