[cbaytan]

I been doing some serious reading and studying of two SLR cameras. The new Pentax K5 and the Nikon D700.

This is what I am looking at two different packages.

Nikon D700
Nikon 28-300mm
External Flash

Pentax K5
Pentax 17-70mm
Pentax 60-250mm
External Flash

Chuck

This is the question most photography beginners ask. The answer is plain simple, what lens system do you like? If you like pastel colors go for the Canon, if you like high color contrast and sharpnes go for the Leica, if you can't afford Leica Pentax is poor man's Leica. Limited Pentax lenses gives you a superb results, they won't let you look for Leica lenses. But if you like harsh color Nikon lenses (yuck) get Nikon.

I had the DA 17-70mm for a while but replaced with 16-45mm immediately, Never had one but DA* 16-50mm is the best among these three, I've been told.

So a digital camera is a just a peripheral device of the computers, it is the lenses that'll make you get results as you wish.

Good luck with your choice.

[yeatzee]

In general, glass will affect the Image quality more than the camera used. SO, getting pro glass on a K-5 for the price of getting consumer glass on the D700 is a no brainer to me atleast, leading to the K-5.

I buy a system for the glass, but hey maybe thats just me

[Abstract]

Harsh Nikon colors? Really...I gotta say I will disagree 100%. My colors were always pretty true to life.

Harsh Nikon colors? Really...I gotta say I will disagree 100%. My colors were always pretty true to life.

Well honestly with RAW and photoshop you can get any colors you want. Also with the level of in camera adjustment most cameras off you can get whatever colors you want straight OOC too. I was so used to my beautiful K200 CCD colors that as soon as I got my 7D I set my 7D's in camera settings to mirror what the K200 put out.

[cbaytan]

Harsh Nikon colors? Really...I gotta say I will disagree 100%. My colors were always pretty true to life.

Yes, I find Nikon colors grossly harsh. Thats because it's the our brains sees it not the eyes. I mean it's a very subjective area how we see the things. Once I showed one of my relatives Canon and Nikon prints and he has chosen the Pentax, I've never undesrtood. Than it danged to my mind it was a subjective choice. BTW I am a Neurophysiologist and fairly know vision.

[Abstract]

Well honestly with RAW and photoshop you can get any colors you want. Also with the level of in camera adjustment most cameras off you can get whatever colors you want straight OOC too. I was so used to my beautiful K200 CCD colors that as soon as I got my 7D I set my 7D's in camera settings to mirror what the K200 put out.

Yeah, well I always shoot raw, I only post process when really needed(call me lazy I guess) and found most of my photos to be pleasing and accurate. I am not a fan of canons colors though, yet they are known for that from what I hear, all comes down to opinion I suppose.

[Kini62]

Well, I bought the K5, 55/1.4 and 50-135 as soon as the K5 became available. I either had a dud camera, 2 dud lenses or all three were bad. It couldn't focus at all beyond about 6 feet with either lens. The 50-135 being particularly bad.

I did a brief AF tracking test with the 50-135, but it's kind of moot since it couldn't focus on anything. But I did notice that the camera/lens lagged way behind the subject which in this case was a 5yo girl running in slippers.

I sent it back and got a Nikon D700, 28-300 and a 50/1.8. Couldn't be happier. The camera focuses super fast in all light conditions, it's accurate especially the 28-300, the 50/1.8 not so much at distance.

The IQ from the 28-300 and D700 I would put up against either of the 2 Pentax lenses you mentioned over the same range.

The DOF would be about the same, you'd loose a little off the wide end and 75mm off the long end and one stop of light, but it would be just one lens that's much smaller than the 60-250, focuses much faster and both the camera and lens (Nikon) would be WAY less expensive.

I also didn't think the inbody SR on the K5 worked very good either. The in lens VR on the 28-300 seems much more effective.

So, spend more (a lot) have to carry 2 lenses and more weight, swap lenses, have slower and less reliable AF, less DOF control (grab a $250 50/1.4D) have a better flash system, spend less (a lot).

Choice is yours.

As you can tell I'm really disappointed in my Pentax experience. It is the only camera brand that I've had that has failed to work properly out of the box. I've had Oly, Canon, Panasonic, and Nikon.

Get the Nikon.

Gene

Yeah, well I always shoot raw, I only post process when really needed(call me lazy I guess) and found most of my photos to be pleasing and accurate. I am not a fan of canons colors though, yet they are known for that from what I hear, all comes down to opinion I suppose.

I found Canon's colors to be very dull, almost like they were desaturating them. Added some saturation, a little contrast, and sharpness, and now they look good to me. But honestly OOC the jpegs looked like crap because the camera was applying almost no sharpening. Once I discovered this it was like getting a new camera.

[aleonx3]

You won't go wrong with either choice, really, and frankly, I don't really think it matters overly what you want to shoot, with the one big caveat that really long telephoto lenses are thin on the ground with Pentax.
Of course, they are also very expensive, which may or may not be a factor for you.
The Pentax is a much smaller camera, the D700 has a bigger viewfinder.
I'm told Nikon's flash system is better, but people do seem able to hobble along with other brands as well.
I have yet to try the P-TTL flash with the K7 or K5, so I can't say how well it works.

I keep hearing people say P-TTL is trash and Nikon flash system is so much better and superior; I like to see some examples. The attached is a flash shot in a recent wedding gig -P-TTL with 31m ltd; if someone can tell me that I can do better, I am all ears and willing to listen... By the way, I also like the color and WB from the k-7.

[GeneV]

I keep hearing people say P-TTL is trash and Nikon flash system is so much better and superior; I like to see some examples. The attached is a flash shot in a recent wedding gig -P-TTL with 31m ltd; if someone can tell me that I can do better, I am all ears and willing to listen... By the way, I also like the color and WB from the k-7.

I've not used the Nikon flash, so I can't compare, but after getting to know it, I also get excellent results with P-TTL.

[hal_a]

Pentax K-5: much newer technology. The sensor is really good, bests the full frame D700 sensor on many counts (read the DXO Mark review). Has adequate auto focus (those lucky enough to have one aren't complaining), high frame rate, quiet shutter. All this in a very small, light and weather sealed package.

Nikon D700: Full frame with its advantages*, best autofocus in existence, higher flash synch, high frame rate

Nikon advantages over Pentax: better flash system, wider choice of exotic lenses (albeit with exotic pricing)

Full frame advantages: Bigger pixel size, wider array of wide angle lenses available, greater depth of field control, lower useable shutter speed for handheld shots because less magnification is necessary for identical print sizes.

For the lens choice you state, I would go for a Pentax, better lens = better images. If it were me, I would only choose Nikon if I had a much bigger wallet, that lets me take advantage of offerings like the 24mm f1.4.

[aragondina]

And this is exactly the shortsighted kind of reply I would expect...

This is the Pentax Forum. There is no place for objectivity here.

[conradcjc]

Thanks for all the input. It does make sense to have better glass then a better body. I am sure the DA* lenses are much better then the middle grade Nikon lenses.

Gene - How is that 28-300 lens? I read it has a lot of distortion. How true is that?

[Miguel]

If you are doing this kind of shooting casually, then a K-r would meet your needs just fine. K-x would work fine too. Really, a three year old K20D would suffice too. Nothing wrong with any of these choices.

It would be helpful if you provided some more context around what your needs are. Otherwise everyone here is projecting their own requirements and fantasies to some degree.

M

[conradcjc]

How is the distortion on the 28-300mm??? I read it is really bad. You see it at all? You try to take pics of flat surfaces for testing? Brick walls etc...