[crossover37]

I'm not losing too much switching systems but I plan on getting a Sigma 50mm f1.4 for my 5D, it's comparable to the Canon 50mm f1.2 L. My brother in law has the cheap 50mm f1.8 and the pictures look good, can't wait to try the much superior Sigma.

[Emacs]

In the photography club I'm in there are a few people with 5Dmk2s that are happy to let us try it and I have to agree they have a great look to them, ISO isn't everything. If I had the money to afford a 5dmk2 with L lenses I would get them, for now I will stick with the cheaper Pentax, so if you can afford it, why not?

Too often people will blame lack of skill as a reason for changing camera... if the camera body is really insignificant then why doesn't everybody just buy the cheapest camera they can get? The camera does make a difference.

It is he sensor size that makes the difference in this case. I thought about switching to Canon FF, but there's no FA limiteds for this system, and I don't find their L primes being a good replacement: the rendition of Ltd's is way better than anything of Canon primes one.

[alvarossorio]

With a "full-frame" body it is easier to get 3D effect than with a cropped sensor one.

Have you ever tried any Pentax 50 f1.2 ?

There are two versions, SMC (also known as K) and SMC-A. They are about 350 $ and 500$. Both are manual focus though.

You can get very nice 3D effect when taking photographs of people.

Also Pentax SMC 28 f2 is wonderful for that effect, but this lens is rare and expensive.

You have a very nice camera. If the only reason to switch to 5D is the 3D effect, It would be worth that you tried a 50 1.2 on your camera first.

[CDW]

FWIW, I just recently decided to sell my Canon systems, which included a 5Dmk2, and purchase a 645d and a K-5. My intent was to use the K-5 as a backup for more casual shooting situations where the 645d would be overkill. The other reason for the K-5 was because of my interest in nightscapes and night sky photography.

I received my K-5 and a 16-45 F4 a couple of days ago. I can say this with certainty, the K-5 has cleaner shadow detail and more dynamic range than a 5Dmk2. As someone else noted in a post, he spent lots of time post processing 5Dmk2 files as did I. I was really never totally pleased with the look of the files as they opened up in Light Room. The opposite seems to be true for the K-5. My test shots yesterday required nothing for my eyes more than a slight bit of sharpening and level corrections.

I'm of the firm opinion that in experienced hands a K-5 with good glass will deliver results that more than compare with a 5Dmk2. But I will say that Canon service is terrific. Hopefully, I will get equally good service from Pentax.

[crossover37]

UPDATE! Ok guys I got my Canon 5D with a Canon EF 50mm F1.4...All I have to say is I made the right decision FOR ME. I still miss Pentax's menu system and all the handy controls on the K-5 but because I do portraits, I like the extra wide view and the ability to get closer to get a shallower depth of field. The screen on the 5D is pretty sucky and is hard to get used to. It doesn't have as many handy options as the K-5 either but you gotta sacrifice some things. Anyways, I'll miss Pentax and it's great products. Thanks for all the advice and info.

[RyanW]

I received my K-5 and a 16-45 F4 a couple of days ago. I can say this with certainty, the K-5 has cleaner shadow detail and more dynamic range than a 5Dmk2.

The files are more maleable that seems sure. Though general detail is greater with the 5DmkII

All sizes | Pentax K5 vs Canon 5D II - Collage 03 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[crunch01]

I shoot portraits and use off camera flash and I had the Kx, K7, and now the K5. I have a Pentax Tamron 28 - 75mm f2.8, Sigma 50-150mm f2.8, and a 50mm f1.4. I love the K5 but I can't seem to get over the fact that when I see images my brother in law takes with his 5D and 50mm 1.8 (a $125 lens brand new), I see a specific look to his images, almost like a film movie look. I saw a picture he took of me yesterday and straight out of camera on his screen the image had that look I like. I also like that he can get closer to get shallower depth of field by scooting up since there's no crop factor. The K5 is awesome and I love it but it seems the images don't have the look I'm referring to...maybe I'm crazy but I see it with his 5D and it's not the editing since I saw an image he took straight out of camera on his camera screen.

I would sell the K5 and lenses and would get a 5D (not Mark II) a Canon 50mm f1.4, a Tamron 17-50mm, and maybe a Tamron 70-200mm.

Let me know what you all think. Thanks.

nick software, Flamming pair, zenoflex ect... PS Filters that produce film grain and effects.. you can choose the type and era of slide,trans or negative film .. ie.. Fuji velvia 50 ... it's a shame if you used raw and PS it would have worked

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

UPDATE! Ok guys I got my Canon 5D with a Canon EF 50mm F1.4...All I have to say is I made the right decision FOR ME. I still miss Pentax's menu system and all the handy controls on the K-5 but because I do portraits, I like the extra wide view and the ability to get closer to get a shallower depth of field. The screen on the 5D is pretty sucky and is hard to get used to. It doesn't have as many handy options as the K-5 either but you gotta sacrifice some things. Anyways, I'll miss Pentax and it's great products. Thanks for all the advice and info.

Coming from a discussion where some people were saying that shooting at f/1.4 is crazy because DOF is too thin, this sounds intriguing.

I also remember people clamoring that getting closer to your subject with lead to feature distortion. Funny how all these arguments don't seem to matter once you get down to actually using a camera.

Don't mind me. Just thinking out loud.

[Jessesdad]

I have a K-r and a 550d. I love my K-r but the Canon 50mm 1.8 lens is an absolute wonder. If Pentax could produce something similar for the price I'd be in heaven.

[ChopperCharles]

I like those shots, but I'm not sure it's the body. My Tamron lens produces some very nice shots with a similar look and feel. Check it:





Charles.