Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-05-2010, 04:33 AM   #46
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,954
The one thing that Canon has on Pentax is that they have cheap lenses. Not necessarily good lenses, but cheap lenses that they sell for cheap. I shot with a woman who was using the Canon 50mm f1.8 a couple of weekends ago and I was not really impressed with the lens. Looking at her photos, the lens really seemed to need to get to f3.5 before it really sharpened up. It also isn't particularly well built.

The Canon 50mm f1.4 is quite a bit nicer, but it is also the same price as the Pentax 50mm f1.4.

I think it is worth sitting down and designing yourself an eventual "system." What lenses in a perfect world you would own, flashes, etc. Look at the costs. Don't worry about camera bodies much at all. There really isn't a lot of difference between APS-C cameras at a similar price point between makers. When you are making your list, don't fudge either. If you think eventually you will want Canon L lenses, stick them in there, because eventually you will be upgrading. I think you will be surprised at the cost of the comparative systems.

11-05-2010, 07:46 AM   #47
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Jyväskylä, Finland
Posts: 16
I'm a Pentax user from 2007 (who previously owned a K100D and then K10D) and I just recently sold my K-7 kit (including Tamron 17-50/2.8, FA 35/2, FA 50/1.4, 18-55 WR and several MF lenses) and bought a Nikon D700. I lost some money in the progress, but I don't think I lost *that* much, as I didn't "buy everything back" - mainly I'm missing a good standard zoom like the Tamron, but OTOH now I have pretty nice and inexpensive wide angle primes. (I now have AF Nikkors 24/2.8, 35/2.0D, 50/1.8 and 70-210/4-5.6).

There are of course upsides and downsides to each system, but the main two reasons for change were my disappointment to Pentax's AF system, and also that I grew fond of traditional full frame focal lenghts and the ability to control DoF better when using my Pentax film equipment (which I still have and use).

In a list form, some upsides to this change...
  • Nikon's 51 point AF system is so much faster and more reliable than anything I've seen (and definitely anything that Pentax has ever done) with all its tracking features etc, that this change alone justifies the investment for me. Also, even lenses using the screw-drive from the camera body focus faster and a lot less noisy than any of my Pentax AF lenses.
  • Many lenses, at least primes, are cheaper and more plentiful in the second hand market.
  • There is a lot more choice with lenses.
  • DoF control is better
  • Low light performance and dynamic range difference is huge (though apparently the K-5 is a different beast)
  • I can use the aperture ring (without stop down metering) if I want to
  • Some UI things (double click trashcan to remove, setting/tuning of WB and image quality without menu) are nicer in Nikon
Downsides I've noticed
  • The D700 (and also the APS-C model D300) is too large for my hands, K-7 felt a lot more comfortable. OTOH D700 is pretty nice to use even with gloves on...
  • Lack of in-body image stabilization (alleviated by better high ISO performance though)
  • SMC really seems to be better - at least the Nikkor 50/1.8 flares a lot easier than my Pentax 50mm's ever did (though comparing FF and APS-C cameras in this is not completely fair)
  • Good "standard zooms", esp. with IS, seem to be really expensive.
  • MLU implementation with Nikon is stupid
  • No video
  • Some UI things (always-on electronic level, ability to turn on auto-ISO without menues) are nicer in Pentax

And the neutral... menu systems and the user interface are pretty good and nicely configurable in both, it didn't feel like too big of a hassle to relearn some things.

But I will stick with my Pentax film gear and stuff I have there (MX, ME, Super-A and several lenses), and I'm keeping close eye on what Pentax is doing. But I do strongly feel that Pentax needs to completely revamp its AF system at least in its higher end models to stay competetive. Just faster doesn't cut it, it needs to be more accurate and able to track the subject. This is my opinion, please don't be offended if it doesn't match yours.
11-05-2010, 08:24 AM   #48
Raylon
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by bobmaxja Quote
I read in a lot of place that the 7D have a lot of AF issue
A 7D with AF issues is pretty rare. Even so it would still focus faster and better than with my K200. Most AF issues are people who dont understand the AF system. It is quite in depth with so much customizability that people think its the camera, not them.

Also abou the viewfinder. Speaking only of coming from a k200 and a kx, YES, the viewfinder is huge and bright! I havent had enough time to directly compare the k7 and 7d, but knowing exactly what you are going to see in your picture when viewing through the viewfinder is nice.
11-05-2010, 09:09 AM   #49
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by Deniz Quote
P.S: Actually there is one more issue. Why the hell Pentax don't/wouldn't produce a f1.8/1.7 50mm lens with a reasonable price!
If you are going "semi-pro" I would think you could pony up the cash for the 50mm 1.4 or 55* 1.4 .

The K5 is semi-pro and certainly a true pro could make money with it. 'Nuff said.

11-05-2010, 09:10 AM   #50
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Boulder, CO
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by oppositz Quote
I'd been watching PentaxForums forever in hope of a hint that a FF is on the way.

The K-5 looks FANTASTIC however I worry that I will feel I settled by not going for what I've wanted over the last several years, and that is a full frame camera.

Considering all the factors in purchasing a Nikon FF (D800 in spring), starting all over with lenses, getting squat for my K10D and half dozen lenses, the weight of a larger camera, the thought of hiking rugged terrain with $5,000+ in my hands makes me question if leaving Pentax might be a good decision.

I love my K10D. It was such a well thought out design and user interface. It still takes great pictures. (Me being the weak link in that process
Why do you need/want FF?
11-05-2010, 09:22 AM   #51
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 99
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote

If I were you, I'd rather worry why the hell Canon doesn't produce a 35mm Ltd.
I don't quite get what you are trying to say with this statement. Canon has an affordable 35mm F2 and a 35mm F1.4 L.

Canon EF 35mm f/1.4 USM L - Review / Test Report - Sample Images & Verdict
11-05-2010, 10:39 AM   #52
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,511
QuoteOriginally posted by Deniz Quote
Now, the K-5 is out. Yet another superb but small camera and with a price you can buy a Canon 7D instead, well, let's say I'm having a serious dilemma for my future investments..
Yeah super hard choice:

DxOMark - Compare sensors

Still having doubts? :P
11-05-2010, 10:45 AM   #53
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by WerTicus Quote
Yeah super hard choice:

DxOMark - Compare sensors

Still having doubts? :P
While I personally favor the K5 to the 7D (I pre-ordered a K5 and have had it since the day it came out 2 weeks ago), if the end user was more interested in better AF and longer lenses, then the DXO marks of the K5 beating the 7D are probably not the deciding factor.

11-05-2010, 10:53 AM   #54
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,509
QuoteOriginally posted by Conan Quote
I don't quite get what you are trying to say with this statement. Canon has an affordable 35mm F2 and a 35mm F1.4 L.
But are any of these "an optical paragon"?
11-05-2010, 12:06 PM   #55
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,423
QuoteOriginally posted by Raylon Quote
A 7D with AF issues is pretty rare. Even so it would still focus faster and better than with my K200. Most AF issues are people who dont understand the AF system. It is quite in depth with so much customizability that people think its the camera, not them.

Also abou the viewfinder. Speaking only of coming from a k200 and a kx, YES, the viewfinder is huge and bright! I havent had enough time to directly compare the k7 and 7d, but knowing exactly what you are going to see in your picture when viewing through the viewfinder is nice.
The K200D is an oldish entry level camera; would anyone expect it to be on pair with the 7D, for both AF or the viewfinder? Of course not.
The K-5's viewfinder is (at least on paper) similar with the 7d's one. 100% coverage and slightly lower magnification, but compensated by the larger sensor. But huge? No way, take a look at (e.g.) the 645D, if you want to see a real viewfinder! (or at least an old, pre-AF era camera like our LX/ME (Super)/MX...)
11-05-2010, 01:23 PM   #56
Raylon
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
The K200D is an oldish entry level camera; would anyone expect it to be on pair with the 7D, for both AF or the viewfinder? Of course not.
The K-5's viewfinder is (at least on paper) similar with the 7d's one. 100% coverage and slightly lower magnification, but compensated by the larger sensor. But huge? No way, take a look at (e.g.) the 645D, if you want to see a real viewfinder! (or at least an old, pre-AF era camera like our LX/ME (Super)/MX...)
Holy cow all I said was compared to the Kx and K200 the 7D has a HUGE and BRIGHT viewfinder. Not sure why you are trying to prove me wrong or something.

And to the person pointing at DxO scores: Have the K-5 and K20 print out 8x11 pictures of the same thing. Will you be able to tell a difference? Doubt it. For most people the performance of nearly any modern SLR will be plenty.
11-05-2010, 01:28 PM   #57
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Raylon Quote
And to the person pointing at DxO scores: Have the K-5 and K20 print out 8x11 pictures of the same thing. Will you be able to tell a difference? Doubt it. For most people the performance of nearly any modern SLR will be plenty.
You're right, most modern DSLRs are plenty for most people, myself included.

I personally bought the K5 because I was looking for a camera that did well at high-ISO, but that was still fairly compact. It suited me perfectly and I am very happy with it.

If I shot sports or lots of action and/or wanted a better selection when it came to long lenses and flashes, I would have bought a 7D (or D700 or 5DMkII or whatever else suited my needs best).

That's why it's nice that there are so many options out there as there is bound to be one that best suits everyone's individual needs.
11-05-2010, 01:35 PM   #58
Raylon
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
You're right, most modern DSLRs are plenty for most people, myself included.

I personally bought the K5 because I was looking for a camera that did well at high-ISO, but that was still fairly compact. It suited me perfectly and I am very happy with it.

If I shot sports or lots of action and/or wanted a better selection when it came to long lenses and flashes, I would have bought a 7D (or D700 or 5DMkII or whatever else suited my needs best).

That's why it's nice that there are so many options out there as there is bound to be one that best suits everyone's individual needs.

Yep exactly. If you want a High ISO beast in a small form, the K-5 will be unbeatable for a while to come. If I had the money I would most certainly pick a K-5 up and put a 18-135 on it and it would be an amazing thing to take hiking: small and WR. Also I wouldn't mind using some nice old MF lenses that pentax has to offer.

But like you said, I wanted long lenses. And what can Pentax off for that? Well, nothing really. They have the 200 2.8, but with a lens like the Canon 70-200 F/2.8 IS available, it's not a hard choice, especially with Canon manufacturing lenses as long as you really could dream of.
11-05-2010, 02:10 PM   #59
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sweden, Umea
Posts: 869
or the 300/4 or the 600/4

You could go with the 60-250/4, seeing that the high iso preformance you dont realy need to go f/2.8 all the time
11-05-2010, 02:21 PM   #60
Raylon
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by melander Quote
or the 300/4 or the 600/4

You could go with the 60-250/4, seeing that the high iso preformance you dont realy need to go f/2.8 all the time
Finding a 600 would be a chore. And they are very expensive. Also I don't think the 60-250 could match performance of the 70-200 2.8. It is a nearly flawless lens. Also f/stops do more than let light in. 70-200 is also used as a portrait lens because the bokeh is amazing.
Closed Thread

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, dslr, k-x, pentax, photography, price, review
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sad but true, quitting Pentax jah3 Pentax DSLR Discussion 101 09-20-2009 02:27 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:38 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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