[zorza]

So, I had a Pentax K30 that fell to the ground. The insurance company will give me the money of the body, so I lose no money here.

But I will have to buy another body. as everybody else, I got really excited with the new K3, but I can't seam to get past that for the same price, I can get The Canon 6d (FF), body only.

Even with the lens, the Canon 6D with the 24-105L f4.0 lens is at almost the same price as the K3 with the 18-135wr lens.

I have already a 18-135wr lens, so I can buy the body only. Or I can go Canon and sell the 18-135wr and the Da*f1.4 I also have..

My question is, and because I really love taking pictures indoor with no flash (And did this with the k30), will the 6d be alot better than the K3?
My biggest issie is that FF might be a lot better for this kind of fotography..

Any thoughts?

Zorza

---

Last edited by zorza; 12-29-2013 at 06:30 AM.

[aurele]

Even with the lens, the Canon 6D with the 24-105L f4.0 lens is at almost the same price as the K30 with the 18-135wr lens.

first : i think you mean the K3 and not the K30.

Second : i don't know where you looked at the price, but for me :
- k30 +18-135 is around 850€
- k3 +18-135 is around 1500€
- 6D + 24-105 is around 2200€

(amazon price),

So i guess you need to clarify the price issue if you want a good advice and not some roaring from some forum member

[zorza]

first : i think you mean the K3 and not the K30.

Second : i don't know where you looked at the price, but for me :
- k30 +18-135 is around 850€
- k3 +18-135 is around 1500€
- 6D + 24-105 is around 2200€

(amazon price),

So i guess you need to clarify the price issue if you want a good advice and not some roaring from some forum member

o clarify the price issue if you want a

135wr lens, so I can b

Sorry for the mistake.. Will correct it right away.
Well you are right for the price, but if I sell my 18-135wr lens and the da* 1.4, I think I might have to put some 200 or 300 more.. I can live with that, and just one lens That was my math..

[elliott]

If you like shooting indoors without flash, wouldn't giving up the 55mm f1.4 for a 24-105 f4 be counterproductive?

[ivanvernon]

If you like taking photos without a flash, you could try the K-5II with Sigma 30 mm f 1.4. That setup lets you almost take photos in the dark!

[zorza]

If you like shooting indoors without flash, wouldn't giving up the 55mm f1.4 for a 24-105 f4 be counterproductive?

Kind of.. The 551.4 is a bit long for indoor pictures at family gatherings.. The 24mm woul rock a bit more than the 18mm (equals a 28mm).

I have been thinking the K5IIs, as it is very very cheap now!

I will try to do some shooting with the 6d this afternoon and get a feel for the camera.. I know it is lighter than the K3, but that 24-105lens is a lot heavier than the 18-135..

I have a confused mind about my own christmas present!!!

But, please keep telling me your thoughts.. Many thanks all

Zorza

[Boris]

IMHO, going Canon will open before you significantly more possibilities, such as using Carl Zeiss lenses that are not being produced in K-mount. Additionally, you will be getting into FF land. Now - is it something you really want and need or not - this question only you can answer. If I were in your position I would probably go Canon.

Also, this may be a good time to consider other "platforms" such as Fuji X-Trans series of cameras and respective lenses.

[starjedi]

So, I had a Pentax K30 that fell to the ground. The insurance company will give me the money of the body, so I lose no money here.

But I will have to buy another body. as everybody else, I got really excited with the new K3, but I can't seam to get past that for the same price, I can get The Canon 6d (FF), body only.

Even with the lens, the Canon 6D with the 24-105L f4.0 lens is at almost the same price as the K3 with the 18-135wr lens.

I have already a 18-135wr lens, so I can buy the body only. Or I can go Canon and sell the 18-135wr and the Da*f1.4 I also have..

My question is, and because I really love taking pictures indoor with no flash (And did this with the k30), will the 6d be alot better than the K3?
My biggest issie is that FF might be a lot better for this kind of fotography..

Any thoughts?

Zorza

just think in this way: canon 6d sensor is only 2/3 stop above k3 in low iso sensitivity. To have the same low light capability with 55mm 1.4 and k3, you need to buy another lens with aperture <f2. One of my friends had recently bought canon 6d with 24-105 f4. The photo quality she took in low light is far worse than my k5-ii and da50mm. Of course, it is unfair to compare in this way with different types of lens. But I guess that,s what your plan currently is.

My suggestin is that if you do not have plan to invest another lens like 85mm f1.4 when you buy canon 6d, k3 is the obvious choice based on your 18-135 and wonderful *55mm!

[normhead]

The reasons for a K-3 are, better magnification for distance shots. The resolution in the test shots at Imaging resources are almost identical. If you're been shooting with an 18-135, you're going to need something like a 70-200 to give you the same reach as you'd get with a K-3. IN low light, don't forget the K-3 has built in shake reduction. That could give you up to a 2 stop advantage in low light, you're losing 1 due to a smaller sensor, that still puts you a stop ahead. I recently shot Christmas with the K-3 and 18-135 combo mostly without flash, at our family christmas party... I shot hand held in burst mode, and got some great images. Sure a few were blurry, but shooting burst, I always got a keeper in each scene.



I don't need no stinking flash, or FF or fast lens.

[JimmyDranox]

If I have to choose only the camera, I will buy Canon 6D. But when I remember the prices of Canon IS lenses, and especially the good ones, the L, I will clearly choose K-3, or K-5 IIs. That's because I remember when I bought my first DSLR, I thought that 2 lenses are enough. Now, I have 10+, and ... I just saw how good is this new lens made by...

[Rondec]

Get a K5 II and another lens (maybe Sigma 35mm f1.4). I think you would not gain anything going witha slowish zoom and a Canon full frame sensor. 600D is a lot better sensor-wise in my opinion.

[Miguel]

I have a confused mind about my own christmas present!!!

Then it's good not to purchase anything unless you are absolutely certain of your decision.
The 6D is a good high-ISO camera, but so is the K-3. The 6D AF system lags behind the other Canon FF models, but if action is not what you care about,then it is irrelevant. The center point of the 6D system is highly accurate and fast however.

I think what you need to take into account are the full lens systems offered by both platforms. That's what you are really buying. If you stay with Pentax, I'd wait for the Sigma 18-35mm f 1.8 Art zoom. Canon, OTOH, offers more fast and wide choices in wide angle primes, plus Tokina offers excellent wide angle zooms. They are bulky and heavy. Quality vs. ease of carry is a decision most of us make all the time in choosing equipment. If you do end up using flash, the Canon solution is far better than Pentax.

The Canon 24-105mm f4 is a very good kit lens, but I question whether it would meet your core needs.

M

[Urkeldaedalus]

So, I had a Pentax K30 that fell to the ground. The insurance company will give me the money of the body, so I lose no money here.

But I will have to buy another body. as everybody else, I got really excited with the new K3, but I can't seam to get past that for the same price, I can get The Canon 6d (FF), body only.

Even with the lens, the Canon 6D with the 24-105L f4.0 lens is at almost the same price as the K3 with the 18-135wr lens.

I have already a 18-135wr lens, so I can buy the body only. Or I can go Canon and sell the 18-135wr and the Da*f1.4 I also have..

My question is, and because I really love taking pictures indoor with no flash (And did this with the k30), will the 6d be alot better than the K3?
My biggest issie is that FF might be a lot better for this kind of fotography..

Any thoughts?

Zorza

I'm not sure if the Canon 6D would be that much better shooting at low light given that you have the DA* 55 f/1.4. The K-3 also strikes me as the better all around body, especially for the price. The K-5IIs is also very good and much cheaper than both. Also, if you consider another system, the Fuji X-E2 looks pretty good and Fuji has some great lenses out right now.

This said, if you're looking for a reason to jump to Canon (particularly full frame) you're right that the event of the broken body is a good time to do it. I've heard good things from my Canon using friends who own the 6D. And if you're going to be using one f/4 zoom all the time the 6D with the 24-105L would be better than the Pentax option if size is not a concern to you.

[PentxOrni]

There are always facts to compare but what people (very often) do is going for very emotional decisions, handling, feeling(haptics), design... think it over and remember what let you decide last time to remain with Pentax gear...? For myself I can state that I more than a dozen times compared Pentax with the CaNikons, Sony, Oly, Pana of this planet and I always found an advantage (or more) over "the others" to stick with the brand that I love...
My personal opinion in this relation: The 6D looks boring, has less features, less reach (due FF) and only a very, very little advantage in terms of noise over the K-3 for a whole bunch of money more to spend in order to have the right gear attached - so, why switching?

[clackers]

the Canon 6D with the 24-105L f4.0 lens .... I really love taking pictures indoor with no flash

Contradiction there, Zorza.