OK... So today I got in a 3 hour debate with a guy why his camera was better than mine. BLAH BLAH BLAH... But he had some good work and made some good points. We both agreed it is not the equipment, but the photographer that makes the image. But we also agree that the equipment does help but then again it is mostly photographer.

All debates aside here... If you shoot Olympus/Panasonic/Leica Digital/ Pentax or anything other than Nikon or Canon, why? Why did you go with that system over the other?

Those of you who shoot one of these systems how are they in low light focus? High iso at 800, 1600, 3200?

No I am not looking for an excuse to switch from Nikon. In fact I am in getting a d300 and maybe a d3 but anyways. I am just looking to see why and what made you go with that system.

After doing some searching, the Leica Digilux 3 and M8 had me interested. I also liked the New Olympus 3 and 510.

I am a Canon shooter but was attracted to the K10D last year for my backpacking/landscape rig. I trek for miles and days seeking great landscape photos so the lightweight, 10 megapixel, built-in IS, ultralight pancake primes, etc from Pentax won me over as my backpacking rig. But as a pro, my backpacking rig must also serve as my second/backup body for weddings/events etc.

So I bought Pentax's 540ez flash and set off to shoot weddings with a 5D/580ex and the K10D simultaneously. The image quality was there with the Pentax, but the performance was not. The biggest problem was that the TTL flash system was wildly inconsistent. Plus, it seemed the flash took days to recycle compared to my 580ex. Plus, there were no USM/HSM/Supersonic lenses available at the time, so I would miss shots waiting for my lens to catch up to my subject. I hear there are USM-type lenses available for Pentax now though... To little too late for me though, I had to sell my entire Pentax kit and get another Canon body for my second. I really wanted to love it, but the performance just wasn't there. But I think I would still choose Pentax if I could have a camera system just for backpacking!

Chris M
www.imagineimagery.com

Leica M8 simply because its a classic system with a modern twist. The lenses are incredible, the body is small, great system.

joshbrown wrote:
Leica M8 simply because its a classic system with a modern twist. The lenses are incredible, the body is small, great system.


If I have an extra $10,000 I would get an m8 and some lenses

I shoot Pentax K10D and primes Pentax SMC-FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited, Pentax SMC-FA 31mm f/1.8 AL Limited. Also i use 2 zooms, Pentax SMC DA 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED[IF] Fisheye, Pentax SMC DA*16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL IF. I am very happy with this system. My father was using Pentax as well, but he went to Nikon this year, when D3 came out, so he invested at least x3 money, for his D3 and Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED N, Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED, Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 G IF-ED VR.
So now we work with different systems, please check featured wedding collum at my page http://www.kudirka.lt and say can you distinct which wedding is taken with D3, which with K10? We always discuss which system is better, maybe i am incurable Pentax fan, but i still think Pentax is the best!

i really like the ergonomics of the Olympus E-3 and wish i had some spare cash to pick it up, but the Olympus lenses are just silly expensive so i'm sticking to my Canon....

Just an H3D-31

My primary camera for a long while was a Pentax K10D. I bought it based on glowing reviews about picture quality. It also on paper had more features than the other cameras I was considering at the time (D80 and 30D). It was a lot cheaper as well. Seemed like a no brainer, right?

Not quite.

Under controlled conditions, the Pentax is a fantastic camera, it hangs with the big boys. It has better out of box colors than a D300 and delivers razor sharp 3D images.

But it's one beast of a camera to use.

You can't shoot it like a 1D mark III, you have to shoot in a medium format frame of mind! Why? The auto focus is hit or miss, "exposure" is more like bracketing and noise can be a hindrance. It works best as a manual camera. There are also glaring gaps within the system lineup that make it unsuitable to the professional photographer.

So I upgraded to a D300, but I will continue to keep and use the K10D when I can.

I haven't invested in "other" systems, but for a while, the Pentax system looked really intriguing. It had in-body IS, which seemed really nice AND it was backwards compatible with older Pentax lenses. For a vintage "alternative" collector, Olympus and Pentax can be quite cool since they allow for Zuiko and Takumar lenses to be used without adapters. Nikon is a lot like this too in some ways.

However, for professional usage, these systems just don't match up to the finesse of Nikon and Canon. People can say what they want about how they hate Nikon or Canon because iso 128000 doesn't look crystal clear and AF isn't faster than the sound barrier - some of these other systems don't even come remotely close. The biggest issue for some people though is the overall "system". Canon and Nikon have a plethora of pro AF lens options which allow photographers to build a system that precisely molds to their style. You just don't have that flexibility in choice with other companies.

YMMV.

I've dabbled in Pentax and Olympus systems and as much as I liked the results from the Pentax K10D, the af performance (especially in low light) and worst of all the shutter sound drove me nuts.

I picked up an E3 and find it to be an awesome camera. The in -body IS is more effective than the Pentax's and the ergonomics are awesome. The other nice thing about the Olympus line is if you go out and buy a Sigma 50-500mm you get a ton of telephoto power for cheap vs other systems because of the 2x crop factor. Couple that with Olympus lenses which are almost uniformly excellent and it makes for a potentially cost effective system. The main downside to Olympus is the lack of primes which Pentax should be commended for.

You can use Takumar lenses but it does require an adapter.