Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-30-2011, 09:49 AM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoek van Holland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,252
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
It's not a huge difference, maybe a notable difference but ca. 15% certainly isn't huge. The FoV of the Sigma 10-20 to Pentax 12-24 is 20% but many people still prefer to buy the 12-24. Certainly 24 to 28 is even less noticeable and easily overcome with just a little leg work.

With regard to amount of lenses available - how many do you actually need ? With one notable exception (tilt & shift) Pentax and high quality 3rd party options (SP, EX, AT-Pro plus new Zeiss or Voigtlander etc.), have at least some options in virtually every FL you could wish for (even those long birding FLs) - though not always easily found persistance will eventually win out. And the SR from the Pentax bodies make them even more desirable than the non-SR Nikon back catalogue.

Nikon & Canon also have largely replicated catalogues of APS-C & FF and SR and non-SR lenses, meaning, for some of them at least, you just get to choose if you want to pay the huge premium for a vibration controlled lense or not.

Conversions - Leitax can offer kits or they can do it for you (for a price), over here I pay between $30 and $50 for a conversion, and I;' rather pay that than try DIY and make a mess of an expensive lense ! Maybe worth a try on a bargain bin lense ?
15% is alot. Especially if you do cityscapes etc. In landscapes you will not see that huge of a difference. But in cityscape yes, especially if you want to add subjecs in the forground.

06-30-2011, 09:53 AM   #32
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
My story again: I inherited some money a few years ago. (Thanks for dying, Mom!) I decided to upgrade my advanced P&S. In decades of shooting, I'd never used Pentax. I leaned towards Sony, Olympus, Nikon. But one of my requirements was a fisheye zoom, and only the DA10-17 was affordable. And user reviews of other brands/models in the K20D's price range included too many wishes to upgrade soonest. If I had inherited lots more cash, I might be a Sony-er now, or a Nikonian bragging of lens availability. But Mom left me just enough for Pentax. Thanks again.
06-30-2011, 10:50 AM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 528
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
You can buy a lens for Nikon on virtually every streetcorner. The same can't be said for Pentax, unfortunately.

I agree WRT Pentax's IS - a primary reason I initially bought into the system.

Nikon D7000 has a focus motor and can meter with old glass.



Get a Canon T1i. Similar IQ to the K-x, costs "only" - a relative term - $150 more, so not a fortune. Better AF, larger higher-res LCD, more accessories (like a grip), etc. Too bad the build quality is crap.
Yeah I was reading about the Nikon D7000 last night after I made this post. It's basically a pro camera with an aps-c size sensor. However the IQ of this sensor is better or as good as the full frame sensor. And yeah I read it has autofocus motor and can meter old glass well. If I got a Nikon, it'd be this one.

With respect to t1i IQ compared to Pentax K-X.. the t1i can't even begin to compare. The image quality of the K-X is better than the Canon 7D even. The dynamic range of the K-X is over 1/2 f stop better than the Canon EOS 5D Mark II. If the IQ of the t1i, t2i or t3i was better than the Pentax K-X, I would be a Canon person right now, because that was the first camera I was seriously considering due to lens compatibility. But research early on with respect to image quality, color depth, and dynamic range lead me to purchase the Pentax K-X.
06-30-2011, 10:51 AM   #34
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by deadwolfbones Quote
They have lenses that are the match of the Limiteds in terms of IQ and build.
I meant compact in terms of build. I don't know a Nikon lens that is as good as the FA31 IQ-wise (35/1.4 perhaps but how much does it costs?) and FA43. FA77 would be more or less as good as the 85/1.8. DA LTD IQ-quality I would think that there are some that might be equal, although size I would think there is none equal.

06-30-2011, 10:53 AM   #35
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by geekette Quote
Yeah I was reading about the Nikon D7000 last night after I made this post. It's basically a pro camera with an aps-c size sensor. However the IQ of this sensor is better or as good as the full frame sensor. And yeah I read it has autofocus motor and can meter old glass well. If I got a Nikon, it'd be this one.

With respect to t1i IQ compared to Pentax K-X.. the t1i can't even begin to compare. The image quality of the K-X is better than the Canon 7D even. The dynamic range of the K-X is over 1/2 f stop better than the Canon EOS 5D Mark II. If the IQ of the t1i, t2i or t3i was better than the Pentax K-X, I would be a Canon person right now, because that was the first camera I was seriously considering due to lens compatibility. But research early on with respect to image quality, color depth, and dynamic range lead me to purchase the Pentax K-X.
the only thing that keeps me aback the D7000 is the lack of pixel-mapping feature. for me that is of great convenience.
06-30-2011, 10:58 AM   #36
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
re:limiteds

QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
true that they have a lot of currently available lenses on their arsenal in the market and I found some of them really good and affordable at the same time. however, they don have the LTDs that Pentax offers. so it's a toss-up between lens options and focal length availability versus having that LTD quality build and optical rendering.
Sure, Limiteds are beautiful lenses...I had all 3 FA limiteds, their build and compactness is what makes them standout, I'm pretty sure the optical quality is matched by the Nikkors though (maybe with exception of FA31)
06-30-2011, 11:16 AM   #37
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by JoostW Quote
I am happy with my recently bought old pentax FA* 80-200mm, but to say that is cheap compared to the new 70-200 f2.8 VR II? Not really...as the 60-250 isnt cheap either.
The 60-250 costs 1249 euro new at the time and for 1099 euro you get Nikon 80-200mm/f2.8 that has no VR of any type. So it aint for free on the other side.
06-30-2011, 11:30 AM   #38
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,880
QuoteOriginally posted by geekette Quote
Yeah I was reading about the Nikon D7000 last night after I made this post. It's basically a pro camera with an aps-c size sensor. However the IQ of this sensor is better or as good as the full frame sensor. And yeah I read it has autofocus motor and can meter old glass well. If I got a Nikon, it'd be this one.

With respect to t1i IQ compared to Pentax K-X.. the t1i can't even begin to compare. The image quality of the K-X is better than the Canon 7D even. The dynamic range of the K-X is over 1/2 f stop better than the Canon EOS 5D Mark II. If the IQ of the t1i, t2i or t3i was better than the Pentax K-X, I would be a Canon person right now, because that was the first camera I was seriously considering due to lens compatibility. But research early on with respect to image quality, color depth, and dynamic range lead me to purchase the Pentax K-X.
I don't think anyone would remotely consider the D7000 a "pro" camera. It's simply not a robust enough body to be put in that class. It's considered an "enthusiast" camera.

Can anyone even see 1/2 stop in a scene? Or 22-bit vs 21-bit color depth? Or, to use an analogy, can you tell the difference when you are driving your car 57mph vs 55mph? Generally speaking, the IQ capabilities of a given generation of like-priced APS-C cameras are all pretty similar. That's when you look at ergonomics, functionality, and (most importantly) lenses.

Occasionally, of course, you'll get a real breakthru, like the Nikon D90.

Can anyone even see 1/2 stop DR in a scene?

06-30-2011, 11:43 AM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Crescenta, CA
Posts: 7,452
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
I meant compact in terms of build. I don't know a Nikon lens that is as good as the FA31 IQ-wise (35/1.4 perhaps but how much does it costs?) and FA43. FA77 would be more or less as good as the 85/1.8. DA LTD IQ-quality I would think that there are some that might be equal, although size I would think there is none equal.
I've honestly been least impressed with my FA 31 of all my Limiteds, but perhaps we just look for different things in lenses. I find the 28/2.8 Ai-s (~$225) to be a pretty spectacular lens, but it's more than a stop slower so it's not really a fair comparison. The 35/1.4 is getting pretty great reviews and the test shots I've seen look nice, but the Samyang equivalent looks nearly as good at a fraction of the price. I like my Ai version pretty well, too.

You're right about the size. That's one place where Pentax definitely wins out, though my 45/2.8P Ai-s and 20/4 Ai are both tiny little jewels.
06-30-2011, 11:50 AM   #40
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
Pro or notpro camera

QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
I don't think anyone would remotely consider the D7000 a "pro" camera. It's simply not a robust enough body to be put in that class. It's considered an "enthusiast" camera.
I agree, neither Pentax K5 nor Nikon D7000 is generally considered as a pro camera....but then what really is? Is it relevant? In my film days I was using Nikon F90X, kind of enthusiast film camera which I find that some pro photogs were happy to use as their workhorse.
So maybe 'pro camera' is quite a marketing thing and the real thing is what functions are really required from camera body.
06-30-2011, 11:56 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 528
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
I don't think anyone would remotely consider the D7000 a "pro" camera. It's simply not a robust enough body to be put in that class. It's considered an "enthusiast" camera.

Can anyone even see 1/2 stop in a scene? Or 22-bit vs 21-bit color depth? Or, to use an analogy, can you tell the difference when you are driving your car 57mph vs 55mph? Generally speaking, the IQ capabilities of a given generation of like-priced APS-C cameras are all pretty similar. That's when you look at ergonomics, functionality, and (most importantly) lenses.

Occasionally, of course, you'll get a real breakthru, like the Nikon D90.

Can anyone even see 1/2 stop DR in a scene?
The 1/2 stop difference is comparing the K-X to the Canon EOS 5D Mark II. Comparing the K-X to the t1i : the K-X has 1 full stop better dynamic range, higher image quality, lower noise at high ISO and can distinguish twice the number of colors:

Canon T1i vs Pentax K-x
06-30-2011, 12:13 PM   #42
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Carradale, Scotland
Posts: 289
just guessing?

QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
85% of the lenses that Nikon has, that Pentax does not, are well over 2 grand.

No thanks .
Is that exactly 85%, or nearly 85%, or roughly 85%, or are you just guessing. I like to see statistical statements backed up by solid evidence. To me this feels a bit wooly. Can you show your evidence please, I'd like to be convinced, but am a bit sceptical.
06-30-2011, 12:17 PM   #43
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by vrrattko Quote
So maybe 'pro camera' is quite a marketing thing and the real thing is what functions are really required from camera body.
One of my great batch-lot coups was, a couple years ago, to win the camera bag of a former staff shooter for a paper in a midsize midwestern city. His kit: 1970-80's. His RF: Yashica GSN Electro 35 (probably fitted with Kodachrome for Sunday-feature photos). His SLR: M42 Argus-Chinon CR-3E, the most advanced M42 body around. His lenses: Vivitar M42's in 28-35-50-90M-135. His flashes: Vivitar. I think his filters were Hoya. Nothing sexy, just solid stuff that delivered.

Pro is as pro does. Perhaps you want to shoot the street. Perhaps you can lug a FF CaNikon rig costing the downpayment on a McMansion and about as stealthy as a skunk in a bathtub. Yeah, be inconspicuous, sure. Or maybe you can use a plastic Rebel and just look like another clueless tourist with bad hair. That was pioneering photojournalist Alfred Eisenstaedt's schtick: I'm just a little guy with a little camera (Leica), I'm just taking snapshots, nothing happening here, ho hum. Peoplescapes may require different tools than landscapes.
06-30-2011, 12:26 PM   #44
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
a bit of exaggeration maybe?

QuoteOriginally posted by geekette Quote
The image quality of the K-X is better than the Canon 7D even. The dynamic range of the K-X is over 1/2 f stop better than the Canon EOS 5D Mark II.
Sorry for this, I'm not attempting to start an argument or anything....but Kx better than Canon7d? It doesn't sound so reliably, Pentax entry level (arguably great camera) outdoing Canon APS-C flagship - if that was true, you'll be seeing more pentaxes hanging from necks than canons while walking on streets. I think K-5 is a Pentax's response to Canon 7D.
06-30-2011, 12:41 PM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Crescenta, CA
Posts: 7,452
QuoteOriginally posted by vrrattko Quote
Sorry for this, I'm not attempting to start an argument or anything....but Kx better than Canon7d? It doesn't sound so reliably, Pentax entry level (arguably great camera) outdoing Canon APS-C flagship - if that was true, you'll be seeing more pentaxes hanging from necks than canons while walking on streets. I think K-5 is a Pentax's response to Canon 7D.
IQ-wise, I think the K-x sensor at least equals the 7D's. I wouldn't be surprised if it exceeds it by some small degree.

AS far as benchmarks go, DXOMark's sensor rankings have the K-x at #25 while the 7D is at #47.

edit: K-5's sensor gets the same score as the Nikon D3s.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aps-c, availability, beat, image, k-mount, lens, lenses, nikon, pentax, pentax lens, quality, respect, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
645 lens availability better now pz1fan Pentax Medium Format 34 05-29-2011 05:53 PM
Gotta Brag , We're going to the State Finals seacapt General Talk 7 03-15-2010 09:40 PM
White DA lens Availability? photonpen Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 01-14-2010 08:08 PM
Nikonians, like clocks, are right twice a day jsherman999 Pentax DSLR Discussion 47 10-18-2009 08:01 PM
Not to brag or something but yeay devisor Post Your Photos! 14 09-05-2009 06:29 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:14 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top