Or in other words, Pentax vs Nikon vs Canon vs Sony vs Micro Four Thirds vs Samsung?
Hi, I'm shopping for my first DSLR and I'm trying to get a feel of the major camera systems available right now. Which one gives the most bang for the buck for someone interested in nature photography (landscapes and bird shots to start with)? Mainly I'm looking for a system where I can get a sharp telephoto (preferably zoom) lens is not too heavy and perhaps some other inexpensive sharp lenses like a 50mm prime.
There seems to be some consensus that Pentax gives more bang for the buck on their lenses than Canon or Nikon. Canon and Nikon seem about the same with perhaps minor differences in their lens lines, but I'm not exactly sure. Sony seems to be like Pentax as they offer in-camera IS, though perhaps Pentax has a broader selection of lenses to choose from than Sony... Pentax's financial troubles are also worrying, but maybe the worst of that is over since they no longer seem to be losing money. And also Samsung is entering the market soon with the NX camera...
Also, I'd prefer a lightweight camera and set of lenses if possible, so the Micro Four Thirds system is interesting... The Panasonic GF-1 with a 20mm lens weighs in at just less than a pound. But the entry level DSLRs are only about 18 ounces, not much more, so with a 50mm lens, the camera weighs perhaps 23-24 ounces, only a half pound more than a GF-1, so perhaps there isn't too much difference in this regard if you are able to find lightweight lenses that are still reasonably sharp.
Maybe all the systems are about the same and you just wind up liking which ever one you pick because you know it the best?
Bookmarks