[savoche]

Funny we are comparing aspects of a 3500$ camera and a 899 dollars camera.

Whatever it takes to prove the fact that Pentax is DOOMED, I say!

[Supernaut]

If you read my post, I said "at the same iso." That is, at iso 100, dynamic range for the K5 II is measured at 13.85 while the D800 is measured at 14.1. At iso 200 the K5 II is measured at 12.9 EV, while the D800 is at 13.85. That is roughly one stop difference in dynamic range at the same iso. The K5 gets a special boost based on its now-mythical iso 80.

Again, look at the curves and what the measured iso is. The D800 is pretty much 0.5 step better thougout the iso span when you look at the curves (toggled to print). This 0.5 step is because of the sensor size, the curves more or less align when comparing in screen mode.

[northcoastgreg]

Can I ask what may be a stupid question. what's the big deal about a ff camera? I've really only ever used aps-c (well and a film Nikon way back). Just curious to understand the appeal.

Before 2010, sensor technology was improving quite rapidly. We were getting sensors with more megapixels, better high ISO performance, greater dynamic range every two years or so. So you could upgrade every two or three years and have a reasonable chance of getting something significantly better. Photographers, especially gear-centric enthusiasts, became accustomed to upgrading to something better every two years. It became a central part of the excitement of their hobby. Then in 2010, the improvement of sensors suddenly came to a stop. The 16MP sensor used in the K-5 (introduced in 2010) is still the best APS-C sensor out there, and the sensor used in Nikon D3s (introduced in 2009), is still the best high ISO sensor. For many photographers shooting APS-C, the only way to feed their upgrade addiction was to move to a larger sensor, because that was seen as the only way to acquire a camera that would constitute, in their minds, a significant upgrade. Hence the mania for FF.

I'm of course generalizing here. What I have written doesn't apply to all photographers.

[normhead]

Again, look at the curves and what the measured iso is. The D800 is pretty much 0.5 step better thougout the iso span when you look at the curves (toggled to print). This 0.5 step is because of the sensor size, the curves more or less align when comparing in screen mode.

I feel like you have to repeat yourself about 5 times to stop the nonsense.

At 100 ISO according to the above posts the K-5 is rated at 13.85 and the D800 . That's .25 EV, as I said, pretty much negligible.
Not only that the K5II will focus in 2EV less light. And really even if the D800 is .5 stop better that also is pretty much negligible.

I guess it's just tough to admit... in the ultimate sense, you could buy a k-5 over a D800 and never notice the difference. The important thing here is, if you don't need the resolution, buying a D800 over a K-5 for the extra DR is pretty much a bad idea for most of the world. I've heard from a lot of users that they prefer the D800 over the K-5, but not for dynamic range, where the K-5 excels. The D800 just excels a little more. A very little bit more.

[gazonk]

I guess it's just tough to admit... in the ultimate sense, you could buy a k-5 over a D800 and never notice the difference. The important thing here is, if you don't need the resolution, buying a D800 over a K-5 for the extra DR is pretty much a bad idea for most of the world. I've heard from a lot of users that they prefer the D800 over the K-5, but not for dynamic range, where the K-5 excels. The D800 just excels a little more. A very little bit more.

The key is to buy whatever fits the lenses you want to use. If you want to do low light ultra wide angle photography, I guess the D800 with the Nikkor 14-24/2.8 is very hard to beat. In fact, Pentax makes no lenses that are even close to that wide. If, on the other hand, weight is an important concern to you and you don't really care about the most extreme wide angle focal lengths, the K-5 (II, IIs) + DA15 combo is just ridiculously small and light compared to that Nikon combo.

[monochrome]

Then in 2010, the improvement of sensors suddenly came to a stop. The 16MP sensor used in the K-5 (introduced in 2010) is still the best APS-C sensor out there, and the sensor used in Nikon D3s (introduced in 2009), is still the best high ISO sensor.

I have a feeling the earthquake and Tsunami has some role in this. Aristophanes will probably contradict me but I'd bet there was considerable time and expense lost re-orienting sensor fab tables and adjusting to the slowed Japanese economy (hell, the world economy - the Earthquake took about 1.8% growth off global GDP for a year!).

[Aristophanes]

I have a feeling the earthquake and Tsunami has some role in this. Aristophanes will probably contradict me but I'd bet there was considerable time and expense lost re-orienting sensor fab tables and adjusting to the slowed Japanese economy (hell, the world economy - the Earthquake took about 1.8% growth off global GDP for a year!).

I heard they were down for a few weeks because of power supply issues and the compulsory, rotating blackouts. But the whole supply chain locked up.

Japan is hit by hundreds of earthquakes, so most plants and facilities are buffered to some degree. Think of spinning all that glass and a tremor comes along, which they do...frequently.

[Andi Lo]

The key is to buy whatever fits the lenses you want to use. If you want to do low light ultra wide angle photography, I guess the D800 with the Nikkor 14-24/2.8 is very hard to beat. In fact, Pentax makes no lenses that are even close to that wide. If, on the other hand, weight is an important concern to you and you don't really care about the most extreme wide angle focal lengths, the K-5 (II, IIs) + DA15 combo is just ridiculously small and light compared to that Nikon combo.

Thats a pretty unfair comparison though. D600 + AF-D 20mm is not thaaat heavy. Not k-x + DA 15 small and light, but still not that heavy.

DA 15 starburst is the bees knees though

[gazonk]

Thats a pretty unfair comparison though. D600 + AF-D 20mm is not thaaat heavy. Not k-x + DA 15 small and light, but still not that heavy.

It wasn't meant to be a "fair comparison", it was just meant to show that you may want to start with the kind of photography you want to do and how you want to carry your equipment around, then think about the kind of lenses you need, and then think about which camera system that may suit that purpose and have that kind of lens.

(And besides, while the weight difference isn't that big, the D600 combo is quite a bit bigger)

[Belnan]

It wasn't meant to be a "fair comparison", it was just meant to show that you may want to start with the kind of photography you want to do and how you want to carry your equipment around, then think about the kind of lenses you need, and then think about which camera system that may suit that purpose and have that kind of lens.

(And besides, while the weight difference isn't that big, the D600 combo is quite a bit bigger)

That's a lot to think about. Especially for a newbie. Unfortunately needs and desires sometimes change.

[gazonk]

That's a lot to think about. Especially for a newbie. Unfortunately needs and desires sometimes change.

They do, but you got to start somewhere. A colleague of mine was upgrading from a cheap Canon. She didn't have much lenses and thus was open to switching platform. And she was seriously considering the K-5, but she ended up with the D800 precisely because she could get nothing like the 14-24 for Pentax.

[Poit]

I don't think it's sad at all. I think it's great, because I get really tired of reading this stuff. If you want 135 format, there are 3 very capable camera systems to choose from. Go get one and be happy. Stop telling people how miserable they should be.


This is not constructive criticism on your part.

I, for one, agree with what Uluru said. And I think it WAS constructive criticism: Constructive criticism is a communication technique intended to identify and find solutions to problems in a positive way.

The problem Uluru identified: people (like myself) are considering and/or actually leaving Pentax because of a lack of action in providing options / diversity in the systems available.

The solution: Extend the range to, at the very least, include a simple FF option that Pentax users have been crying out for, FOR YEARS. Provide at least a semblance of diversity in options available to their users.

I think comments like "if the K5ii doesn't suit your needs then go away and leave us all alone" are not constructive. If everyone here just trumpeted how the K5ii is the perfect, cover-all DSLR, suitable to every photographic and artistic requirement, then it would be a VERY sad day.

For both financial and sentimental reasons I don't want to leave the Pentax system, and I agree with Uluru that it is quite sad people like me are almost being forced away from the brand due to a lack of meaningful response to their customers', and the market's wants and needs.

[monochrome]

For both financial and sentimental reasons I don't want to leave the Pentax system, and I agree with Uluru that it is quite sad people like me are almost being forced away from the brand due to a lack of meaningful response to their customers', and the market's wants and needs.

Pentax has been financially hamstrung for at least 5 years. Ricoh will get there - perhaps not soon enough to suit many current customers - but there is a lot of work to do yet rebuilding the brand before they allocate the resources to FF. It really is a simple business fact. It just isn't the time yet, much as you, I and probably they wish it was.

[Andi Lo]

It wasn't meant to be a "fair comparison", it was just meant to show that you may want to start with the kind of photography you want to do and how you want to carry your equipment around, then think about the kind of lenses you need, and then think about which camera system that may suit that purpose and have that kind of lens.

(And besides, while the weight difference isn't that big, the D600 combo is quite a bit bigger)

Understood. That's a fair point Talking about bodies though, I actually switched to d600 not because of any particular lens, but because it's the only FF I could afford with a dual sd card slot. 6D isnt quite as affordable here and the 5dii AF doesn't exactly have the best reputation.

While I have particular lenses that I actually wish to use, they are either really expensive (Nikon 14-24, Canon 17mm TS) or exist in both mounts (Tokina 11-16, a decent 35mm, 50mm, 85mm prime), so in my case the lenses were actually not a factor, as there is usually an option for everyone these days.

The Nikon flash system actually was a factor, but I probably would have been happy with the Canon had I chosen that.

[Pål Jensen]

They do, but you got to start somewhere. A colleague of mine was upgrading from a cheap Canon. She didn't have much lenses and thus was open to switching platform. And she was seriously considering the K-5, but she ended up with the D800 precisely because she could get nothing like the 14-24 for Pentax.

From a cheap Canon to a 14-24 is odd. This lens is extremely specialized. Firstly it is expensive and heavy. Secondly one in a thousand images is shot wider than 20mm (on FF). It flares a lot and you can't used many filters on it due to its curving front element. It is a photo journalist lens who want all (well most) wide angles in one. It may be sharp but it certainly comes with lots of drawbacks for general use.