Originally posted by Class A What is it one should be wary of if one thinks that the grass is greener of the Nikon side of the fence? What is it that you don't like about Nikon gear and you like about Pentax gear?
Why would FF do the trick?
FF has no intrinsic low-light advantage. As a wedding shooter you'll probably appreciate the higher dynamic range, but I wonder if it is really FF you want or very high-ISO performance. The K-x is supposed to be a good high-ISO performer.
I think it is reasonable to expect that the two new Pentax models to be revealed in September will have very decent high-ISO performance.
Pros with Pentax: Ergonomics. They have it right IMO. Canon with the rear wheel is aweful in my hands and I don’t like a lot of the button placement. Nikon is similar to Pentax with the E dials but the lens removal button is in the wrong place (opposite Pentax’s) and it’s just not as easy to change lenses quickly. It’s because the grip is on the Pentax release side. You can hold the grip and with one finger push the button. Then with the other hand, remove the lens. With it on the other side of a Nikon, there’s nothing to hold on to while pushing the button.
ISO button on a Nikon is on the top left. With it on the OK button or the top right on a Pentax, you can change ISO’s much faster without removing you’re eye from the VF.
Pentax menus are better but Nikon did a few things right. The help menu is excellent. The “My Menu” is great (make your own custom menu). Best of all, they have the menu set so if you leave the menu, it goes back to the last item you looked at when you access the menu again. So no starting at page one and scrolling to get back to where you were before.
SR and WS. Unless you buy the overpriced VR lenses (I only have one, the 24-120mm), you lose SR. WS, There are no Nikon WS lenses. They only claim dust proof. The bodies are WS (some) but Pentax has WS in several lenses.
AF speed and accuracy. Nikon is very fast. The light has to be near black to see it hunt. It’s fast and locks the subject when you need it. Plus it can track an object moving in any direction much better. I rarely used AFc on my K20D’s as I found it nearly useless. Not now.
Buffer speed. Huge difference. There's just no waiting at all. You can take 3-4 shots in a row and look at the histogram nearly instantly. I'm not sure if this is a difference with SD vs CF and or the processor. But it's much faster.
The advantage in low light with the D700 is huge. It’s partly because they stuck with a 12MP sensor. ISO6400 is the same as ISO800 on a K20D. That’s pretty large (3 stops). I a dark church, that’s the difference between a flash shot and natural light. I have a K-x and although very good, it’s not the same. The K-x seems to have a lot less detail at similar ISO’s and just not as sharp looking. Plus Chroma noise on the D700 is much better controlled.
FF has one other thing APSc just can’t do. Yes there’s a difference in DOF but more than that, a 28mm lens is a 28mm lens. Sure you lose the FOV crop at longer distances, but a lens like the 28-75mm f2.8 Tamron sings on a FF body. I got a Sigma 12-24mm FF lens and that’s wild on a FF. Corrected ultra wide with about 125 degrees FOV. I like the Sigma 70-200mm more on it as well.
Again, I don’t want to come across as trashing Pentax. Far, far from it. Give me this camera in a K-XXX and I’d sell what I just bought. Pentax has a lot right and for the average shooter, there’s nothing missing. Below ISO400, the way the sensor processes an image is superior in every way. For me and what I do, it just wasn’t enough. I just think APSc in all brands is maxed on high ISO. The D300s can’t touch the D700. The 7D is worse than the K20D.