Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-25-2012, 09:52 AM   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,152
QuoteOriginally posted by thebigcat Quote
I think you can get great pictures from any brand today.
If I was starting over I would probably go with Nikon.
I agree - the brand makes less difference than the photographer. We choose based on our impression of the usefulness of features - and our past history. If I hadn't had a bunch of Pentax-M lenses I would have the D7000.
For all the comparisons about features and how the controls are arranged - both can do a great job, and Nikon has the edge in breadth of offering.
I'm still just as happy with a basic film camera (Pentax SV or Nikon F) as with the latest digital stuff because I use them the same way. Digital is just more convenient much of the time, but all the frills are... just frills to me.

02-25-2012, 03:46 PM   #17
Pentaxian
Bob from Aus's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,086
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
As my photography studio instructor said.. find the lens you want..
I support this comment. Work out your realistic 10 year lens wish list between Nikon and pentax. Both the K5 and D7000 are fabulous cameras each with some additional strengths.

I started with the K10 when I went digitally and have hardly used my really old pentax lenses. I have slowly built my lens kit from rather cheap to a high quality kit. The lenses will keep going for 20 years, the K10 and K 20 I never use anymore.
02-26-2012, 07:58 AM   #18
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,933
I read a lot of cheap Samyang lenses are better than the low-end Nikon ones (which still cost twice as much as the samyang) and Samyang also makes lenses for Pentax. But I agree, Pentax generally doesn't have very many fast lenses (only the ones around 50mm and maybe some ancient ones at 135mm)
02-26-2012, 09:02 PM   #19
Veteran Member
kaiserz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NoVa The "burg"
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 899
Original Poster
Thanks for the response guys (: I'm still a pentaxian, But it did cross my mind to switch to nikon because they have more lens selection + they have an FF (which I don't think I can ever afford). But I'm so much inlove with the K7's ergo compared to the d7000 (I believe the K7 and k5's ergo are almost the same right?) The SR is going to be a BIG plus on the stuff that I'm going to do in the future. Also I think the size of the k5 is a big plus for me too, I mean I'm a tall guy and I have big hands but I still love how small the k7 is compare to the d7000 and it fits my hand just right specially with the battery grip. Anyway I can go on and on about how much I like the k5 more than the d7000 but the last issue for me "were" the lenses. And you guys are correct, I specially love that one comment about building your lens set-up to a 10 year thing or something. That means that I don't need to rush to get lenses, just try to get the best lenses that I can get, not the cheap ones that sucks.


Last edited by kaiserz; 02-26-2012 at 09:13 PM.
02-27-2012, 05:13 AM   #20
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,455
QuoteOriginally posted by elho_cid Quote
Nikons 85/1.8 has problems in PF department. DA70 is much better lens. It is not too slow. If you want fast long portrait Sigma 85/1,4 is available for both mounts.
K-5 is not only faster than D7000, but there are other advantages like composition adjustment which allows to achieve shift effects by moving the sensor. Or the astrotracer. Possiblity to save last jpg as RAW... and other.
Even without "investment" in Pentax gear I'd still choose K-5 again. Honestly.
+1 - The DA 70/2.4 is an exceptional lens especially when mounted on the K5.

Tom G
02-27-2012, 05:43 AM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hoek van Holland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,252
QuoteOriginally posted by kaiserz Quote
Thanks for the response guys (: I'm still a pentaxian, But it did cross my mind to switch to nikon because they have more lens selection + they have an FF (which I don't think I can ever afford). But I'm so much inlove with the K7's ergo compared to the d7000 (I believe the K7 and k5's ergo are almost the same right?) The SR is going to be a BIG plus on the stuff that I'm going to do in the future. Also I think the size of the k5 is a big plus for me too, I mean I'm a tall guy and I have big hands but I still love how small the k7 is compare to the d7000 and it fits my hand just right specially with the battery grip. Anyway I can go on and on about how much I like the k5 more than the d7000 but the last issue for me "were" the lenses. And you guys are correct, I specially love that one comment about building your lens set-up to a 10 year thing or something. That means that I don't need to rush to get lenses, just try to get the best lenses that I can get, not the cheap ones that sucks.

After reading your first post and now this one, i would like to ask a few questions.

You were thinking of switching because they have a bigger lens selection.
How many lenses do you need? What lenses does Nikon have that you cannot get either from Pentax or a third party?
You also menton the FF from Nikon, but say that you cannot afford one. Why go to Nikon because of that if you cannot afford it anyway?
And you say that you are in love with the ergonomics of the K-7.
So why go to a different body which you might hate ergonomically?

Also the 35 2.4 from pentax is an excelent lens, and you will not notice that it is slower than the Nikon 1.8, there is not much difference between them.

And I agree with the fact that you almost never shoot wide open anyway (my prefered aperture is 5.6, I just like the DOF and sharpness it gives most lenses). And with how little nose you get with the new camera's, super fast lenses are not necessary anymore (unless you want that shallow DOF for a reason)
02-27-2012, 07:29 AM   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,152
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
And I agree with the fact that you almost never shoot wide open anyway (my prefered aperture is 5.6, I just like the DOF and sharpness it gives most lenses). And with how little nose you get with the new camera's, super fast lenses are not necessary anymore (unless you want that shallow DOF for a reason)
That's a refreshing view considering the current fad for super thin DOF. Too many Leica shooters now talk about how they always shoot their lenses wide open, meaning the 50 f0.95 or 35 f1.2. I guess they like showing off an effect you can't get without spending $10K on a lens; but it sure gets boring after a while.
02-27-2012, 07:44 AM - 1 Like   #23
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,231
QuoteQuote:
That's a refreshing view considering the current fad for super thin DOF.
That's just disturbing....I recently read a pro advising not to shoot super thin DoF because foreground out of focus areas are irritating. Which was funny, because that's exactly what I think. I find it even more amusing that there would be a whole fad in photography based on the technical limitations of the lenses. There seems to be a lot of nostalgia for pictures from days when DoF was difficult to achieve because of slow emulsions and less than stellar lenses. Those technical limitations have somehow now become a standard. It's crazy but it's true... people now pay an arm and a leg to attain what people used to pay an arm and a leg to avoid...

02-27-2012, 09:31 AM   #24
Veteran Member
kaiserz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NoVa The "burg"
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 899
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
After reading your first post and now this one, i would like to ask a few questions.

You were thinking of switching because they have a bigger lens selection.
How many lenses do you need? What lenses does Nikon have that you cannot get either from Pentax or a third party?
You also menton the FF from Nikon, but say that you cannot afford one. Why go to Nikon because of that if you cannot afford it anyway?
And you say that you are in love with the ergonomics of the K-7.
So why go to a different body which you might hate ergonomically?

Also the 35 2.4 from pentax is an excelent lens, and you will not notice that it is slower than the Nikon 1.8, there is not much difference between them.

And I agree with the fact that you almost never shoot wide open anyway (my prefered aperture is 5.6, I just like the DOF and sharpness it gives most lenses). And with how little nose you get with the new camera's, super fast lenses are not necessary anymore (unless you want that shallow DOF for a reason)
Good day sir, to be honest I don't really know why you need to ask this questions. And what you will achieve if I answer them for you. I think they're kind of irrelevant because I believe that I already answered them on my first and second posts.

Q:
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
You were thinking of switching because they have a bigger lens selection. How many lenses do you need? What lenses does Nikon have that you cannot get either from Pentax or a third party?

A:
QuoteOriginally posted by kaiserz Quote
What nikon offers are what I think cheap "Fast " AF prime lenses like the 85mm 1.8, 50mm 1.8/1.4, 35mm 1.8, 28mm 2.8 or 20mm 2.8. while pentax doesn't really have any equivalent to an 85 1.8 the closest would be the FA77 limited which is super expensive.
And how many lenses do I need? I think it's not about the need. But it's about the "want".


Q:
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
You also menton the FF from Nikon, but say that you cannot afford one. Why go to Nikon because of that if you cannot afford it anyway?

A:
QuoteOriginally posted by kaiserz Quote
which I don't think I can ever afford
I think that's not even a question I just threw it out there, because the main reason why people switch is because pentax doesn't have any FF. And I'm not even planning on getting one thus making the FF issue irrelevant and therefore I didn't even mention it on my first post.

Q:
QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
And you say that you are in love with the ergonomics of the K-7. So why go to a different body which you might hate ergonomically?
A:
QuoteOriginally posted by kaiserz Quote
Also I think the size of the k5 is a big plus for me too, I mean I'm a tall guy and I have big hands but I still love how small the k7 is compare to the d7000 and it fits my hand just right specially with the battery grip. Anyway I can go on and on about how much I like the k5 more than the d7000
also
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
find the lens you want... then buy the camera that goes on it.
Also might hate ergonomically? I personally think that "Might" doesn't necessarily means that I am going to hate it. I did try my friend's d7k for a day and it's not really cumbersome, I just prefer the k7 because I've been using it for a while thus making me prefer it more cause I'm more familiar with it.

QuoteOriginally posted by Macario Quote
Also the 35 2.4 from pentax is an excelent lens, and you will not notice that it is slower than the Nikon 1.8, there is not much difference between them. And I agree with the fact that you almost never shoot wide open anyway (my prefered aperture is 5.6, I just like the DOF and sharpness it gives most lenses). And with how little nose you get with the new camera's, super fast lenses are not necessary anymore (unless you want that shallow DOF for a reason)

Thank you for the reassurance (: And good day to you sir.
02-27-2012, 11:21 AM   #25
Veteran Member
liukaitc's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,008
if you are ok with MF, there are plenty cheap and great glass out there but second hand.
for fast AF lens, da35 2.4 is one, but you are right it is not as fast as 1.8. the upcoming da50 1.8 is one. and the second hand fa50 1.4 is quite affordable, around 250.

In my opinion, Pentax zoom lens has better price than prime lens.

Last edited by liukaitc; 02-27-2012 at 03:10 PM.
02-27-2012, 01:56 PM - 2 Likes   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Sacramento, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 728
Pentax zooms are definitely cheaper than their Nikon counterparts, but therein is the difference between the two companies. Nikon maintains cropped and full frame cameras, so they tend to have a bias towards the latter in their offerings (14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 24, 35, 50, 85, 105, etc.). Where as Pentax is bias more towards APS-C and thus offering more lenses with focal lengths toward that end (16-50, 50-135, 60-250, 15, 21, 35, 40, 70, 100, etc.).

Unless you're shooting extreme telephoto (300mm+), I don't see how people can say the lens lineup "isn't there" for Pentax.

I do agree, the cheapy fast primes aren't as readily available, but it seems Pentax realizes this too. Hence, we now have the DA 35mm f2.4 (a tiny bit slower than Nikon's 35 f1.8, but it is cheaper too) and the upcoming DA 50mm f1.8. People say Pentax needs an 85mm f1.8, but I think the DA 70mm fills in that spot nicely and is actually affordable for what it is (about $545 new). The build quality is definitely a level up from the cheaper Nikon lens.

Anyhow, I've owned both the D7000 and K-5. Although there were many features that I liked about the D7000, I ended up with the K-5 for very specific reasons:

1. Ergonomics. I prefer the button placement (ISO, WB) on the K-5 in addition to the size and weight. I have small hands and the grip of the K-5 suited me more.
2. DNG file format. The files from the K-5 seemed more malleable to post-processing and I like the open format of DNG.
3. Pixel mapping. I had hot pixels in my original D7000 and had to mail it in for service.
4. Robust bracketing. 5 exposures, one press of the shutter.
5. Highlight protection. D7000 seemed to blow highlights more for me, so I typically set -1EV by default.
6. Weather Sealing. The K-5 is sealed better than the Nikon, which helped during a recent trip to Thailand with my DA* 16-50mm.

Of course, there were features that I preferred on the Nikon (i.e. flash support, "My Menu", 1/250 x-sync, SWM versus SDM, and tethering), but none of that has prevented me from achieving the photos I want with the K-5. Both are very capable cameras in the right hands, but that's the nature of the beast. Is it the right camera in your hands?
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!
camera, lenses, line-up, nikon, pentax, pentax help, photography, question, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
D7000 to K-5 wishlf Pentax K-5 72 01-25-2012 09:25 AM
Going from D7000 to K-5? bridgemix Pentax K-5 5 01-07-2012 02:23 PM
K-5 or d7000 ? harleynitelite Pentax K-5 78 02-16-2011 02:42 AM
k-5 vs D7000 Samantha Photographic Technique 2 10-30-2010 01:36 PM
From K-X to K-5... or D7000? jremick Pentax K-5 80 10-27-2010 01:09 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:48 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