[tbirdas]

Oh no, not another "Pentax or CaNikon" post!
No, it's not another one. I have a K-x with a small collection of lenses and have been fairly happy with the results so far. Of course, my toddlers running around can sometimes be too much for it, even with the Tamron 28-75 or FA 50/1.4. So the thoughts creep up, what if...? I don't think I would ever get out of Pentax (for many reasons, not the point of this post, not least of which the "cult" feeling), but how do I improve AF performance? K-5 is pricey right now (maybe not as much in a year's time), but it might also make sense to have a dual system just for some occasions.
So my questions is, what do people think who have a dual system now? What is the role of their Pentax camera vs their CaNikon?
For instance, one thought might be to keep the K-x only with primes (small portable package, 35 DAL, 50, 70) and use lets say a T2i with a reasonably fast Tamron or Sigma zoom for other occasions where fast AF may be more important (including some sports). Or is the K-5 SO much better in AF that it's worth investing there (and obviously staying with one set of lenses)?
To muddle the waters more, it would be easy to try out a T2i through Costco/Sams for a period of time and return it if needed.
Thanks

[Itai]

Having multiple cameras is like having multiple lenses, you have to decide which ones you take with you and how much weight you are willing to carry. Presently I have several cameras of different brands all serving some need I had at the time I bought them. If I had to buy everything TODAY, the choice may be slightly different.

- Pentax K-5 for everything, K-7 as a backup. Actually that was 2 K-7s up to last week
Full collection of lenses for Pentax, from ultra-wide (12-24mm) to telephoto (60-250mm F/4), including primes.

- Canon EOS 40D for sports with a 28-105mm and 70-200mm F/4. Those are the only lenses I need
for sports. The continuous auto-focus (AF-C) speed is very good on advanced Canon DSLRs, while
I find that on the Pentax DSLRs, it seems to always try to catch-up with action. Nikon has excellent 3D
tracking AF but I did find Canon's AF-C faster the last time I checked.

- Fuji Finepix S100FS as a daily camera and extra backup. This is the one that's in my work bag, just in
case. It has a mechanical 28-400mm lens which means it covers most situations that require to quickly
get the camera out of work-bag. It has full manual controls too and image quality is the best in its class.

- Fuji Finepix F200 EXR as a family camera. This one is always on a table or counter and ready to be used
at any moment. Most family pictures outside of events (birthdays, parties, etc) are taken with this one. It is
completely unintrusive, fits in a pocket and ANYONE can use it. My wife and daughter feel at easy with this,
no so much with the DSLR.

- Konica-Minolta DImage A2. Memorabilia from the days when cameras where well-designed. Stays in the
closet most of the time

Important consideration:
- Only get a second system if it has a benefit over your existing system. That could be quality, speed, choice
of optics, size or convenience. Anything that matters to you.
- If I did wildlife, I would feel seriously limited by the lack of very long Pentax lenses. Sigma lenses would be
an option but IF I was regularly going on safaris and the like, I'd go with another brand.
- Oh Pentax Tilt/Shift where art thou?

Hope this help!

- Itai

[luke0622]

i don't know about Canon, Canon does not produced the best natural colors, especially red... I'd go with Nikon if you really want to, but so far, only up-to-date Nikon out there is D7000, then you should just got for the K-5....

[Urkeldaedalus]

Oh no, not another "Pentax or CaNikon" post!
No, it's not another one. I have a K-x with a small collection of lenses and have been fairly happy with the results so far. Of course, my toddlers running around can sometimes be too much for it, even with the Tamron 28-75 or FA 50/1.4. So the thoughts creep up, what if...? I don't think I would ever get out of Pentax (for many reasons, not the point of this post, not least of which the "cult" feeling), but how do I improve AF performance? K-5 is pricey right now (maybe not as much in a year's time), but it might also make sense to have a dual system just for some occasions.
So my questions is, what do people think who have a dual system now? What is the role of their Pentax camera vs their CaNikon?
For instance, one thought might be to keep the K-x only with primes (small portable package, 35 DAL, 50, 70) and use lets say a T2i with a reasonably fast Tamron or Sigma zoom for other occasions where fast AF may be more important (including some sports). Or is the K-5 SO much better in AF that it's worth investing there (and obviously staying with one set of lenses)?
To muddle the waters more, it would be easy to try out a T2i through Costco/Sams for a period of time and return it if needed.
Thanks

Another option would be for you to switch to the Pentax K-r, which supposedly has improved auto focus especially with the continuous autofocus that would help you keep up with your toddlers. The K-5 would also help you for sure with this, but you might want to wait until the price comes down a bit.

I think dual systems are perfectly alright in theory, it's just that they cost quite a bit when it comes down to duplicating everything.

Or is the K-5 SO much better in AF that it's worth investing there (and obviously staying with one set of lenses)?
To muddle the waters more, it would be easy to try out a T2i through Costco/Sams for a period of time and return it if needed.
Thanks

I still haven't seen many actual reviews comparing K-5 to say 7D or 1Dm4. Everyone here says it is blazing fast but they are simply comparing it to their own experience with other Pentax's.

Like Itai's lineup, a 70-200 is a fantastic lens. If you would be willing to spend the 2k on a 2.8 mark II,you would be buying a flawless lens, it is simply incredible. I am going to put down the money for a F/4 version soon, and make my way up there. Also if you want to get into massize primes, say a 300 or 400, they are not crazy expensive like everyone things. A 400 f/5.6 goes for $1,200 and a 300 f/4 goes for the same price. Stick Canon's amazing TC's and you've got many other focal lengths too. I would go ahead and try out the T2i. See if you are comfortable with it. Also don't judge the IQ on the kit lens, that 18mp sensor is quite amazing, and will outresolve a lot of lenses. If you are happy with the body, try renting a few lenses and see what it can really do.

And as far as what luke0622 said, completely ignore that. It's called shooting in RAW or even shooting in JPEG and adjusting in camera settings.

I don't know about you, but this red/pink looks pretty good to me:

[Ubuntu_user]

Wouldn't a K-r be better than T2i? That way you'd be able to use all your pentax lenses... And I hear that K-r AF speed is better than K-7's.

[audiobomber]

Another option would be for you to switch to the Pentax K-r, which supposedly has improved auto focus especially with the continuous autofocus that would help you keep up with your toddlers. The K-5 would also help you for sure with this, but you might want to wait until the price comes down a bit.

Agree on the K-5, but the AF on the K-r seems to be equal to the K-x. See this thread:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/122336-labo-fnac-tests-k...ml?src=subsct2

[einstrigger]

Anyhow, I kinda shoot two systems...but not really. Does a compact Canon S95 count? I have the S95 because I like that it fits in a pocket and does well in low light (for a point and shoot). My main reason though is because I scuba dive and it's hard to find underwater housings for cameras without paying an arm and a leg.

But I digress, back to your other questions, I don't believe you'd see a dramatic improvement in AF if you're thinking about a T2i. I used to own one before buying a K-x. If you want improved AF for sports and wild kids, you should probably opt for any of the Canon D-series (40D-50D). The T2i is still an entry level consumer camera where aside from video, doesn't really outshine the 40D or 50D IMO.

[tbirdas]

I would also think that the K-r is likely not much of an upgrade from the k-x in terms of AF. The crucial question is whether K-5 would be equal to Canon/Nikon in terms of AF or not.

[luke0622]

oh yeah, RAYLON? Go Canon!!!!!! how we loooooooove the canon systems. Why not give a try any models below 7D under artificial lights? find out yourself...

oh yeah, RAYLON? Go Canon!!!!!! how we loooooooove the canon systems. Why not give a try any models below 7D under artificial lights? find out yourself...

I have. It's called shooting in raw or adjusting white balance. Also every lens has a different color rendition. So maybe you were seeing what a bad lens does for colors?

[Flickeroo]

I shoot Pentax, and it was my first DSLR.
My wife shoots Olympus.

She might switch over to Pentax because of my own lens collection. Zuiko glass is awesome but if you want fast glass get ready to pay dearly for it (even the kit lenses are very nice. I might sound blasphemous here but I think their kit lenses 14-45 and 40-150 are better than Pentax's 18-55 - 50-200 combo. I can't judge the 55-300 though).

She does use some of my M42 lenses on it, but manual lenses tend to annoy her.

I guess we both didn't want to follow the usual Canons or Nikons.

I have to say I prefer Olys for Macro (specially that 50 f2, an incredible lens).
The liveview is more responsive than my K-x, and dare I say the in-body stabilisation might be better.

Otherwise, there's such a large difference in image quality (but her camera is also two-three years older) that we use mine whenever we can.

[deadwolfbones]

I shoot three systems, though I basically treat one of them as a p&s: Pentax K-5, Nikon D700, Panasonic GF-1.

I tend to use the K-5 for everyday, all-purpose shooting. The Nikon I use when I need the fastest/most accurate possible AF, the shallowest possible DoF, and the ultimate IQ in general (though the K-5 isn't far behind). The GF-1 (w/ 20/1.7) I use for travelling light, or times when I don't want to advertise that I'm carrying camera gear.

The K-5's AF capability is very close to the D700's, but not quite there yet, IMO. A lot of this has to do with Nikon's AF-S lenses, but the screwdrive lenses are still faster and somewhat more accurate with the D700. But hey, I'd hope so given its price/pedigree.

[Yugosaki]

I run Pentax K-7 as my main and Sony NEX-3 as my backup.

Primary reason is that the Sony is small enough for me to shove in a coat pocket.

However, I plan to get a PK to E mount adapter and use my pentax lenses on the NEX (nearly all my lenses are old manual ones anyway) so other than the 16mm sony kit lens, I'm using the same mount on all my lenses anyway.

That could change if the rumors about a Pentax mirrorless camera turn out to be true.

[Abstract]

i don't know about Canon, Canon does not produced the best natural colors, especially red... I'd go with Nikon if you really want to, but so far, only up-to-date Nikon out there is D7000, then you should just got for the K-5....

Agreed, Canon does not produce very good natural colors...and to the other guy...I don't wanna adjust every damn photo I take because the cameras color system is crap...Seems like something avoidable by choosing another brand. Also yes I do shoot in raw but...most of my photos rarely need adjustment and if they do it was most likely my fault or I am going for a certain effect.

I have no brand loyalty btw, Nikon is good, Pentax is good, Olympus is good, etc...I just always disliked canons because of the color output.