[Lowell Goudge]

My current dSLR is getting old and it's time to upgrade.
Pentax's recent price changes have made me re-examine my options.
I am trying to decide between a K-5 and a full frame Canon 5D Mark II.

I am asking for your help in comparing two kits equivalent in price and field of view (estimated used prices are in parenthesis):

Pentax APS-C:
1. DA12-24mm f/4 ($700)
2. DA 35mm f/2.4 ($200)
3. DA 50mm f/1.4 ($320)
4. DA 70mm f/2.4 ($450)

Canon Full Frame:
1. EF 17-40 f/4L ($700)
2. EF 50mm f/1.8 ($100)
3. EF 85mm f/1.8 ($380)
4. EF 100mm f/2 ($400)

I am asking about the performance of the lens kits, not about the advantages/disadvantages of full frame vs. APS-C

Also, this is not a troll, I have suffered through many sleepless nights trying to come to a decision.

I have no brand loyalty. I came to Pentax because I used to believe they provided the best value.
Now, I am not so sure.

I also have a closet full of M42's that would fill in some gaps.

Thanks in advance for your responses and insight.

What lenses do you own now, and what do you do with them. I doubt you would notice any difference and why bother switching, unless there is something driving you to get a full frame camera that you are not stating, if you have pentax now and some of the lenses on the list, you are not going to be further ahead trading

[Docrwm]

I think you probably realised (but it never hurts to actually write it) that there will be a large difference in weight, size, and overall ergonomy between these systems. The best would be to be able to actually get your hands on both. If size/weight are concerns, the Pentax lineup still makes a lot of sense! Sorry I can't comment on the Canon lenses you list.
Also, I think your estimates for used prices are a bit high on the Pentax (again, can't comment on the Canon): eg 200 is more than retail for DA35/2.4!
I think the most important question is which system pleases you the most and which one makes you want to go out and take pictures? It's not all rational, and no, it's not "just a tool" for most amateurs. If photography is a hobby for you as it for me, it's about enjoying yourself!

Unfortunately your statement that $200 is more than retail for the 35/2.4 is no longer true. Since the egregious price increases the 35/2.4 is selling for $219 and used prices have already begun their inevitable climb as well.

[asp1880]

If you can stand the size and weight then go for the 5D2. Size/weight vs IQ, simple as that.

Don't forget the viewfinder. The 35mm viewfinder is nice.

Personally, I wouldn't bother with the 5d2 over the K-5.

Regards,
--Anders.

[VictorDA]

Unfortunately your statement that $200 is more than retail for the 35/2.4 is no longer true.

Oops, sorry, was thinking in Euros :ugh:... it usually works quite well... anyway, it is probably still more than anyone would pay for it used, I hope? Or is it?

[Docrwm]

Oops, sorry, was thinking in Euros :ugh:... it usually works quite well... anyway, it is probably still more than anyone would pay for it used, I hope? Or is it?

Not sure, they are beginning to be priced at more used than I paid new for mine. Only time will tell if the market will tolerate these increases. We are already seeing Amazon buck the PRIC directives on pricing on some items (although not on the DA* zoom lenses).

[unixrevolution]

My current dSLR is getting old and it's time to upgrade.
Pentax's recent price changes have made me re-examine my options.
I am trying to decide between a K-5 and a full frame Canon 5D Mark II.

I am asking for your help in comparing two kits equivalent in price and field of view (estimated used prices are in parenthesis):

Pentax APS-C:
1. DA12-24mm f/4 ($700)
2. DA 35mm f/2.4 ($200)
3. DA 50mm f/1.4 ($320)
4. DA 70mm f/2.4 ($450)

Canon Full Frame:
1. EF 17-40 f/4L ($700)
2. EF 50mm f/1.8 ($100)
3. EF 85mm f/1.8 ($380)
4. EF 100mm f/2 ($400)

I am asking about the performance of the lens kits, not about the advantages/disadvantages of full frame vs. APS-C

Also, this is not a troll, I have suffered through many sleepless nights trying to come to a decision.

I have no brand loyalty. I came to Pentax because I used to believe they provided the best value.
Now, I am not so sure.

I also have a closet full of M42's that would fill in some gaps.

Thanks in advance for your responses and insight.

As mentioned above, the upcoming DA 50mm F/1.8 is a lot cheaper than the FA 50mm F/1.4, brilliant though the 1.4 is. I, personally, have a love affair with Pentax glass, and adore my Pentax lenses and Takumars. Of course, you can adapt the Pentax glass, K and M42, to a Canon body with a cheap adapter if you really want to. That's really one of the cool things about Canon EF cameras: Their registration distance is so short that most other SLR lenses fit on with adapters.

Addressing your particular kit, I think you've got very comparable lenses. All the ones you have listed are spectacular, except perhaps the Canon 50/1.8 (Canon's "Kit fifty" is a little spotty on the Image quality and build, from what I've heard.)

That said, the Pentax kit seems pretty close, though the Canon kit is a little faster across the board as far as maximum apertures. Combined with the longer focal lengths of a full frame kit, you'll have more depth of field control. However, the increased speed of the lenses won't really, IMO, make up for the K-5s superior low-light performance.

See, I think the lens kits are pretty much a wash. The bigger issue, to me, is the camera bodies. The K-5 is a small, light, weather-sealed DSLR with absolutely outstanding image quality, especially under low-light conditions. At higher ISOs, the 5D is actually at something of a disadvantage.

Also, the 5D is not as ruggedly weather sealed as the K-5, and it's a LOT bigger. Look at this link to camerasize.com:

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Clicking that link will show you, truly, how big of a beast the 5D is.

With all that said, if you're doing portraiture, the 5D is the perfect camera for it. For almost anything else though, I'd take the Pentax. Better low-light, smaller, lighter, and about $1000 cheaper. The Pentax kit you listed above is fabulous, and there is plenty of other Pentax and other 3rd party glass from the last 50 years out there as well.

[pinholecam]

TS, what lenses do you have now?
If you already have a couple of good lenses, then short opinion is that its not worth the switch.

No offense, but I can't see the reasoning of the "The price increase means that I have to leave Pentax for Canikon" statement that has been going around.
Esp, so if the person already has a few decent lenses.
Its more of an additional excuse to move out from Pentax than a real reason.
With a few decent lenses in your possession, the lens buying slows down from needs to wants.
Perhaps 1,2 good lenses a year.
The price increase just doesn't affect you that much anymore.
You'd spend that sort of money or more if you were on or switch to a Canikon as well.


K5 compared to 5DII:
1. AF : more or less even. 5DII is no AF speed demon. Well reported.
2. DR : K5 is better by a significant amount
3. Handling : Its a wash imo. One can get used to either interface.
4. High ISO : maybe a slight advantage for the 5DII), but not day and night if you look at the IR and DPR comparators
5. Shallow DOF for same FOV: of course FF has an advantage
6. More DOF for same FOV : advantage goes to K5
7. Resolution : 5DII, though 16mp on K5 is no slouch.
8. Price : K5 is still cheaper by 1/2
9. Size/Weight/Encumbrance : K5 wins by a mile
10. Viewfinder : 5DII is better
11. SR : K5 wins this one since the 5DII has none.
12. Cheap WR lenses : Pentax

#5,#6 depends on what you'd shoot. More reach and macro, K5 has an advantage. Shallow DOF goes to 5DII.
Portraits need not always be shallow dof, anyway, many APS-C shots can give shallow enough DOF too.
Some argue that you can always stop down from FF to get the same DOF as APS-C. Well, the trade-off to that is shutter speed or ISO or flash power (if using strobes), basically no free lunch

Are the slight advantages worth the trouble to switch?
The size, weight, price (still more expensive camera), less DR, no SR?
It depends on your needs and preference (and itch for FF)


Personally, I've looked here and there too. 5D, 5DII, D700, all at pretty good prices now 2nd hand.
But then I look at what the K5 is giving me now in a smaller package, I really ask myself "Whats the point?"



DXO results :
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

---

Last edited by pinholecam; 04-11-2012 at 06:22 AM.

[slackercruster]

Why switch??

I'm not familar that much with Canon. But unless you are getting into a giant mp Canikon, Pentax has you covered.

But the price rise for Pentax glass would advise me to tell you buy Sigma or another 3rd party glass. Or buy used Pentax glass and not new unless Pentax comes to its senses.

[Rondec]

TS, what lenses do you have now?
If you already have a couple of good lenses, then short opinion is that its not worth the switch.

No offense, but I can't see the reasoning of the "The price increase means that I have to leave Pentax for Canikon" statement that has been going around.
Esp, so if the person already has a few decent lenses.
Its more of an additional excuse to move out from Pentax than a real reason.
With a few decent lenses in your possession, the lens buying slows down from needs to wants.
Perhaps 1,2 good lenses a year.
The price increase just doesn't affect you that much anymore.
You'd spend that sort of money or more if you were on or switch to a Canikon as well.


K5 compared to 5DII:
1. AF : more or less even. 5DII is no AF speed demon. Well reported.
2. DR : K5 is better by a significant amount
3. Handling : Its a wash imo. One can get used to either interface.
4. High ISO : maybe a slight advantage for the 5DII), but not day and night if you look at the IR and DPR comparators
5. Shallow DOF for same FOV: of course FF has an advantage
6. More DOF for same FOV : advantage goes to K5
7. Resolution : 5DII, though 16mp on K5 is no slouch.
8. Price : K5 is still cheaper by 1/2
9. Size/Weight/Encumbrance : K5 wins by a mile
10. Viewfinder : 5DII is better
11. SR : K5 wins this one since the 5DII has none.
12. Cheap WR lenses : Pentax

#5,#6 depends on what you'd shoot. More reach and macro, K5 has an advantage. Shallow DOF goes to 5DII.
Portraits need not always be shallow dof, anyway, many APS-C shots can give shallow enough DOF too.
Some argue that you can always stop down from FF to get the same DOF as APS-C. Well, the trade-off to that is shutter speed or ISO or flash power (if using strobes), basically no free lunch

Are the slight advantages worth the trouble to switch?
The size, weight, price (still more expensive camera), less DR, no SR?
It depends on your needs and preference (and itch for FF)


Personally, I've looked here and there too. 5D, 5DII, D700, all at pretty good prices now 2nd hand.
But then I look at what the K5 is giving me now in a smaller package, I really ask myself "Whats the point?"



DXO results :
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

I think this is a pretty good summary. To me, current generation full frame cameras (D800, D4, and 5D Mk III) have significant advantage on the K5. Older full frames, not so much. But you really just have to weigh what is important to you with the benefits of a given system. Canon L lenses (not listed in the OP post) are not cheap, although they have some pretty sweet lenses.

[lightbulb]

Off topic, my eyes are on 5DIII; better weather sealing, better AF, better Video capability, and thin DOF... waiting for more reviews and if Pentax doesn't improve its shortcomings (AF and poor IQ on 16-50 lens) I am more incline to dive into the sea of Canon.

I could invest in 5D III and a 24-105 f4 L and the weight is about 3lb which is about the same as K5 and 16-50 f2.8. Also the FF f4.0 has a little thinner DOF than the APS-C f2.8. Forget about 7D, the size and weight is about the same as 5D and the EF-S lenses are all non-weather sealing but price around the Pentax DA*.

[Shamwow]

I currently use a K10D that has served me well over the years, but it's now on its last leg.

Last week, I ordered a K-5 and the unopened box is now sitting on my desk staring at me.
To complicate things, my local electronics superstore has the 5D II on sale every once in a while for $1900, but they usually only have a couple and they go fast.

I just wanted to get an idea for how my Canon lens roadmap would compare to their Pentax equivalents.
I used to have a Canon SLR in the film days, but only used the 50mm f/1.8. I rented the 200mm f/2.8L and thought it was spectacular, but didn't have anything else to compare it to.

I understand the differences between the two bodies. The 5D II has rather dissapointing ergonomics. It felt cheap and much bigger than I would like. The K-5 on the other hand, appears elegant and well layed out. I have small hands, and it fits just perfectly. But, the advantages of full frame have been discussed ad nauseum in other threads

I am not looking for a reason to leave Pentax, but before I drop $1k-$2k on a body, I want to analyze all my options.

My most used lenses in my current lineup are the DA70mm, DA14mm, and the DA40mm. I am happy with all of them.
I was hoping to purchase the DA* 60-250, but that might now be out of reach. Maybe the DA55-300mm will do for the time being, or the DA* 300mm will be in my future.

Thanks,

[Franky2step]

Switch to Canon with those lenses. Uless you want the high build quality and small lens sizes of Pentax that is. I ca tell you the Canon 85 f1.8 is SUPER SHARP, and the 100 is as well. One problem is though the 85 and 100 are just too close together. Get the 135 f2 if you want an amazing telephoto prime. If you are fine with the size of the 5D MKII(?) and the 17-40L(which is relatively light I must say), then you won't regret it. I have owned all of the Canon lenses and switched because I hated the size of Canon lenses, and their 50mm f1.4 is complete $hit regarding build quality. Another thing to think of is bokeh. Full frame will give you better bokeh than aps-c generally speaking. The 135L is the best glass I have ever used in this regard.

[MegaPower]

17-40/4 is a good lens.
50/1.8 is a very cheap plastic lens but it sure can compete with DA35/2.4. (IMO, not as good as DA35/2.4 in terms of IQ)
85/1.8 is a very good lens for it's value.
100/2, I don't know.

Once you go on Canon, you can easily find a lot of sigma/tamron options.

[Jean Poitiers]

I currently use a K10D that has served me well over the years, but it's now on its last leg.

Last week, I ordered a K-5 and the unopened box is now sitting on my desk staring at me.
To complicate things, my local electronics superstore has the 5D II on sale every once in a while for $1900, but they usually only have a couple and they go fast.

I just wanted to get an idea for how my Canon lens roadmap would compare to their Pentax equivalents.
I used to have a Canon SLR in the film days, but only used the 50mm f/1.8. I rented the 200mm f/2.8L and thought it was spectacular, but didn't have anything else to compare it to.

I understand the differences between the two bodies. The 5D II has rather dissapointing ergonomics. It felt cheap and much bigger than I would like. The K-5 on the other hand, appears elegant and well layed out. I have small hands, and it fits just perfectly. But, the advantages of full frame have been discussed ad nauseum in other threads

I am not looking for a reason to leave Pentax, but before I drop $1k-$2k on a body, I want to analyze all my options.

My most used lenses in my current lineup are the DA70mm, DA14mm, and the DA40mm. I am happy with all of them.
I was hoping to purchase the DA* 60-250, but that might now be out of reach. Maybe the DA55-300mm will do for the time being, or the DA* 300mm will be in my future.

Thanks,

Bonjour Shamwow,

Thanks for your "happy ending" update ... and I'm jealous of your DA line-up (14, 40 & 70) ... hesitating to buy those lens until the FF situation (maybe) clears up in a year or so from now ... Enjoy the K-5, it's great!

Salut, John le Frog

[Bestzoom]

Hi Shamwow,
It depends on what you are trying to achieve with photography. If you are a pro or needing to print in huge prints A0 or larger most of the time, go for the FF.

If you are like me, who aim to print photos into photo books A4 size (onto my fourth with K5 and FA 31 in 8 months), then the K5 is perfectly adequate. It is as portable as my Leica M but with autofocus.
I love smaller cameras, but that is just me!

Enjoy!