[dc1500]

I agree Edgar, the problem is it raises the wider issue of "what is a good camera?" per say. We all go along this route of faster autofocus, higher mp's, lower noise etc. etc. comparing different cameras but to what end. Presumably a "nicer" looking image. This is why I feel, like you, that perhaps there should be a greater emphasis on portrait and perhaps wildlife photography. Here resolution, sharpness and detail are paramount. I personally feel that street photography and landscapes are more about mood than the above and as such a good photograph relies slightly more on the artistic skill of the photographer than the spec of the camera. I realise there are generalisations here and I am mainly referring to the use of "sample" pictures. By the way I am just rambling in my own mind and am quite happy to be disagreed with!

[JohnLegrand]

but the lens he is comparing in FL is the 16-50 Sony, not the same animal,
Unfortunately Pentax doesn't kit with the 16-50 2.8 and if they did it would be stupidly expensive based on the new pricing. I bet you could get a kit from a dealer with the tamron 17-50 2.8 for about the same (if you had an actual B&M to go in and negotiate with),
the a77 kit is not even a comparative model. a77 in canada is 1499,
the A57 kit with the 18-135 is more the comparison model. priced at 999 for what is the lesser model in pretty much all aspects
A65 with the 18-135 is 1199 A65 with the 16-50 is 1599,
a77 with the 18-135 is 1799 and 2149 with the 16-50
A65 level doesn't exist in the Pentax world (yet) a77 level will be the K5 replacement,
Right now a K5 18-135 kit is 1499 so less than the a77 with similar kit, lesser sensor, but better across the board with better sensor performance according to DXO. Megapickles ain't everything

But a lens is everything. Trust me you can put a Top class lens on a sensor from 5 years ago and get stunning results or you can put a 200 euro lens on a D800 and get crappy results. You are not going to be able to tell me when you see A77/1650 pictures that those are from a sensor that has more visible noise at iso 3200 (in lab tests). But im not here to bash anything, I really do love pentax. But i think they good use a better zoom aroung the 500 USD range.

[JinDesu]

But a lens is everything. Trust me you can put a Top class lens on a sensor from 5 years ago and get stunning results or you can put a 200 euro lens on a D800 and get crappy results. You are not going to be able to tell me when you see A77/1650 pictures that those are from a sensor that has more visible noise at iso 3200. But im not here to bash anything, I really do love pentax. But i think they good use a better zoom aroung the 500 USD range.

Get a Tamron 17-50. $300 bucks and beats almost anything in that range.

[georgecape]

I fully agree with the Tammy recommendation!
Abundance of game in the Etosha park, Namibia.
K-7 @ 17mm 1/640 f8 ISO 250 EV+1

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[eddie1960]

I agree on the Tammy but he has a point on the need for a more reasonable lens than the da* 16-50
Oh wait there is the 17-70 f4.0. make it WR and it would be the ideal kit for the k5. or with the k30 as a 999 kit