[jatrax]

So I was bored today (raining) and idly browsing that internet thingy. I got to wondering what it would cost to swap out my Pentax K-1II system for a (very roughly) equivalent mirrorless system. This is just for fun, I've no intention of switching, just curious. And the lenses do not quite line up one to one anyway. I used the Canon R5 as the closest to the K-1II. I'm not sure that is right camera to compare but its what I used. And I selected RF lenses that were as close to my modern Pentax ones as I could get. Some were "better" / "faster" some were slower, some just different.

Total to get me roughly to the system I have in the bag now? $17,200 before tax. And that doesn't count the dozens of vintage K-mount lenses I have that I use occasionally. Just the modern ones I use all the time.

I'm not trying to say anything in particular. You could use EF lenses and the adapter and get a lower number. Or try a different brand or camera model. It doesn't really matter. I guess the only point is that jumping ship (if you are heavily invested in any system) is very expensive.

[dbs]

What if's add up to alot don't they

[luftfluss]

I do the same thing sometimes, although I don't necessarily try to match my Pentax setup. I try to come up with a kit I would be happy with - at least initially.

Current MILC interests for me are the Nikon Z6 and Fuji X-T4.

Current Pentax bodies are K-3 II and K-70.

I think it's difficult to truly judge a kit until you've lived with it for a while.

Tangentially related, a couple weeks ago I was on a Nikon forum, and several users were discussing how they sold their D500's to finance a new Z. Some of them regretted the loss of the D500 so much they either re-purchased it or were seriously considering doing so. The primary complaint was that when photographing wildlife with their Z cameras, they felt a lack of engagement with their subject, due to the EVF.

[Imp]

Pentax K-1 ii; Pentax 15-30; Pentax 24-70; Pentax * 70-200; comes to about $6,022 right now B&H prices new.


Sony a7R ii (a 42MP 2015 camera); Tamron 17-28 2.8; Tamron 28-75 2.8; Sony GM 70-200 2.8; comes to about $5,800 right now B&H prices new.


Another comparison, for what it's worth (very little).

The primary complaint was that when photographing wildlife with their Z cameras, they felt a lack of engagement with their subject, due to the EVF.

Fascinating. As someone who's never used a pro-grade EVF I'm very curious to hear about people's user experiences.

[dbs]

Hi Imp
Why not add the Sony brand lenses instead of Tamrons ?

B&H Sony !6 - 35 usd $2,098 and the 27 - 70 also usd $ 2,098 and 70 - 200 usd $2,398 a bit more and comparing OEM to OEM ---- $ 6 596
A fairer compare ..... no

[luftfluss]

Fascinating. As someone who's never used a pro-grade EVF I'm very curious to hear about people's user experiences.

Yeah, the discussion led to some serious contemplation on my part. There was a time when I used my K-01 with a Hoodman Loupe style EVF viewer for wildlife photos, and I don't recall feeling a "lack of engagement" with the animal. Going back further, I shot with Pentaxes that had the small pentamirror OVF's, and I don't remember having that sentiment, either. But maybe that's because I didn't know any better.

Anyway, it's fun to consider alternative kits, because it lets me know a) what's interesting (to me) out there and b) sometimes makes me a bit more appreciative of what I've already got, on both an emotional and intellectual level.

[pres589]

Lately I've been toying with the idea of getting a used Fuji X-E2 or -E2s and the Samyang 12mm f2, one of the 25mm f1.8's (seems like there are a few different designs available) and a 55 to 58mm vintage SLR prime. I've wondered if that would get me shooting more often again and then I realize that it's really doubtful that a change like this would get me out with a camera more. I think I'd have about $500 to $600 in the whole setup so not very expensive... but rather expensive for gear that may not get a lot of use.

[dbs]

Playing mind gymnastics with your gear just illustrates how much you have spent over the journey ....... scary is'nt it

[Imp]

Hi Imp
Why not add the Sony brand lenses instead of Tamrons ?

B&H Sony !6 - 35 usd $2,098 and the 27 - 70 also usd $ 2,098 and 70 - 200 usd $2,398 a bit more and comparing OEM to OEM ---- $ 6 596
A fairer compare ..... no

We can feel free to make any comparisons we want of course

My rationale was that the Tamron lenses for Sony e-mount are very highly regarded and so I would count them as 'professional' but not 'star level' lenses, much like the Tamron designed Pentax 15-30 and Pentax 24-70 lenses, also very highly regarded. I considered those a fair comparison. But then I chose the Sony GM to compare with the Pentax DA* 70-200, as those are considered the 'top line' OEM lenses. Pentax does not (yet) have a complete * lineup of D-FA zooms.

Just my two cents

[surfar]

Fascinating. As someone who's never used a pro-grade EVF I'm very curious to hear about people's user experiences.

Theres plenty of variation, the latest "pro" grade is a lot higher than bygone "pro" grade.

Dslr Pros when they have used the 3.69 dot Evfs have said things like as good as Ovf or better than Ofv.Others just don't like any variation.

3.69 is third on the rung at the moment, bettered by the 5.76 present in Sony A7R4 and Canon R5( can't remember what the top Nikon has)

Two Sony$ have the 9.25 top dog.

I own 2 Fujis with 3.69,perfectly good compared to any Ovf ive used.I also like the 2.36 4th tier which is pretty standard for any non top of range mirrorless.

[dbs]

We can feel free to make any comparisons we want of course

My rationale was that the Tamron lenses for Sony e-mount are very highly regarded and so I would count them as 'professional' but not 'star level' lenses, much like the Tamron designed Pentax 15-30 and Pentax 24-70 lenses, also very highly regarded. I considered those a fair comparison. But then I chose the Sony GM to compare with the Pentax DA* 70-200, as those are considered the 'top line' OEM lenses. Pentax does not (yet) have a complete * lineup of D-FA zooms.

Just my rationale in this particular comparison.

No worries

I just thought the only similarity of the 15 - 30 and 24 -70 was the range, Pentax then made it there own

[surfar]

Sony GM 70-200 2.8;

You could have easily included the Tamron 70-180f2.8 which is superior to the GM(which is being updated soonish, I'm led to believe)

The 180 sizes up well to that focus breathing Pentax monster!

[dshfoto]

Wanting to get some experience with a EFV I got a Fuji X-E3 for $200 and a Zeiss 32mm lens for $300. Also a couple of adapters so I can use Nikon and Pentax K lenses. Just starting to get some shooting in.

[luftfluss]

I own 2 Fujis with 3.69,perfectly good compared to any Ovf ive used.I also like the 2.36 4th tier which is pretty standard for any non top of range mirrorless.

I had the X-T20 with the 2.36M and found it far inferior to my K-70's OVF. The 3.69M might be OK, hence my interest in the Z6 and X-T4.

[surfar]

Wanting to get some experience with a EFV I got a Fuji X-E3 for $200

Thats a bargain for that camera, well done.Unfortunately,that Evf isn't great.I'd call it passable(only just).Its too small, otherwise that body process excellent images.

---------- Post added 02-19-21 at 03:39 PM ----------

I had the X-T20 with the 2.36M and found it far inferior to my K-70's OVF. The 3.69M might be OK, hence my interest in the Z6 and X-T4.

You may find 3.69 inferior as well?...The Nikon has more magnicication than the Fujis(from memory).

You may be interested in XT3 or XH1 both have the 3.69(I have them) and are a lot cheeper than the T4.T4 has better Ibis than H1 and is a generation more advanced.The T4 has a better battery,flippy screen and Ibis over the T3.H1 is similar in size to a K3 but a touch lighter, its got the sweetest shutter action of any camera which is a big reason the owners love it.