[L33tGreg]

with all due respect, I am not going to ask you not to go to D300 route, I am just wondering how I could get a better flash system than PTTL... These are samples of flash photos taken from a wedding party (against a bright background) - k-7 and FA31 ltd.

What flash setup were you using (flash a modifiers?)? Just curious....

[jsherman999]

Hi all,

has anybody compared these two bodies with similar lenses?

At the moment I'm happy camper with K-7 and FA*24 and DA*55 and occasional FA100. But there are few niggles that make me think of switching. So I was thinking of Nikon 300D + AF24/2.8D + AF50/1.4G (the 100 or so would possibly come later but more likely it would transform to AF85/1.8D.

So any opinions on direct comparison of K-7 to 300D?
AFAIK, 300 has marginally lower resolution, but according to DPR it has better per pixel detail/sharpness and cleaner ISO 800+.
On down side, Nikon lacks SR (my is ON all the time so I'd probably notice it's missing especially with shots like this:
FA100/2.8 wide open, ISO1000, 1/15s
)
and I'm not sure about WR...

so any opinions?

Thanks

As others have said, D300 would bring:

1) Much better AF-lock speed, especially in low light and tracking
2) Better high-ISO performance, at least a stop better than the K-7
3) Better flash system
4) Access to a whole new area of LBA

Drawbacks:

1) It's still aps-c, and still an 'older' sensor (but a very good one, better than the K-7 for low-light)
2) The Pentax lenses you'd be swapping are better than the Nikon ones you listed as replacements (24 2.8D, 50 1.4)
3) Not as WR
4) Body is bigger (but those particular lenses are smaller - size maybe a wash.)

The FA* 24 f/2 is a great lens, and is a stop faster, but it's big and I don't think it locks focus very quickly on that K-7, relative to the Nikon 24 2.8 on D300. If you're missing shots because of that AF lag, it doesn't matter much if the FA* is a bit better - you still missed the shot.

If you're not AF-constrained or ISO constrained, it doesn't make as much sense to switch IMO.

.

[Rondec]

I'd just start saving for the K5. I don't think the difference between the D300 and the K7 as far as high iso is that much if you are shooting RAW. A stop is probably over stating it. As others have mentioned, the D7000 is a significant jump from the D300 or the K7 with regard to noise and dynamic range and if you wanted to go with Nikon, that would certainly be the obvious choice.

The thing is that you have some excellent lenses and are used to the Pentax ergonomics/system. You would slide into the K5 more easily without problem.

[axl]

As others have said, D300 would bring:

1) Much better AF-lock speed, especially in low light and tracking
2) Better high-ISO performance, at least a stop better than the K-7
3) Better flash system
4) Access to a whole new area of LBA

1 - would be greatly appreciated
2 - would be greatly appreciated - I'm shooting a lot of indoors and artificial light, I don't like flash too much so the high ISO is important
3 - if needed would be really appreciated
4 - not too interested...

Drawbacks:

1) It's still aps-c, and still an 'older' sensor (but a very good one, better than the K-7 for low-light)
2) The Pentax lenses you'd be swapping are better than the Nikon ones you listed as replacements (24 2.8D, 50 1.4)
3) Not as WR
4) Body is bigger (but those particular lenses are smaller - size maybe a wash.)

1 - I don't mind too much, especially as with the right lenses the upgrade path is open to FF
2 - that is a CONCERN. I know that with FA*24 and DA*55 I'm pretty much in top flight with regards to lenses although I thought 50/1.4G is a good performer
3 - somewhat of a concern
4 - I loved the size of K10D with DBG2 so I don't thing 300D would be too big for me

The FA* 24 f/2 is a great lens, and is a stop faster, but it's big and I don't think it locks focus very quickly on that K-7, relative to the Nikon 24 2.8 on D300. If you're missing shots because of that AF lag, it doesn't matter much if the FA* is a bit better - you still missed the shot.

The FA* actually focuses very fast on K-7. It spanks DA*55 by mile and beats all FA ltds in AF speed. I'd say it even beat my FA100! Problem is not speed but accuracy! There is quite a bit of hit and miss going on...

If you're not AF-constrained or ISO constrained, it doesn't make as much sense to switch IMO.

.

The AF is an issue to certain degree. The speed is OK with FA lenses and bit on the slow side with DA*. Accuracy is good with DA* (although in high contrast scene it's a struggle) and bit of a hit and miss with FA lenses. ISO is of concern. Frankly, I don't think ISO800 on K-7 is better than on K10D. If so, then only marginally. ISO 1250 and 1600 are better on K-7 but nowhere near my wife's K-x and that's a real PITA. ISO3200 is just bad compared to K-x....

[richard balonglong]

Hmmm... All of them are right. And to add, I have a friend who's my partner whenever doing wedding photography and other photography projects, and he uses the D300 and mine is K-7. Looking at our images, we always shot in RAW, there's only tiny difference in ISO if you pixel peep. If you have proper lighting, even at the highest ISO, there's no problem.
But, what I envy on Nikon's is the costumer service and some of the fine Nikon lenses. But my friend also have an envy on Pentax especially with my K-7. He loves the feel and built of the K-7, it's silent shutter, the size, the camera's many features, loves the rubber grip of Pentax because Nikon's rubber grip bulges and expands and peels off. That's what happened to a lot of Nikon cameras, the rubber expands over time. The rubber grip and terminal rubber covers of my friend's D300 expanded, and the rubber cover for the terminal became useless, so it's now prone to water entering those terminals. Not like Pentax's rubber grip and covers that are tough at any temperature.
Anyway, my advice for you is take more time on your K-7 and save more cash for upgrade. Upgrade to K-5 or if you want Nikon's system then choose D7000 instead of D300. Cheers! =)

[axl]

I'd just start saving for the K5. I don't think the difference between the D300 and the K7 as far as high iso is that much if you are shooting RAW. A stop is probably over stating it. As others have mentioned, the D7000 is a significant jump from the D300 or the K7 with regard to noise and dynamic range and if you wanted to go with Nikon, that would certainly be the obvious choice.

D7000 and K-5 are pretty much out of budget. At least until Christmas and by then I might as well be gray haired....with 3 months old in the house and one salary only I don't really have £900 to splash. That's why I was looking into D300. Selling my K mount system (with exception of K-x and 31ltd for my Mrs) would allow me to get an improvement on my existing system (with regards to ISO, AF and flash capabilities) without spending an extra penny!

It does somewhat puzzle me when people say D300 doesn't have so much better high ISO then K-7. Doesn't D300 use the same Sony CMOS as K-x?!? If so then that difference on it's own is well worth the switch IMO!

The thing is that you have some excellent lenses and are used to the Pentax ergonomics/system. You would slide into the K5 more easily without problem.

Yes I know. And thank you. I'm very familiar with Pentax system and know nearly nothing of Nikon lens system. I don't expect many folks here to tell me Nikon glass is better than SMC let's be real.... and I realize that Nikon 24/1.4G is as much out of reach as K-5 or D7000.

I like Pentax ergonomics but that's not all and it' snot something one can't get used to...

[Eruditass]

Nikon's flash system is light years ahead of Pentax's.

I'd bite my lip and save up for the K5 Axl. You might get lucky and one appear on here or locally or SRS etc. If both the K7 and K5 depreciate at the same rate then you won't be losing anything by hanging on until you can afford it.

About the flash system, I was really considering switching because of it until I learned of the strobist world, where everyone uses manual flash, so brand doesn't matter.

With weddings, there is some advantage for on the fly adjustment of CLS. With that, many strobists still go all manual flash once they set up their off camera flashes to bounce how they want it, taking advantage of inverse square and large light sources. Then they can still adjust DoF given their ISO latitude. Also, TTL/CLS and auto-thyristor will be fooled by different backgrounds and clothes colors (white dress, black tux), giving incorrect subject lighting.

Flickr: Discussing Manual flash at weddings? in Strobist.com
Flickr: Discussing Manual flash at weddings? in Wedding Photography

That said, there are many other Nikon system advantages. Their AF is more sophisticated with respect to tweaks. On ergonomics I like the D300s's bigger body on some days, but not others. I like Pentax's controls better, except for the 4-way controller / AF select issue.. But for many other reasons, I'm staying here.

[Raffwal]

To me it sounds like you won't be happy until you've given Nikon a try. So what the heck, go for it. Obviously some aspects in Nikon are better while other are the same or worse.

How about loaning Nikon gear from somebody to try before making any permanent decisions? Someone who wants to give Pentax a try in exchange?

[sjwaldron]

It does somewhat puzzle me when people say D300 doesn't have so much better high ISO then K-7. Doesn't D300 use the same Sony CMOS as K-x?!? If so then that difference on it's own is well worth the switch IMO!

I know some people don't like DXOMark, but it is a good general reference for sensor ability.

Overall score:
K-7: 61
D300: 67
K-x: 72

Dynamic Range:
K-7: 10.6 evs
D300: 12 evs
K-x: 12.5 evs

Sports low light ISO rating:
K-7: 536 ISO
D300: 679 ISO
K-x: 811 ISO

[Rondec]

D7000 and K-5 are pretty much out of budget. At least until Christmas and by then I might as well be gray haired....with 3 months old in the house and one salary only I don't really have £900 to splash. That's why I was looking into D300. Selling my K mount system (with exception of K-x and 31ltd for my Mrs) would allow me to get an improvement on my existing system (with regards to ISO, AF and flash capabilities) without spending an extra penny!

It does somewhat puzzle me when people say D300 doesn't have so much better high ISO then K-7. Doesn't D300 use the same Sony CMOS as K-x?!? If so then that difference on it's own is well worth the switch IMO!



Yes I know. And thank you. I'm very familiar with Pentax system and know nearly nothing of Nikon lens system. I don't expect many folks here to tell me Nikon glass is better than SMC let's be real.... and I realize that Nikon 24/1.4G is as much out of reach as K-5 or D7000.

I like Pentax ergonomics but that's not all and it' snot something one can't get used to...

I think many people base high iso evaluation on jpegs and the K7 has a lousy jpeg engine at high iso, but in RAW there isn't that much difference.

[aleonx3]

What flash setup were you using (flash a modifiers?)? Just curious....

Nothing fancy, just Stofen Omni diffuser and white (black back) card on the back side (as courtesy not to flash people behind me); bounce flash to ceiling and front with manual and pttl flash to avoid clipping highlights. With flash photography, there are infinitely possibilities with bounce flash angle and ambient/flash light mix - manual/pttl flash provides better control.

[Arpe]

You may like to read this:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/145270-pentax-k-7-...view-sort.html

You may also like to get this thread heading corrected, the 300D is an old Canon DSLR.

[yeatzee]

You may like to read this:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/145270-pentax-k-7-...view-sort.html

You may also like to get this thread heading corrected, the 300D is an old Canon DSLR.

When I first saw the title I was like, Really??? hahahaha

I say go for it, you only live once and if its something you think you'll regret not trying than thats the wrong route IMO.

[twitch]

Isn't the D300s a newer version of the D300? Different sensors right?

[Frogfish]

D7000 and K-5 are pretty much out of budget. At least until Christmas and by then I might as well be gray haired....with 3 months old in the house and one salary only I don't really have £900 to splash.

See Eruditass' post. Now we understand the issue (a 3 month old) then I think by far the easiest, quickest and probably best way to improve the shots of your baby is to start bouncing a manual flash (e.g. Yongnuo YN560) off the ceilings/walls and maybe adding a Stofen diffuser or similar) - total cost ca. US$100 / £60. That's going to beat the pants off of the very small increase in ISO/DR from the 300D over the K7 for ambient light shooting. I'm certain you have a good flash already though ?

YONGNUO, photographic equipment, camera accessories, flash light, camera remote control, speedlite, photo equipment, LED photo light, flash trigger, camera wireless remote control, TTL cord

About the flash system, I was really considering switching because of it until I learned of the strobist world, where everyone uses manual flash, so brand doesn't matter.

With weddings, there is some advantage for on the fly adjustment of CLS. With that, many strobists still go all manual flash once they set up their off camera flashes to bounce how they want it, taking advantage of inverse square and large light sources. Then they can still adjust DoF given their ISO latitude. Also, TTL/CLS and auto-thyristor will be fooled by different backgrounds and clothes colors (white dress, black tux), giving incorrect subject lighting.

Flickr: Discussing Manual flash at weddings? in Strobist.com
Flickr: Discussing Manual flash at weddings? in Wedding Photography

Great post in regards to helping Axl achieve the improvement he requires.

To me it sounds like you won't be happy until you've given Nikon a try.

I think Axl has convinced himself he would be better off switching and is looking for some moral support I know the feeling, I have convinced myself a D700 would give me something APS-C can not