[FrancisK7]

The 24-70 alone is like 2000. Plus a brand new body... you must have a lot of disposable income. I'm lucky if I can buy new glass every two months and I consider myself fortunate.

[Reportage]

The 24-70 alone is like 2000. Plus a brand new body... you must have a lot of disposable income. I'm lucky if I can buy new glass every two months and I consider myself fortunate.

Well i take more risks then usual so that i can charge more then usual. Thats where i got my disposable income for investment.

Anyway see how the D600 fares. I am also looking at used D700 because a D3/1D range would be too damn bulky for my style.

[Alizarine]

I don't even have K-5 yet I'm happy with Pentax APS-C. Also, I don't plan on becoming a weightlifter with all those Nikkor VR G N lenses....
and yes, am also poor

[TomTextura]

Well, if I were to buy a Nikon FF I'd have to also be prepared to buy a basic kit of three prime lenses—probably their 28, 50, and 85 f/1.8G lenses—that would run around at least $1,300. That I could get the D700, or D600, and those three lenses for a fair amount less than what I have invested in my Pentax kit is interesting. However, I feel that thanks to the size, WR, build, ergonomics, and great IQ I have a more well rounded and satisfying kit with Pentax. If I were to buy into Nikon it would be very unlikely that I'd leave Pentax so I'd be running dual systems. That's not convenient or cost effective. I'm hopeful that Pentax will have a FF body by the time I am seriously in the market for an upgrade. In the mean time, I will be keeping in mind FF compatibility with any new lens acquisitions.

[kenyee]

Nikon's "light" lenses are the new 1.8 primes they've released. The D600 actually looks fairly small for FF...probably D7000 sized w/ a bigger mirrorbox.
The main thing that'd attract me to it is the edge performance of their lenses...they'll be a lot better than Pentax's Ltd on FF IMHO, even if they are made out of plastic mostly :-)

[normhead]

they'll be a lot better than Pentax's Ltd on FF IMHO

Given that in some quarters the 31 ltd is one of the top 3 lenses ever made.. that's a pretty bold assumption.

[LeDave]

I'm sticking with APS-C for a long time. If the K-5 can beat the 5DMK2, why would I want a full frame when my K-5 is the size of young Simba and does everything a 5DMK2 would do but better? Seems like there was a poll on this forum showing people would buy a Pentax FF if it ever comes out over not buying a full frame, the poll clearly shows that people would rather buy the FF over not buying by over 3x, now that is just purely awkward because last time I checked, FF doesn't even come close to sales of APS-C. Sounds like a lot of people were drugged up on something when they voted on that poll =P

[normhead]

Oops I didn't answer your question, with the D800 currently @ about 3 grand, throwing money at a lessor system would seem like a waste.

[jsherman999]

i dont mind getting one to complement pentax system and then a 24-70 with 50mm for lowlight and some portraiture work.

anyone else?

If they had come out with the D600 (as described in the rumours) before the D800, it would have been a tough choice between the D800 and the D600. As it stands, I suspect the D600 will have AF performance closer to the D7000 than the D700, so it's not as attractive to me.

If Pentax does not come out with a FF body anytime soon I think the ultimate 1-2 kit might be a D600 + a new MILC m4/3 body, or even a fixed-lens Fuji.

You would have the small, sharp, modern body + some very good lenses for those "I don't care about DOF control or noise" situations, and a 24MP FF body for everything else. Add the new 28, 50 and 85 primes and maybe the excellent Samyang 14mm f/2.8 and maybe something like a Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and you would have a mind-blowing kit that doesn't completely break the bank, compared to equivalent FF kits from just a few years ago.

Problem is, I think a K-5-ish version of that D600 will be even better - if it appears, and if they can update SAFOX or replace it, and add more and smaller AF sensors.

Photokina can't come soon enough.


.

[sb in ak]

I'm sticking with APS-C for a long time. If the K-5 can beat the 5DMK2, why would I want a full frame when my K-5 is the size of young Simba and does everything a 5DMK2 would do but better? Seems like there was a poll on this forum showing people would buy a Pentax FF if it ever comes out over not buying a full frame, the poll clearly shows that people would rather buy the FF over not buying by over 3x, now that is just purely awkward because last time I checked, FF doesn't even come close to sales of APS-C. Sounds like a lot of people were drugged up on something when they voted on that poll =P

I have a 5DMK2 and K-5, partially due to CBA, and partially due to buying the Canon and then realizing it was just too big and heavy (at least for me) for a lot of the activities I like to do (hiking & traveling). Ultimately, I will probably sell one of them--as I can't afford the lenses and accessories for two systems--after deciding what really suits me better. As a landscape photographer though, I have a hard time parting with the FF due to its ability to do superwides, though I could do those with the K-5 and photo merge in some situations.

The K-5 holds up pretty darn well, though I'd give the 5D2 a slight edge in IQ unless it is a high DR situation...here the K-5 easily wins. But the K-5 destroys it in the size, weight, and build quality categories, and I think it will destroy the D600 in those categories too. As they say, the best camera is the one you bring, and the K-5 is a much easier camera to deal with, especially with the small primes. Though we don't know how large the D600 will be yet....

So is the DOF, larger viewfinder, and small IQ advantage worth switching and investing into a bunch of new glass?

[Barnster]

No not this century!!Happy with the K5.

[TomTextura]

Given that in some quarters the 31 ltd is one of the top 3 lenses ever made.. that's a pretty bold assumption.

I've got to agree with normhead on this. I don't doubt that the Nikon f/1.8G lenses are nice lenses but the FA31 is nothing short of top notch. I love the results I get from it and have seen impressive work with it on film. Same goes for the FA77, which I also have. I've also seen some good examples of it on a Canon FF, I think 5D II, used with an adapter. Not only would it be hard to beat the FA31 in terms of IQ but it'd be hard to beat it in terms of build and joy of use. The focus ring is the best I've used, though I admittedly don't have a great deal of other lenses to compare it to.

[ElJamoquio]

I'm definitely considering the D600. Sure, Nikon doesn't have as many optically-slow/lightweight lenses as Pentax (where's Nikon's FF 24mm f6.2?) but there's niches here-and-there that are very nice.

Opening up a 70-200 to a 45-200 (aps-c equivalent) alone... or the same with a 40 mm prime, etc... is worth the price of admission.

Right now the only question is whether Pentax wants my money.

[TOUGEFC]

I will probaby get it as a FF back-up camera

[kenyee]

Given that in some quarters the 31 ltd is one of the top 3 lenses ever made.. that's a pretty bold assumption.

I was thinking of the 43ltd in particular...a few pentax users (wlachan among others) have said edge performance isn't great.
If people have put these on a Canon 5D and checked already, I'll eat crow. I've been impressed by what Nikon has done w/ their "nanocoating"...a few Nikon friends keep trying to lure me to the dark side by showing me these ridiculously contrasty/sharp pictures w/o much post work