Originally posted by heasley I have enjoyed Pentax for a few years now. I initially perservered with the 18-55 kit lens until relatively recently I began to splurge on some nice primes.
I currently have the FA 50mm f/1.4, FA 43mm f/1.9 limited, FA 77mm f/1.8 limited, the Sigma 20mm f/1.8 EX, and the kit lens. I currently have the K-x to carry me over until my upgrade.
I was looking to upgrade to the k-5. I have suddenly realised I can get the Nikon D7000 for about $400 less (K-5 cost $1650 and the D7000 cost $1250).
I then started looking at Nikon primes. This is when my jawreally dropped. I canpurchase the following Nikkor lenses for around $800: 35mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.8 (the price of a single 77mm limited).
So for around $2000 I could go Nikon. I could sell my current gear for more then this.
Are the Pentax primes worth staying with Pentax?
Pentax doesn't seem to do budget lenses any more, preferring to sell upscale (and probably more profitable) lenses.
I came to Pentax via Nikon because of the lenses. I like the look of the pictures I get from Pentax glass more than what I got from my Nikkor lenses.
Pentax glass tends to have more resistance to flare in my experience, though I will admit my experience may be a bit dated and anecdotal more than anything.
I'm sure the budget Nikkors are good, though I'd be surprised if they are better than the Pentax LTD lenses of similar focal lengths.
Lenses don't work on a direct quality to price correlation though, so a lens that is twice as expensive will not often be twice as good.
I think it's called the law of diminishing returns.