Pentax K-x

[Paul64]

Hi,

Does anyone have any experience photographing wildlife with a Pentax K-x with 55-300mm lens? If so, it would be great to hear about the quality of your photos.

Best wishes, Paul

[Geoff F]

Can't help with any personal advice; I'm 'Canon Fodder' now. But is this review about the lens you mention? http://www.photozone.de/pentax/396-pentax_55300_458

[Paul64]

Thanks Geoff, that is very useful! What Canon do you have and what is your opinion about Canon products?
Paul

[Ukwildlifeo]

The k-x is a neat bit of kit, ive jeard only good things so far about it. Ive not used it my self but I own a Pentax K20D and Ive been nothing but happy with it

[squishy]

I don't think any manufactures make a body at that level that people don't recommend. The things that might affect your choice are just the general feel of the body and lenses. If there are any lenses in particular made by canon or nikon or olympus (or any other mount I can't be asked to list), go for a body in that mount.

The lens is more important than the body. If you have to 'cheap out' on something, buy a cheaper body (old generation bodies go for a bargain and don't perform badly (things like a nikon D200 or canon 40D produce excellent photos and are going for a fraction of their successors)) and spend the difference on a nice lens.

I know quite a few people who use canon and people are usually very pleased with their stuff. Canon and Nikon seem to become the biggest two photographic brands, so there are more third party lenses made for them, but Olympus, Sony, Pentax and Panasonic gear is nearly always reviewed well (and Olympus's Zuiko lenses are regarded as some of the sharpest lenses currently made (though they aren't cheap)).

[Geoff F]

Originally Posted by Paul64

Thanks Geoff, that is very useful! What Canon do you have and what is your opinion about Canon products?
Paul

Well I have a friend who insists that his old 3 mp Nikon is better than any camera that Canon, or anybody except Nikon, will ever make! But in reality there isn't a lot between the better brands now.

I went digital around 7 years ago with a secondhand Canon Powershot G2 (£700 new then); and after a while went for a secondhand Canon 10D. No particular reason for choosing Canon except this camera was at a sensible price.

Updated to a 40D a couple of years ago when Canon were offering a £100 cash back deal. Purchased a couple of Canon lenses to go with the 10D; a 28-135 IS for general work and a 70-300 for wildlife, which I used with a 25 mm extension tube for macro work.

Since then I have updated the 28-135 with a 24-105 IS (better build, but the 28-135 is a good sharp lens), plus a Sigma 180 macro and a Sigma 150-500 IS zoom which is better for distant wildlife. Still have my earlier equipment which is handy for 'rough use' conditions.

I found the better quality end of the Sigma range to be virtually as good as genuine Canon lenses and a bit cheaper. But if money was no object, I would probably buy the pukka Canon gear.

The one thing I would recommend is before purchase, always have a look at the 'semi pro' range as well as the 'entry level' cameras, ie the Canon 40D against the 400D. You do pay a little bit more but you get a stronger build with easier to use controls. I like a good chunky camera that I can really grip, but admittedly, some people do find these larger and heavier models a bit of a struggle to carry around all day.

[Paul64]

Thanks for all this info guys. I heard that a big advantage with the K-x is that the stabilisation is in the camera, allowing for older pentax lens purchase giving great quality at an affordable price. However, I have heard the K-x is not comparable with the build quality of the K7, but I suppose you get what you pay for.

I have been keeping a close eye on the new Canon 550D, but again with a descent couple of lenses the costs are going to mount. I like to video clips too and I've heard that the canon range offers superb results.

[squishy]

you can get a 50D for the kind of price of the 550D.

To be honest i'm not sure what advantage you'd really gain from a 550D, you might be better off going for a bigger 50D or older 500D if you want a canon.

The was a discussion about in body IS a few days ago. It would seem like quite a useful feature as you wouldn't have to bother with more expensive IS lenses

[John D]

Originally Posted by squishy

you can get a 50D for the kind of price of the 550D.

To be honest i'm not sure what advantage you'd really gain from a 550D, you might be better off going for a bigger 50D or older 500D if you want a canon.

The was a discussion about in body IS a few days ago. It would seem like quite a useful feature as you wouldn't have to bother with more expensive IS lenses

Hi Squishy,
It would appear from the involvement and replies you have made in this and other threads you have an extensive use/experience of several makes/types of camera and associated lenses.
What camera or cameras and lenses do you currently use and from your own experience what one do you find to be the best you have had to date.

I started off with Olympus and now have Canons. I changed to Canon a few years ago due to the wider range of lenses which were available at the time.
John D

Zenfolio | John's Wild World

[squishy]

sorry john, maybe i should make it clear, all my advice is second hand.

I don't own or use a DSLR, but I do spend a lot of time reading specs and reviews. (I don't just read one review and take it as given, anything I say is information i've gathered from several different people or sources)

Advice from me might not be as good as advice from somebody who has experience, but It's not to be considered worthless. I do my research before posting.

I used to start most replies on threads like this with a prefix of 'I haven't used 'X equipment', but I gather from other people/sources that:' or something to that effect, but I seem to have stopped doing that. Maybe I should start again posting like that to make it clear.

Sorry if I misled anyone