Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-25-2016, 12:27 AM   #76
Kiwi Pentaxian
NZ_Ross's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Timaru
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,261
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
Well, that would be cool. Guess you could run the FF (if it's small and light enough) with the primes, (still need a fast 24mm,) and run a Aps-c with the 50-135. That could be a solution. Price would be the factor there.
Hi Ed, I have read the comments here, and also enjoy watching the videos. I have been following this debate with interest - not that I am a professional photographer

With regard to the fast 24mm - have you ever looked at the Pentax FA*24/2. I know they are only available second hand, but they are AF, reasonably fast, not too heavy, and well regarded optically. They can be obtained on the used market, and come up regularly enough here on the PF Marketplace.

Cheers

Ross

01-25-2016, 04:21 AM - 1 Like   #77
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,216
I just don't know how often you actually need f1.4 and 16mm. My experience is that f2.8 is more than adequate for those sorts of shots. Anyway, for folks who need pretty wide and really fast, it is too bad that the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 has such mixed reviews on auto focusing, because it would be a good solution as optically it seems pretty stellar.

Rather than trying to figure out super fast lenses and dealing with the ultra-narrow depth of field that results, a lot of photographers would do better to figure out lighting -- on camera and off camera, as that can make a huge difference in the end result.
01-25-2016, 04:30 AM   #78
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,332
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
BUT, I would have preferred that Pentax pursue really expanding and perfecting and catering to their PRO APS-C DSLR system, which NO OTHER COMPANY has done, and therefore offering truly something unique and desirable to the market.
I really don't understand why you're saying this. Ricoh has developed its Pentax APS-C system since acquiring it from Hoya, and plans to continue doing so for the simple reason that it will make most of its sales and profits there. The two formats (all four, really) complement each other, not compete, and sales will continue to grow as a result.

As for no other company pursuing APS-C, I think Fuji is making a fairly good fist of it (as you appear to have noticed) and Nikon just released the D500. Who knows what Canon is thinking, but Sony may even decide to revisit APS-C, now they appear to be getting their ADHD under control. The Pentax offerings may not be unique (WR APS-C DSLRs), but they are desirable (value, ergonomics etc).
01-25-2016, 05:47 AM - 2 Likes   #79
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,185
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
Where does that say that Pentax isn't a pro level system? It says that Pentax isn't a complete APS-c based pro system. It says that Fuji is a completely APS-c based Pro system. It DOES NOT SAY that "Pentax IS NOT a Pro system."
Dude, you gotta chill. And you gotta look up the word "only" because when you say that Fuji is the only pro-level APS-C system you are inferring that other APS-C systems are not pro-level.

When originally asked to clarify your position, you listed fast Fuji primes as the reason that it is a pro-level system.

Additionally, you use the word "complete" in reference to your particular needs as a wedding photographer. You're just one type of pro photographer. There are others, and some of those others might judge Fuji as incomplete. Where, for example, are the tilt/shift lenses for architecture? And where are the long fast primes for certain types of sports shooting?

Your position may have shifted over the last few messages, but I'm not the only one that saw your original words and asked you to clarify. There's no need to get defensive, but there is a need to own your words and perhaps admit that you weren't clear earlier,

(Sorry to everyone else for derailing the thread. I'll refrain from commenting on this particular issue any further.)

01-25-2016, 06:02 AM   #80
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,828
Fuji is kill.
They don't even have [digital] FF or MF as an option.
[Stab in the heart]. How can any pro take X-mount seriously in 2016?
01-25-2016, 06:26 AM   #81
dlh
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Northern Piedmont of Virginia
Posts: 139
back to the pixel-shifting thing: the PF review on this topic said, "The implementation of the pixel-shifting system in the K-3 II seems to require the use of a tripod and involves the capture of four back-to-back images which are then synthesized in the camera or by post-processing software. Additional time will surely be required compared to conventional shooting, but we do not yet know exactly how the K-3 II will behave in its super-resolution mode (i.e. whether or not the shutter will stay open during the whole sequence). We will report on this as soon as we have the camera in our hands."

Read more at: How Pentax Pixel Shifting Works - Articles and Tips | PentaxForums.com

V6 of Silkypix provides a "demosaicing" function that purportedly provides the same or an equivalent function on raw data as a post-processing effect. The idea that a pixel or the light hitting a particular pixel could be physically shifted is absurd and false. What's really going on here is an interpolation on the data that creates the illusion of greater resolution, but it's done in software, not physically. That's like the difference between optical zoom and digital zoom. So why bother to pay extra for a camera that does raw data postprocessing as part of the camera's software package to accomplish something you can do in a computer later, if you decide that a particular picture needs it? The only advantage I can see is for people who want to use the camera as a point-and-shoot fully auto snapshot camera and want the best possible JPEG to result. The use of the Sony 23.22MP (the advertised 24 million pixels is a decimal number) actually provides very high resolution by today's standards, but pixel shifting only adds processing time between shots by my lights.
01-25-2016, 10:06 AM - 1 Like   #82
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eureka, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,972
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
The Fuji 35mm F2.0 is like shooting a Leica Summicron F2, it's that small, but mirrorless skews that as well
Wide angle mirrorless does have advantage when it comes to weight and size --- which is probably why we'll never see a Pentax DA 16 f1.4 or a DA 24 f1.4 (although we might see a DFA* 24 ~f1.8 for FF). Fast wide angle primes for DSLRs tend to run quite large and heavy. Even the APS-C stuff can be, relative to the Fuji fast wides, relatively heavy. The Samyang 16mm f2.0 weighs 583 grams (as opposed to the 375 grams for the Fuji lens). The DA 14 f2.8 weighs 420 grams, despite being two stops slower than the Fuji 16mm. A Pentax DA 16 f1.4 would simply be too big, heavy and expensive for Pentax ever to make.

To cover the fast wide angle need, it actually makes sense for Pentax to go with a bigger sensor. While it does add more weight, it's the more economical solution.

For those who appreciate and enjoy the (mostly) analogue interface of Fuji cameras and who also need fast wide angles, Fuji's a compelling choice. While I respect what Fuji has accomplished with their mirrorless APS-C system, their cameras and lenses just don't fit my shooting style. Per usual, YMMV.

QuoteOriginally posted by NZ_Ross Quote
With regard to the fast 24mm - have you ever looked at the Pentax FA*24/2. I know they are only available second hand, but they are AF, reasonably fast, not too heavy, and well regarded optically.
If I was ever talked into doing weddings, that's the lens I would resort to for wide angle prime work. While in terms of technical specs, it may not be the equal of the Fuji 23 f1.4, the Pentax lens renders beautifully.
01-26-2016, 01:54 PM   #83
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 615
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Dude, you gotta chill. And you gotta look up the word "only" because when you say that Fuji is the only pro-level APS-C system you are inferring that other APS-C systems are not pro-level.

When originally asked to clarify your position, you listed fast Fuji primes as the reason that it is a pro-level system.

Additionally, you use the word "complete" in reference to your particular needs as a wedding photographer. You're just one type of pro photographer. There are others, and some of those others might judge Fuji as incomplete. Where, for example, are the tilt/shift lenses for architecture? And where are the long fast primes for certain types of sports shooting?

Your position may have shifted over the last few messages, but I'm not the only one that saw your original words and asked you to clarify. There's no need to get defensive, but there is a need to own your words and perhaps admit that you weren't clear earlier,

(Sorry to everyone else for derailing the thread. I'll refrain from commenting on this particular issue any further.)


Fuji is the only completely aps-c pro level system. It's not the only pro level system that has aps-c cameras. As far as "chilling" is concerned, why do have the need to "derail the thread?" in your own words. That's NOT chill.


I own what I said. I DON'T OWN your INFERENCES regarding what I said.




I did apologize if you mis-understood me, but for some reason you just want to keep hammering away. So I guess this is more just a personal beef you have with me and my opinions? PM me and we can get as personal as you'd like.

01-26-2016, 02:03 PM - 2 Likes   #84
Imp
Pentaxian
Imp's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Washington, DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,344
Ed, relax. The way you respond to people is probably half the reason behind the way they respond to you. John said he's done, leave it.
01-26-2016, 06:48 PM   #85
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 615
QuoteOriginally posted by Imp Quote
Ed, relax. The way you respond to people is probably half the reason behind the way they respond to you. John said he's done, leave it.


If John's done, then so am I... if...


And, I do know I tend to flick back that which is being flicked at me. Civil comments ALWAYS get civil replies. Veiled attacks get called out. I do have ZERO tolerance for people "sniping at the pro." Sorry. I have paid 30 years of dues to get to where I am at. I NEVER said I was perfect, but if you ask me and I don't know, I will tell you I don't know. And if I can help you in any way, I will.

---------- Post added 01-26-16 at 06:54 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by NZ_Ross Quote
Hi Ed, I have read the comments here, and also enjoy watching the videos. I have been following this debate with interest - not that I am a professional photographer

With regard to the fast 24mm - have you ever looked at the Pentax FA*24/2. I know they are only available second hand, but they are AF, reasonably fast, not too heavy, and well regarded optically. They can be obtained on the used market, and come up regularly enough here on the PF Marketplace.

Cheers

Ross

Hi Ross, Yes the 24mm 2.0 is/was a beauty. I used to have one back in the days of film. Loved it!


But just from a theoretical standpoint, Pentax is never going to grow their client base if that client base has to dip into the used market just to fulfill needs. I can make the Pentax system work for my needs, but the measure of the health of the system is how does it fulfill those needs with the current offerings.


On the other hand, sacrifices have to be made if you want to shoot any brand. Some bigger than others depending on the brand.


From a practical standpoint, I think I'm going to experiment with the 21mm 3.2 LTD. The color and contrast are superb, and most of the wedding shots are outdoors in daylight anyway. Reception shots require flash, so as long as I have f5.6. I'm thinking the F3.2 is a on paper limitation, but those thoughts need to be tested. Soon enough, we just booked a full scale big time wedding for April 30th.

---------- Post added 01-26-16 at 07:01 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Fuji is kill.
They don't even have [digital] FF or MF as an option.
[Stab in the heart]. How can any pro take X-mount seriously in 2016?


The list is long, distinguished, and financially well off. Zack Arias, Kevin Mullins, David Hobby, Colin Nichols, Damien Lovegrove, to name 5 off the top of my head.


Just google: "Fuji wedding photographer" and see what you get. LOL!


Don't Google: "Pentax wedding photographer." It's depressing.

---------- Post added 01-26-16 at 07:10 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by dlh Quote
back to the pixel-shifting thing: the PF review on this topic said, "The implementation of the pixel-shifting system in the K-3 II seems to require the use of a tripod and involves the capture of four back-to-back images which are then synthesized in the camera or by post-processing software. Additional time will surely be required compared to conventional shooting, but we do not yet know exactly how the K-3 II will behave in its super-resolution mode (i.e. whether or not the shutter will stay open during the whole sequence). We will report on this as soon as we have the camera in our hands."

Read more at: How Pentax Pixel Shifting Works - Articles and Tips | PentaxForums.com

V6 of Silkypix provides a "demosaicing" function that purportedly provides the same or an equivalent function on raw data as a post-processing effect. The idea that a pixel or the light hitting a particular pixel could be physically shifted is absurd and false. What's really going on here is an interpolation on the data that creates the illusion of greater resolution, but it's done in software, not physically. That's like the difference between optical zoom and digital zoom. So why bother to pay extra for a camera that does raw data postprocessing as part of the camera's software package to accomplish something you can do in a computer later, if you decide that a particular picture needs it? The only advantage I can see is for people who want to use the camera as a point-and-shoot fully auto snapshot camera and want the best possible JPEG to result. The use of the Sony 23.22MP (the advertised 24 million pixels is a decimal number) actually provides very high resolution by today's standards, but pixel shifting only adds processing time between shots by my lights.


I'm not sure that's correct. The camera is taking 4 physical exposures and the software is combining all three colors for each pixel site somewhat like a foveon sensor. There then is an interpolation, but it's not an extrapolation from 1 image, or 1 color per pixel, it's an interpolation from 4 images and contains 3 colors per pixel instead of 1 with gaps.


According to imaging resources test, it bumps the K3II resolution up to D810 standards, or 36mp FF resolution. (But doesn't even come close to 645D resolution!) With the right subject matter, the K3II pixel shift is AMAZING!


The real question seems to be a tendency for false color with any kind of movement. I have not seen it, but I have seen posts that show it.

Last edited by Qwntm; 01-26-2016 at 07:52 PM.
01-26-2016, 07:18 PM   #86
Kiwi Pentaxian
NZ_Ross's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Timaru
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,261
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
On the other hand, sacrifices have to be made if you want to shoot any brand. Some bigger than others depending on the brand.
Hi Ed, I think that is very true. Not just Pentax either - although of course we are very aware of the issues there.

Pro and high-end enthusiast Nikon APS-C users have been griping for ages about the lack of a D300s replacement body and now it is finally here (years late) with the D500. Same with the fast 58mm Nikon had - they were harder to find than hens teeth and fetched ridiculous prices on the second hand market, as they were considered one of the best Nikon lenses for astrophotography, last year - after a very long wait of non availability there is a new model.

I am prepared to wait and see with Pentax - I am sure once they get the FF camera on the market they will follow up with lenses and lens refreshes. It is the logical thing to do, relatively easy for them, and an avenue for considerable revenue. I am quietly confident there will be some pleasant surprises on that front this year, including from third party manufacturers.

QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
From a practical standpoint, I think I'm going to experiment with the 21mm 3.2 LTD. The color and contrast are superb, and most of the wedding shots are outdoors in daylight anyway. Reception shots require flash, so as long as I have f5.6. I'm thinking the F3.2 is a on paper limitation, but those thoughts need to be tested. Soon enough, we just booked a full scale big time wedding for April 30th.
I have an smc version of the 21 Ltd. I have found it is a very good lens for landscapes with water bodies - as it seems to render the water's blues very nicely in its own unique way. I will be interested to hear how it goes for weddings. Of course the DA 20-40 (which I also have - relatively small and light, and WR) is f2.8 at 20mm - that might also be an alternative for wide and fast. It is half the weight of the DA*16-50 and a lot less bulky too.

Well done on the wedding booking, always good to have some decent sized jobs ahead of you

Cheers

Ross
01-27-2016, 05:26 AM   #87
Pentaxian
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 634
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
So what we are going to do this summer is shoot the Pentax's with the 16-50 and 50-135, and shoot the Fuji's with the fast primes. Who knows, this may work out to be the best of both worlds.
Let me see if I understood correctly. You sold your Canon and Nikon gear because it was to expensive and heavy and because you wanted to spend as little money as you can for an I quote you "a no brainer camera - Pentax K-3 II" which ended up being 2 systems (Fuji and Pentax).

Sure, I understand your arguments about the weight and compactness you get with Fuji or Pentax, but if you're shooting with 2 cameras then one of them is always around your neck ready to be used when the circumstances require a fast prime, or a zoom (it's not like you can say to the guest at a wedding wait for a minute guys, I have to go and pick the other camera wich has a zoom on it to take this shot). So, in practice it's not more weight on you with one Fuji and one Pentax camera than let's say with a Nikon D750 and a 24-70mm f2.8?

Again, I have nothing with you in particular, I just want to understand your logic on this. Because for example you can buy a Nikon D750 with 3 primes (or 2 zooms - 24-70mm and 70-200mm) and a D7100 as a back-up with less money that you spend on both systems (Pentax and Fuji) and have no worries on a weeding with high iso, fast low light focussing, etc., or with dynamic range when you're shooting landscape.

It's not more complicated to work with 2 cameras from 2 different systems on a weeding than with 1 camera with a 24-70mm and a long prime (or a 70-200mm) on the second body for candid shots? Not to mention that you have invested much more money into 2 systems (lenses, flashes, accessories).

And please don't get defensive again when (if) you will answer to my question.

LE. Before saying that full frame is heavy, please take a look at D750 with primes vs. K-3 II with primes

D750 (750g) / K-3 II (800g)
28mm f1.8G (330g) / DA 21mm f3.2 (119g)
50mm f1.4G (290g) / FA 31mm f1.8 (345g)
85mm f1.8G (350g) / DA* 55mm f1.4 (375g)
24-70mm f2.8 VR (1070g) / DA*16-50mm f2.8 (544g)

For the last combo (Pentax with 16-50mm f2.8 vs Nikon with 24-70mm) you gain 476g which I agree it's important if you shoot for 8-12 hours. But if you shoot with primes there is no advantage in weight between those two cameras.

In the end I can agree with you on some points, but not when comes to spending money wisely.

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 01-27-2016 at 07:58 AM.
01-27-2016, 12:04 PM   #88
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 615
QuoteOriginally posted by Dan Rentea Quote
Let me see if I understood correctly. You sold your Canon and Nikon gear because it was to expensive and heavy and because you wanted to spend as little money as you can for an I quote you "a no brainer camera - Pentax K-3 II" which ended up being 2 systems (Fuji and Pentax).

Sure, I understand your arguments about the weight and compactness you get with Fuji or Pentax, but if you're shooting with 2 cameras then one of them is always around your neck ready to be used when the circumstances require a fast prime, or a zoom (it's not like you can say to the guest at a wedding wait for a minute guys, I have to go and pick the other camera wich has a zoom on it to take this shot). So, in practice it's not more weight on you with one Fuji and one Pentax camera than let's say with a Nikon D750 and a 24-70mm f2.8?

Again, I have nothing with you in particular, I just want to understand your logic on this. Because for example you can buy a Nikon D750 with 3 primes (or 2 zooms - 24-70mm and 70-200mm) and a D7100 as a back-up with less money that you spend on both systems (Pentax and Fuji) and have no worries on a weeding with high iso, fast low light focussing, etc., or with dynamic range when you're shooting landscape.

It's not more complicated to work with 2 cameras from 2 different systems on a weeding than with 1 camera with a 24-70mm and a long prime (or a 70-200mm) on the second body for candid shots? Not to mention that you have invested much more money into 2 systems (lenses, flashes, accessories).

And please don't get defensive again when (if) you will answer to my question.

LE. Before saying that full frame is heavy, please take a look at D750 with primes vs. K-3 II with primes

D750 (750g) / K-3 II (800g)
28mm f1.8G (330g) / DA 21mm f3.2 (119g)
50mm f1.4G (290g) / FA 31mm f1.8 (345g)
85mm f1.8G (350g) / DA* 55mm f1.4 (375g)
24-70mm f2.8 VR (1070g) / DA*16-50mm f2.8 (544g)

For the last combo (Pentax with 16-50mm f2.8 vs Nikon with 24-70mm) you gain 476g which I agree it's important if you shoot for 8-12 hours. But if you shoot with primes there is no advantage in weight between those two cameras.

In the end I can agree with you on some points, but not when comes to spending money wisely.





People only get defensive when they get attacked. Your comments and questions here are very civil, I'll be happy to take the time to respond.


Lets look at a few alternate choices and factor in price as well (USD, I have no idea and suspect things are very different in Bucharest, but I'm in the USA so I have to go with that.)


D750 (750g) / K-3 II (800g) D750 = $2000.00 K3II = $729 Savings: $1,270.00 (or a FREE Fuji X-T1 w/ 18-55mm lens) Weight is 50g in Nikon's favor.


28mm f1.8G (330g) / DA 21mm f3.2 (119g) 28G = $700.00 21mm = $360 Savings: $240.00 weight - 211g Pentax

50mm f1.4G (290g) / FA 31mm f1.8 (345g) I would not choose the 31mm 1.8 LTD, I'd go with the FA 35mm 2.0 at 195g and $329


So 50 1.4 G = $450 Pentax 35 F2.0 = $329 Savings $130.00 and -95g pentax

85mm f1.8G (350g) / DA* 55mm f1.4 (375g) 85G = $476 55mm 1.4 = $600 $125 over for Pentax, but I'm not sure I'd choose that either and might go with the 70 LTD etc.

24-70mm f2.8 VR (1070g) / DA*16-50mm f2.8 (544g) 24-70 VR = $2400.00 (ouch) 16-50 = $700 Savings $1800


I would also add that the 540g weight savings here is a critical weight savings for wedding photography. If your going to shoot the zooms, then you are going to shoot these lenses 70%+ of the time. You will be carrying around that extra 540g most of the day



Back up D7200 = $1100 Back up K3 = $600 Savings = $500.00


So totals: Dollars saved with Pentax: $3815.00 and weight savings about 750g


I agree the weight savings is not that great, though 750g is a bit.


But as for spending money wisely, $3815.00 difference speaks for itself. Again, there might not be that big a savings in Bucharest, and then I can see where you would think otherwise.


Essentially because I shoot Pentax instead of Nikon I can have a free Fuji system too.


(The Fuji system is half the weight of the Pentax system, and comparably priced to the Pentax system, so Nikon is real big loser there.)
01-27-2016, 12:14 PM   #89
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 877
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
People only get defensive when they get attacked. Your comments and questions here are very civil, I'll be happy to take the time to respond.


Lets look at a few alternate choices and factor in price as well (USD, I have no idea and suspect things are very different in Bucharest, but I'm in the USA so I have to go with that.)


D750 (750g) / K-3 II (800g) D750 = $2000.00 K3II = $729 Savings: $1,270.00 (or a FREE Fuji X-T1 w/ 18-55mm lens) Weight is 50g in Nikon's favor.


28mm f1.8G (330g) / DA 21mm f3.2 (119g) 28G = $700.00 21mm = $360 Savings: $240.00 weight - 211g Pentax

50mm f1.4G (290g) / FA 31mm f1.8 (345g) I would not choose the 31mm 1.8 LTD, I'd go with the FA 35mm 2.0 at 195g and $329


So 50 1.4 G = $450 Pentax 35 F2.0 = $329 Savings $130.00 and -95g pentax

85mm f1.8G (350g) / DA* 55mm f1.4 (375g) 85G = $476 55mm 1.4 = $600 $125 over for Pentax, but I'm not sure I'd choose that either and might go with the 70 LTD etc.

24-70mm f2.8 VR (1070g) / DA*16-50mm f2.8 (544g) 24-70 VR = $2400.00 (ouch) 16-50 = $700 Savings $1800


I would also add that the 540g weight savings here is a critical weight savings for wedding photography. If your going to shoot the zooms, then you are going to shoot these lenses 70%+ of the time. You will be carrying around that extra 540g most of the day



Back up D7200 = $1100 Back up K3 = $600 Savings = $500.00


So totals: Dollars saved with Pentax: $3815.00 and weight savings about 750g


I agree the weight savings is not that great, though 750g is a bit.


But as for spending money wisely, $3815.00 difference speaks for itself. Again, there might not be that big a savings in Bucharest, and then I can see where you would think otherwise.


Essentially because I shoot Pentax instead of Nikon I can have a free Fuji system too.


(The Fuji system is half the weight of the Pentax system, and comparably priced to the Pentax system, so Nikon is real big loser there.)
Can't argue with your math. Your numbers speak for themselves. As far as Pentax vs. Nikon, I have shot my K3 head-to-head with a friend's Nikon 7100. The image quality is so close that you have to pixel pip to see any differences. As far as compactness, the nod goes to Pentax with a more compact body and very compact (and might I add very capable) prime lenses.

So congratulations on a free Fuji system! I have seen images shot with the Fuji and I have shot with it at trade shows. It is a serious system and just as capable as the rest of the big boys.
01-27-2016, 12:35 PM   #90
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 615
QuoteOriginally posted by btnapa Quote
Can't argue with your math. Your numbers speak for themselves. As far as Pentax vs. Nikon, I have shot my K3 head-to-head with a friend's Nikon 7100. The image quality is so close that you have to pixel pip to see any differences. As far as compactness, the nod goes to Pentax with a more compact body and very compact (and might I add very capable) prime lenses.

So congratulations on a free Fuji system! I have seen images shot with the Fuji and I have shot with it at trade shows. It is a serious system and just as capable as the rest of the big boys.


Dan got me curious... the money savings isn't as great, but the great appeal of the Fuji system is the weight and size differences:


X-T1 390g


X-E2s 300g


23 1.4 300g


35 2.0 170g


56 1.2 405g


16-55 2.8 655g


2220g TOTAL for 2 camera bodies and 4 lenses!!! That's 400g heavier than a D750 with a 24-70 zoom!


Or, the D750 and 24-70 VR is about 1800g compared to an X-T1 with 16-55 2.8 which is 1045 or 35g lighter than JUST the Nikkor 24-70mm VR by itself, no camera attached!!! But, the K-3 with 16-50 is only 1344g. So 300g heavier than the Fuji, and 450g lighter than the Nikon.


Monetarily it's harder to compare. If your saying the 23 1.4 is equal to the Nikkor 35mm 1.4 then it's a $1000 savings. Same with the 56 1.2. But one could argue that the 56 1.2 is really more equal to an 85 1.8.


Either way, an X-T1 body is $1000 and a D750 is $2000.


Only the person spending the money can decide if the lenses are a value or not.


On a personal note, I do find the Pentax and Fuji systems complement each other extremely well. I would rather have a Pentax and a Fuji system than just a Nikon system, and it's about equal money. I feel I have a lot more versatility with Pentax and Fuji than with just Nikon. Fuji for the Fast primes and small discrete lightweight kit and Pentax for when I want to shoot a DSLR. I will be shooting both this summer at the weddings and I'm pretty sure a clear winner will emerge (just in terms of my preference, not a "winner" in terms of which is better.)


But again, you can have a Pentax AND a Fuji system, or just a Nikon system for about the same money. Either way, as long as your happy, you can't go wrong!

Last edited by Qwntm; 01-27-2016 at 01:25 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aps-c, argument, camera, cameras, dslr, f1.2, f2.0, f2.8, f4, ff, files, frame, fuji, gear, k-3, k3, k3ii, lens, lenses, pentax, pentax k-3, pentax k-3ii, pixel, pixel shift, service, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Night Who needs a full moon anyways? ZombieArmy Post Your Photos! 2 09-05-2014 12:40 AM
Full Frame Not Practical in the Long Run? DarCam Pentax Full Frame 579 07-12-2014 11:04 AM
Misc Hungry ? Not me anymore ... daacon Post Your Photos! 2 08-04-2010 05:16 AM
Why not a Full frame with two APC sensors madhurvyas General Talk 23 02-16-2010 11:24 PM
Those who are not remembered anymore.... mulder Post Your Photos! 2 06-17-2007 08:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:50 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top