[Jeff Charles]

As you can see in my signature I have one, though you are correct, they are no longer in production for Pentax. It can still be picked up used as they come up every month or so. However for comparative purposes it still has far more in common with the 70-200 than the 50-135 does (though nowhere near as large/heavy) !

I see the 50-150 in your signature now.

I've had the 50-150 in my Marketplace keyword list for a while, but I did not notice the email notification that I received for the one that was most recently for sale. Next time.

[FrancisK7]

FF cameras like the D800 are great.... but their achilles heel is their bulk. Size, great WR and IQ are where the current Pentax DSLRs excel.

Size and WR, yes. IQ, no.

[Jeff Charles]

Size and WR, yes. IQ, no.

excel: "be exceptionally good at or proficient in an activity or subject"

The K-5 may not have IQ as good as a D800 or a 5DMkIII, but it's IQ is "exceptionally good."

[Rondec]

Size and WR, yes. IQ, no.

Interestingly, the one area in particular where the D800 really lags is frame rate. I guess all those megapixels gum up the works when shooting "action." A D4 would do better for this type of photography.

[FrancisK7]

Dedicated sports photographers will no doubt prefer the D4, yeah. I'm not one of those

[Frogfish]

I see the 50-150 in your signature now.

I've had the 50-150 in my Marketplace keyword list for a while, but I did not notice the email notification that I received for the one that was most recently for sale. Next time.

It's a superb lens Jeff. Fast & silent HSM AF, very very sharp and yet at the same time light and wieldy. You should really enjoy it once you get your hands on one !

[Frogfish]

It isn't. It's unfair maybe, but not ridiculous. Nor asinine. You have to be wacked to think it's an asinine comparison. Do you know what the word means?

K5 is the best Pentax has to offer, and the DA*50-135 arguably its best longer zoom. There's no better bodies money can buy in the APS-C Pentax line-up, so we're comparing the best vs the best.

The dude made a blank general statement that there was no evidence that suggested that Nikon had body/lens combos Pentax couldn't even touch in terms of IQ and abilities.

THAT is an asinine statement.

My simple experience with a D800 or a 5DMkIII clearly puts these bodies on top of the best Pentax has to offer.

Most people add the word asinine to their vocabulary around the 6th grade - your continued overexploitation of the word seems to indicate you have only just discovered it's tenor.

Anybody with an iota of intelligence would not be comparing a 2012 pro camera to a 2010 advanced amateur's. Your initial deleterious comparison was risible and yet you are intent on compounding that rhetoric with your 'comparing best vs the best' statement. I doubt anyone in their right mind would compare a K5 to a D4, D800, 1 series or 5dIII unless they wanted the condition of their mental health challenged.

[FrancisK7]

Most people add the word asinine to their vocabulary around the 6th grade - your continued overexploitation of the word seems to indicate you have only just discovered it's tenor.

The thread is titled Nikon vs Pentax. I made a general statement earlier that Canikon had certain body+lens combos Pentax could never touch if you had the money to buy them, and that at some point, some photog's needs will grow over what Pentax can offer them compared to Canikon. There's nothing wrong with that statement. It's perfectly true.

"Based on what evidence? For every great 5DMkIII photo I can find one that is just as nice on Flickr that was taken with the K5."

There's no need to troll like an arsehole the way you are behaving like right now. If you had followed the whole argument correctly you'd have caught up with the reason for the comparison.

[Frogfish]

The thread is titled Nikon vs Pentax. I made a general statement earlier that Canikon had certain body+lens combos Pentax could never touch if you had the money to buy them, and that at some point, some photog's needs will grow over what Pentax can offer them compared to Canikon. There's nothing wrong with that statement. It's perfectly true.

"Based on what evidence? For every great 5DMkIII photo I can find one that is just as nice on Flickr that was taken with the K5."

There's no need to troll like an arsehole the way you are behaving like right now. If you had followed the whole argument correctly you'd have caught up with the reason for the comparison.

I suggest you go back to review the opening post again, D3000 vs Kr. I think it was you (?) that actually introduced pro-level FF cameras into the debate ... so there is only one troll here.

That said :

I doubt anyone in their right mind would compare a K5 to a D4, D800, 1 series or 5dIII unless they wanted the condition of their mental health challenged.

.

Why would there be any doubt that those cameras would obliterate a K5 in both AF performance and IQ ? In any logical debate of course there wouldn't be. However that is at a complete tangent to the core debate, a comparison of APS-C cameras - the logical assumption of the OP's intention from the opening post.

Simply put you are either intent on knocking Pentax or blowing the FF horn of pro-level cameras costing many times more than those in the APS-C camera debate (i.e. amateur or even entry level cameras vs pro), either way it is senseless.

[FrancisK7]

My first statement was vague and general, but not inaccurate.

My point was that it's perfectly logical and normal that some photographers' needs might outgrow what Pentax can offer in terms of capabilities. If you hit that threshold, Pentax has nothing better to offer and you are forced to switch.

Then someone opposed my view and stated for every good Canikon pic out there, there is a K5 equivalent. Which I thought was a completely senseless argument. Not only because pulling Flickr pics to debate the capabilities of a camera wouldn't work, but also because it's not just about IQ.

You're the one who read a response out of context and then offered a response oozing in arrogance and dipshit attitude. Even if what I had said was completely stupid for whatever reason, there are better ways to offer criticism. I know Internet standards for savoir-vivre are low, but this is a friendly forum. Remember that next time.

[Ivor K Ecks]

but this is a friendly forum. Remember that next time.

But you were the first person to use the following words or phrases in this thread........

Asinine
troll
arsehole
oozing in arrogance
dipshit attitude

[goldenarrow]

The thread is titled Nikon vs Pentax. I made a general statement earlier that Canikon had certain body+lens combos Pentax could never touch if you had the money to buy them, and that at some point, some photog's needs will grow over what Pentax can offer them compared to Canikon. There's nothing wrong with that statement. It's perfectly true.

Thanks for the frank discussion. I only own Pentax and can't afford to "jump ship" without major hassles and expense. Very good descriptions of what a higher-end camera can do (whatever the brand). I sympathize with FrancisK7 since he is attempting to find the best mix of hardware, software, and skills to get "the money shots". If he could do it with an old Kodak Brownie box camera, he would do it. A pro compares hardware differently than amateurs (like most of us). It is hard work, and to be let down by a camera's limitations potentially can cause lost opportunities and money, perhaps big-time. Makes the Pentax vs. Nikon (or Canon) comparisons extremely interesting and not theoretical!

I will probably stay with Pentax for its well-rounded capabilities and value, but I thank you for opening us up to a view that is different from my safe little amateur world. In my opinion, the more Pentax moves toward a FF platform, we should be able to embrace more and more of the pros, who WILL bring a different perspective than what some of us are used to, whether we like it or not. (and I am not talking about the choice of words and attitude, it is the dependence on making a livelihood from photography that forces a change of perspective).

[sb in ak]

My first statement was vague and general, but not inaccurate.

My point was that it's perfectly logical and normal that some photographers' needs might outgrow what Pentax can offer in terms of capabilities. If you hit that threshold, Pentax has nothing better to offer and you are forced to switch.

I sort of agree and disagree. All of these cameras are just tools for taking a photo, to put it maybe too simply. And one should use the right tool for the job. For low light situations in theaters, Pentax is probably not the best tool for the job. However, lets switch the situation and put the photographer on a mountain ridge in the drizzle. Am I going to be wanting to lug around a D800, 5DIII or much less a 1DX or D4? Yes, but only if I have a sherpa. This is the perfect climate where a camera like the K-5 excels. Sure its IQ or AF doesn't quite match the previous cameras, but it's good enough to where the cost-benefit of lugging one of those beasts isn't worth it...in my opinion anyway. The K-5 will be at my side, ready for action-- where the D800 or 5DIII would either be in a case (potentially missing the shot) or in my car at the bottom of the hill because it just wasn't worth it.

I'd argue that one can outgrow a FF camera to a K-5, just like one can outgrow a K-5 to FF. It's about what matches your shooting style/needs and which camera is the best tool for the job given the situation.

Anyways, this is after owning a K-5 and 5DM2. If I were going to part with one, it'd be the Canon. I don't do much low light work, mostly outdoors in decent lighting. The K-5 isn't quite up to the 5D in IQ but its really quite close. Close enough for me anyway...plus it's smaller, easier to lug around, better built, and is just more fun to shoot with.

[FrancisK7]

But you were the first person to use the following words or phrases in this thread..

I don't do passive aggressive. I say it like it is. We're not writing a novel. This is a discussion forum. Implying I do not possess even an iota of intelligence is just as insulting as saying "you're a dumb fook" directly to my face. The latter has at least the merit of being honest and straightforward. Hiding behind overused similes, metaphors and other expressions to take a stab at someone is so cowardly it makes me sick. Is it necessary to personally attack someone, either directly or indirectly? We're adults. There's really no need to play the fingerpointing game. Can we all move along and get back on topic?

However, lets switch the situation and put the photographer on a mountain ridge in the drizzle. Am I going to be wanting to lug around a D800, 5DIII or much less a 1DX or D4? Yes, but only if I have a sherpa.

I agree, I would probably just bring something like a K5 without grip and a DA15 if I was shooting landscape in broad daylight. That's why I made sure to say it will depend of your needs. At a new assignment yesterday, I could have shot with a D800 at ISO6400 without ever needing a flash or sacrificing quality. I would also never have encountered AF issues because of the low light. Is it fair to compare 5000$ worth of gear (D800+70-200) to 2000$ worth of Pentax gear? Not really. Except if you account for the fact I couldn't have brought better equipment since Pentax doesn't offer anything better. So I either adapt (and accept I will produce sub-standards photos than what COULD be in these specific conditions) or I switch.

A K5 is so good for so many things. In a studio environment, I love it. Paired with the FA77, FA31 or FA43, I've gotten superb results. Can't complain. However, for sports, weddings or low-light situations, the spotty AF is a real issue. Especially for weddings, most photogs will have backup bodies, backup batteries, backup lights, etc. You can't account for an AF system that will probably work fine, but may fail. What if it fails during the first kiss, first look, or other such important moments?

The K5's AF has failed me too many times that it prompted me to consider other options. So yes, I did have to account for the cost of a D800, versus the cost of my current equipment, so I can budget my year accordingly. I need an AF system I can trust completely. When I'm shooting with the K5, I'm always worried about the AF. For shooting anything that moves, AF.C is just a slap in the face.

[Edvinas]

The K5's AF has failed me too many times that it prompted me to consider other options. So yes, I did have to account for the cost of a D800, versus the cost of my current equipment, so I can budget my year accordingly. I need an AF system I can trust completely. When I'm shooting with the K5, I'm always worried about the AF. For shooting anything that moves, AF.C is just a slap in the face.

That's exactly my feelings and reasons why I switched to Nikon.