[Falcons]

Switters, you still haven't answered your own question yet.
"is the extra expense of the 5D worth it?"

I am just a rank amateur hobbyist and Pentax makes fantastic cameras for me there is even a prominent fashion photographer on here and he seems very happy with his K10D and as far as I can tell seems to make a pretty good living from his Pentax camera.

Now you state you need faster AF & higher ISO for portraits and that the canon 5D meets your needs. Forgive me as I am just a rank amateur but I would have thought that for portraits a good studio lighting set up would be more important than lowlight AF. And the price of a K10D body and a couple of flashes and stands would come in about the same price as a Canon 5D.

What I also don't understand is if you are making money from portraits and the canon 5d will in your opinion be easier to use (and I assume you feel it will give superior results) then what are you waiting for, buy it, be happy and make lots of money.

The cost of your camera is irrelevant when it comes to making money - and it is not always the most expensive equipment that is best for the job either.

[kenyee]

for portraits a good studio lighting set up would be more important than lowlight AF.

I'm a bit puzzled by this as well. Unless you're doing unusually lighted portraits, I would have thought good lighting gear would be a higher priority.

Now if you had tried doing sports or birds in flight with the 5D or even a 40D and compared it to AF speed/lock and AF-C on the K10D, you would have been more impressed


ken

[baw]

I certainly wouldn't claim that my tests are scientific or comprehensive in nature, but I can tell you that the 5D focuses MUCH faster in low light, and locks onto focus much more reliably (even in areas with no contrast) than the K10D & FA Limiteds.

Did you actually compare images or were you just playing with the cameras?
Reason I ask is that the usual theory on Pentax focussing is that it's a bit slower because it is more precise. It is supposedly focussing, backing off and locking again "from the other side" to get more precise focus.

[TDN]

This isn't a Pentax or K10D bashing thread - quite the contrary. I've always been amazed at what an incredible value the K10D represents, and perhaps that is why it's so frequently compared with cameras that are three to four times more expensive.

Your remarks are definitely true.

And the reason the K10D is so frequently compared to the higher end 5D is because Pentax simply doesn't have a more "professional" (read: expensive) body yet

Hopefully this will change soon. Pentax is building a nice lineup. You need a strong base for a good top.

Anyway your remarks are true, but compared to the boatload of other features you get with the K10D for the price, they are forgivable

Tom

[TaoMaas]

Switters, you still haven't answered your own question yet.
"is the extra expense of the 5D worth it?"

What I also don't understand is if you are making money from portraits and the canon 5d will in your opinion be easier to use (and I assume you feel it will give superior results) then what are you waiting for, buy it, be happy and make lots of money.

The cost of your camera is irrelevant when it comes to making money - and it is not always the most expensive equipment that is best for the job either.

You're exactly right. If you're making money with your camera and you have a camera that won't do the job for you, CHANGE! Get a tool that works. Why even debate it?

[Jodokast96]

The FOV of a 35mm lens may have the reach of a 53.5mm lens, but it still behaves like a 35mm lens in that it's not a flat field of view like a 50mm lens.

This has me confused. Isn't it just the opposite? You have the FOV of a 50mm, but it's still only the reach of a 35mm?

[creampuff]

the bokeh/dof and hyperfocal distance are very different. the full frame will have a slightly larger dof but a tighter bokeh making the subject pop more.

the hyperfocal distance is just, handy. it's nearly double with the cropped setup.

You are incorrect. Assuming the same focal length lens is used, the FF has a narrower DOF than a cropped sensor.

[switters]

Switters, you still haven't answered your own question yet.
"is the extra expense of the 5D worth it?"

I am just a rank amateur hobbyist and Pentax makes fantastic cameras for me there is even a prominent fashion photographer on here and he seems very happy with his K10D and as far as I can tell seems to make a pretty good living from his Pentax camera.

Now you state you need faster AF & higher ISO for portraits and that the canon 5D meets your needs. Forgive me as I am just a rank amateur but I would have thought that for portraits a good studio lighting set up would be more important than lowlight AF. And the price of a K10D body and a couple of flashes and stands would come in about the same price as a Canon 5D.

What I also don't understand is if you are making money from portraits and the canon 5d will in your opinion be easier to use (and I assume you feel it will give superior results) then what are you waiting for, buy it, be happy and make lots of money.

The cost of your camera is irrelevant when it comes to making money - and it is not always the most expensive equipment that is best for the job either.

First of all, I never claimed that I was a professional portrait photographer, nor someone who shoots formal portraits. I'm just a hobbyist, although I occasionally do sell images to small publications.

I do occasionally use off-camera light when I'm setting up a more formal portrait, but often I prefer a more candid style with available light. The K10D is very good up to ISO 1600, but obviously lacks 3200 and 6400. That's a very real issue for me, because that's two more stops of light which can make the difference between a keeper at 1/125 and a shot that is too blurry at 1/30 (if the subject is moving a little bit).

Nor am I making any scientific claims. I'm merely relating my own personal experience comparing the K10D & 5D, and even that is only a comparison based on a few limited areas - high ISO performance and AF speed.

So, you're right: I haven't yet answered my own question about whether a 5D is worth 4x what a K10D is for me. I'm about 50/50 right now. I'm also curious about the Fuji S5 and Nikon D300 for my style of shooting. And of course there's the K20D announcement coming up, which should be very interesting. Probably the best bet would be for me to lay low and watch it all unfold for a bit, and then make a decision.

Yes, technology is always changing... but I'm just trying to find the right fit for my needs.

[Snowcat]

BTW, from my own experience, Fuji is extremely slow. I mean really really slow (in AF), often if focused longer then my Panasonic FZ-30 used to. So I guess it's not the camera for you, if you depend that much on AF speed.

[RiceHigh]

This isn't a Pentax or K10D bashing thread - quite the contrary.

Where have you seen any K10D bashing thread(s) anywhere? :-) I can only see K10D praising threads everywhere around on the net, in contrast.

I've always been amazed at what an incredible value the K10D represents, and perhaps that is why it's so frequently compared with cameras that are three to four times more expensive.

It is not about the price when people makes the comparison. They only compare a "top" DSLR, i.e, the K10D in the Pentax line, to another near the top camera, i.e., the 5D.

As a Pentax user, what we can choose for the "best" and the highest grade body in the lineup is undoubtedly the K10D.

Nevertheless, for some time I've had three major complaints that have significantly limited my satisfaction with this camera: slow AF speed in low light, limited high ISO capability, and a 1/180 sync speed. I'm well aware that these may not be issues for many others, but since I shoot a lot of portraits both indoors (in low light) and outdoors (in bright light, where 1/250 would be very welcome) they are very significant for me.

Me 2 for all the concerns you've made, also.

So, after a lot of wondering I decided to rent a 5D to get a sense of what the competition has to offer. As has been pointed out many times, it's not fair to compare the K10D with a 5D that is four times more expensive - but that's what I'm going to do. Why? Simply because that IS exactly what I'm doing in my decision making process... trying to decide whether a 5D is worth the extra expense to get the features I want.

Well, that's what I did. I borrowed a 5D to try, though. Everytime, I used the K10D and then a 5D and then a K10D and then a 5D, I thought with no doubt that the 5D must be a better or just much better camera.

Enough with the background. Here are my brief (unscientific) observations.
* camera feels very solid and well-built

Yes.

* AF is MUCH faster; frankly, I'm blown away at how much faster it focuses in low light than the K10D (note that I have mostly FA Limiteds, which are known to be slower than other lenses; I do have a Sigma 18-50 which is somewhat closer to what the 5D offers, but still significantly slower

Yes x 2. The FA Limited are particularly slow to focus, though, owing to the large span in the AF travelling distance of the lenses.

* high ISO performance is unparalleled (except for the D3 & 1D); low noise without sacrificing detail

Yes. In fact, the high ISO performance of the 5D surpasses the K100D, which is already superior to the K10.

* a 50mm lens on a full-frame camera has a significantly different FOV than a 50mm equivalent (i.e. 35mm) on a 1.5x APS-C; it's been a long time since I used a film camera, so I had forgotten this; I prefer the full-frame FOV

Yes x 3! There is always a good single reason for why Full Frame!

What it comes down to is that if it weren't for my FA Limiteds I'd sell the Pentax gear and pick up a 5D in a heartbeat. They can be found for about

Yes x 4 !! What I always have been dreaming everyday is that Pentax can have a Full Frame DSLR which meet the performance, accuracy and image quality of the 5D, so that I can use my excellent older Pentax glass on it. But the reality is that there is none and will not have one in the foreseeable near future! :-((

$1900 new and $1700 barely used right now, so it's not completely out of my range. But the Limited primes are the reason I chose Pentax in the first place, and I don't know if I'm ready to give them up.

I feel for you. Same here. But surprisingly, there are cheapo Canon glass like the toy lens 50mm/1.8 MkII that really performs and close to Limited glass optical quality in the Canon land.

I think I'll wait until late January to see what Pentax has up its sleeve before I make a decision. Also, there's a chance that a 5DmkII (or 7D, some say) might be released at PMA, and some on the Canon forums believe they could sell for as low as $2200 (low for a FF DSLR, that is).

The K20D and K200D which are to come isn't FF DSLRs, are very probably just 1.5X ones.

As for the 5D replacement, it will come somedays later but no one knows when it will be. If you need the 5D now, why not buy one as it is damn cheap right now. In fact, it is the cheapest FF DSLR on this planet.

[Falcons]

Well Switters if you are not a professional just buy whatever your bank balance can afford and be happy. That is why I still am very happy with my *istDS it is all the camera I need for the price bracket I can afford.

Pentax may someday have a FF, blisteringly fast AF (in any light) etc, etc - and guess what it will probably cost just as much as the Canon 5D (or its equivalent of the day). For the moment though Pentax produce a very nice camera that has some very nice features for a very nice price.

But for you,Switters, the canon 5D is available now if it is what you want and price isn't a barrier go for it.

[carpents]

But surprisingly, there are cheapo Canon glass like the toy lens 50mm/1.8 MkII that really performs and close to Limited glass optical quality in the Canon land.

This is patently absurd. The Canon 50/1.8 is a 'decent' lens, comparable to the Pentax 50/1.7 lenses, but it should never even be mentioned in the same sentence as the 31/1.8, 40/2.8, or 77/1.8. The 50/1.8 MkII is a pedestrian lens, with a pedestrian build, offered at a pedestrian price.

Canon makes some of the best lenses in the world - like the aforementioned 85/1.2, 100/2, 135/2, and most of their long zooms and primes - the 50/1.8 MkII is not among them.

[RiceHigh]

This is patently absurd. The Canon 50/1.8 is a 'decent' lens, comparable to the Pentax 50/1.7 lenses, but it should never even be mentioned in the same sentence as the 31/1.8, 40/2.8, or 77/1.8. The 50/1.8 MkII is a pedestrian lens, with a pedestrian build, offered at a pedestrian price.

I've called the 50/1.8II a toy lens just because it has a toy build, as well as a toy price (I agreed), but its optical quality is excellent than one would imagine for such a toy build lens at a toy price.

It has very good resolution, very low distortion, excellent colors which are neutral and accurate, creamy and even bokeh (even though for highlight spots pentagons can be seen). Images rendered are contrasty but yet 3 dimensional. The flare control is so good that no lens hood is actually needed and even there is a sun in the pictures taken. So, what else do you want for a *lens*?

As for the new DA 40/2.8 limited, it is by no means can be matched with the Canon 50/1.8, nor other older Pentax Limited glass neither. It has rough bokeh and strange colour, I won't recommend it to anyone. Instead, the 43 Limited should be the way to go for the 40mm.

Canon makes some of the best lenses in the world - like the aforementioned 85/1.2, 100/2, 135/2, and most of their long zooms and primes - the 50/1.8 MkII is not among them.

Well, I don't think the Canon 50/1.2 is really something that much better than the 1.8 when we shoot at f/2.8 or onwards. And ditto for the 85/1.8 which is very good lens at a very affordable price, which now the Pentax system lacks. Note that the closest thing 77/1.8 limited is double the price of the 85/1.8 but the optical quality are just as good for both, although the characters can be different in some aspects.

[digitaldevo]

Coming from someone who came from Canon... Pentax is far better! I shot Canon + L glass and can't begin to tell you how much better the Pentax is in comparison to the 20/30/40D Canons. Canon is so plagued with issues it is not funny! Yes, every Manufacturer has problems, but Canon likes to just sweep theirs under the rug and not fess up and fix the problems but instead do so in a "new" camera with a few "new" features and charge you a full new price for it!

As for the 5D, great camera, but in all honesty, the Sigma SD14 runs head to head with it but offers better colors and better details as well, thanks to the Foveon x3 sensor! Now if Sigma would just release a dSLR with different lens mounts.

But, in the end, there is far more to a product then just the product itself!! Canon doesn't give 2 sh*ts about its users nor do they listen to went heir users want either!

[Chako]

Hmmm.

The Canon 50mm f/1.8 Mk II is a really good lens for a really good price. They do not call it the plastic fantastic for nothing. I will have to disagree with you Carpents. It is an excellent lens. In fact, its probably the only true bargain in the Canon lens lineup that everyone must have with a Canon system. Mind you, the build quality is junk, but there is nothing wrong with the optics or the images it produces.

I have and still own my 20D. I never once had any issues using it in all the years I have used it. No hardware issues, no software issues, nothing. I do not think I was lucky either. I haven't heard of any major issues other then the focusing problem of one of their pro line bodies.

I fully agree with Falcon. If you’re not a pro, go with what you like best and can afford. After all, its your satisfaction that needs to be met, as you will be the one using it.