[lol101]

the better question is which assortament of glass do you think is better, or, better suited to your needs, that of canon, or pentax.

the 5D is a relic and will be replaced

the K20D is new but will still be replaced

both will be replaced by something better, but your glass will last you forever.

Ouch! "a relic" ?

The 5D was released in october 2005, that's a whole 2,5 years... have we become so addicted to change?

I remember buying my Z1P in 1995 and stopping using it in 2005 when I bought my Ds... but then the film wasn't welded in the camera...

Seriously though, the 5D is lacking in the ergonomics and functionalities department but not in the IQ department, even compared to K20.


When I look at images from the K20 or 5D, I really have no idea what more we need, except maybe for people printing A0... ....

I think we are now free to choose our brand based only on ergonomics, performances (AF/AE), specialized recquirements (low-light, fast fps...) or any kind of compromise you might need but IQ is no longer an area where you see strong variations across brands.

[egordon99]

5d/24-70 All The Way!

[attack11]

based on the intended use i'd say the k20d is the better choice. the body/lens combo is sealed extremely well; i've used it in the rain, snow and dirt. the 5d might suffer damage where the k20d wouldn't.

build wise, the pentax lens is better. better mtf, better everything. tokina also sells the lens for canon & nikon mounts, but it's a different build. you shouldn't really think of them as being identical.

since i own a k10d & 16-50, i know it's a solid performer in nature... and i lust for a ff body. either way you go, you'll probably want both for different reasons later on

[Confused]

Hi all

Well, as the current owner of a pair of K10D's, I can only speak theoretically when trying to make valid comparisons between Canon's 5D and Pentax's K20D, but reckon that my viewpoint still holds some sway, due to the numerous similarities that currently exist between the K10D/K20D !
If 'push came to shove', I really wouldn't be prepared to forego the K20D's reassuringly solid build quality, comprehensive weather-proofing, intuitive controls and delightfully balanced ergonomic body shape, in favour of a Canon 5D.
The thought of abandoning the K20D's brilliantly implemented body Shake Reduction feature, in favour of Canon's expensively designed IS technology (which is a de facto requirement in each of their equivalent lenses) simply makes this proposal a total deal-breaker for me, on a cost basis alone !
Whilst attempting to draw comparisons between these two DSLR's, another thing to bear in mind is the sheer 'bulk' of the 5D, which has to be felt to be appreciated. Considering the differing pricing structure & diverse market sectors which the K20D and 5D respectively inhabit, it's surely a remarkable tribute to Pentax's engineering & design ethos that these two cameras are even being discussed in the same breath !

Best regards
Richard

---

Last edited by Confused; 06-24-2008 at 11:33 AM.

[Okami]

Yeah... I'm up to the point where I have spent enough money if I were to offload all I have I would be able to get a decent 5d setup.

I tried one out the other day from a buddy of mine and the large FF viewfinder was gorgeous!

But because of the price and versatility of my Pentax's I can't bring myself to totally jump.

Has anyone done a High ISO low light comparison of them?

[jsherman999]

5 simple un-trumpable reasons to choose the K20D:


1) In-body Shake Reduction.

2) Weather-sealing. I can't overstate how nice it is to not worry about your $1.6K investment when you're tromping down a dusty trail. It simply makes photography more pleasurable.

3) Image Quality. The IQ of the $1000 (body) K20D is class-leading, and with good glass, is either better or equivalent to the $1700 (body) 5D. See referenced Online Photographer re that.

4) Resolution. 14.6mp gives you a bit more high-quality cropability.

5) The glass. 30-year old Super Takumars to modern SDM'd DA* primes/zooms, all affordable, all Shake Reduced (see #1), many providing as good or better IQ than their Canon counterparts.



.

[cygnet]

o Lens quality. The Canon L is a much higher quality lens.

I beg to differ. While any one specific copy of a certain brand of lens may be better or worse, I have seen nothing overall to lead me to believe that Canon L glass is better or worse than Pentax, except for Canon's marketing around their "L". They figure if they say it enough times, people might believe it. And your going to end up with a whole collection of lenses, not just one, so figure that into the price.

[benjikan]

Both camera's are GREAT! Actually so is the K200D and the 450D and the D300 and the D70 as well as the D200 and the K100D as well as the 1Ds Mklll and the 350D and the Olympus E3 and the Fuji S5 etc etc etc etc....

What is YOUR criteria for a good camera? What are you looking for specifically? None of these camera's will improve your "TALENT, INGENUITY, VISION, EXPRESSION etc..." I have done pro shoots with everything from a Canon G5 5 megapixel camera to a Canon 1Ds Mkll, from a Canon 350D to a Pentax K20D. In the final analysis, if you know what the support of your image will be you can respond accordingly. In fact I am wrong...Most DSLR's or compacts can pull of some serious resolution if the limitations of the tools are understood.

Look...I was sponsored by Bronica, Fuji, Canon and Pentax. I didn't give a flying F..... about which was better, as the differences were really quite minute. In fact the less you know about what the application of your images are going to be, the less discerning you are about the reasons for your choices.

I know what I want and that is a camera that at 100-400 iso gives me the finest most subtle and smooth rendition possible. That is why for IQ, the Pentax K20D is amongst the finest camera's out there right now. I include the Canon 1Ds Mklll in that grouping. At 100 iso there is NOT a major difference in rendition between the two, especially for what I am shooting. There will be perhaps 10- 20 percent of the time a need to use a pro 39 megapixel back or the 1Ds Mklll. But in most cases, I would not use the Pentax for 300 dpi poster reproductions for advertising. In that case I might go with the Pro Back. When I did the "Swarovski" campaign, I used the pro back for the Full Fashion shots and a Canon 20D for the Macro Still Life images. I had 5 x 3 meter billboards shot with the Pentax K10D and the Canon 20D.

I do love the Pentax lenses...I really like the Canon lenses. But I prefer the Pentax. I like it because it is different, quirky, original and NOT too mainstream.

That is why I am going to stay with Pentax for the time being.

Now what are you going to do and why?

Ben

[creampuff]

This is such a pointless discussion. Do you buy a car merely on the basis of specifications alone and not by test driving it? This obsession to analyse to death on-paper specifications and pros and cons won't bring you any closer to getting good images, which any of today's DSLRs are capable of. Ben puts the context correctly that is the photographer, not the gear.

Since this is a Pentax forum, obviously I'd say the K20D is the more usable and photographer friendly camera.

How about some of the "issues" with the 5D (from a Canon user friend who has one):
- Viewing mirror dropping out. Quite a common known issue. His fell out within a month of use but thankfully Canon service glued it back FOC.
- Very easy to get dust on the sensor.
- Use a crappy lens and you'll very probably get vignetting and soft images at large apertures
- Not a fast camera to use, especially with features buried deep in the menu
- Build quality is average
- Sensor resolution may be good but colour rendition is not fantastic
- Discernible shutter lag
- No stabilisation means either using IS lenses or lugging a tripod

[robgo2]

lower noise is due to lower pixel density. if you were to compare the 5d to a similar pixel dense APS-C camera, the noise should be about the same, but the APS-C will be of a lower mp count. full frame has the ability to cram the same number of pixels into a bigger area, thus creating less noise.



I thought that lower noise was the result of larger individual photosites, not the density of those sites. A larger sensor can accommodate larger photosites at a given resolution. Is this what is meant by pixel density?

Rob

[RiceHigh]

I am considering either a Pentax K20D with 16-50 2.8 zoom or Canon EOS 5D with 24-70 2.8L.

Owing to the very low noise characteristic of the 5D at high ISO, I would recommend to get the 24-105 F4 L instead. Its lighter and has a longer reach.

Advantages of K20D over EOS 5D
o Waterproof & Dustproof . I have lost two compact cameras to dust and I shoot outdoors. The Canon 'L' is sealed, but the 5D is not.

But there is not many Pentax lenses that are sealed.

o Price. The K20D with lens is ~$1.6K (after $200 rebate), the 5D with lens is ~3.1K. (Refurbished version would be ~$2.7K, or with the 24-105 f4L is ~$2.6K). That is a huge price difference; the benefits of the 5D would have to be equally great.

I think you'll get for what you pay, for the price difference.

o Ergonomics. The 'hyper program' (moving one of the wheels changes to shutter or aperture priority), the 'TAV priority' (user sets aperture + shutter speed, camera sets ISO) and the green button to set aperture and shutter in Manual mode are all very simple and great examples functionality designed for real world use.

Those exposure mode to me is not important. I used to use those Pentax Hyper modes for years but with my 5D, which has only traditional PASM mode (with program shift in P mode), is just more than enough for me. In fact I have never used program shift neither. If I want to control Av and Tv, I just turn the mode dial to A or S.

The lack of Auto ISO of the 5D is something that would cause some inconvenience. However, changing ISO in the 5D with the rear quick control wheel is very fast. It is much faster than the K20D with the Function (Fn) button and the rear wheel, which cannot be turned *continuously*, unlike Canon.

o Weight. The Pentax is heavy 48 oz), but the Canon is even heavier (56 oz).

I feel no difference for both in my hands, with comparable weighed lenses mounted.

o The K20D is a new camera and the 5D is a little dated.

But 5D has more advanced and matured technology used already which had been ahead of years than the Pentax! Physically, the FF sensor is something that the K20D new born sensor could ever beat. Dynamic range and exposure latitude is something that the K20D can never meet (which is very crucial IMO for good Image Quality):-

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Dynamic Range and (Background) Noise Tests of the K20D

o ISO displayed in the viewfinder. This is most useful in the 'TAV Priority' mode.

The 5D has a dedicated ISO button at the index finger tips so that you can check for the selected ISO at a touch of the button. The selected ISO will be displayed both in the finder and in the top LCD.

Of course, to always displaying it would be nice.

Besides, I found that the TAv mode is actually redundant, just if there was Auto ISO feature in the M mode to be selectable.

o Auto bracketing set via hard button rather than buried in a menu

I would rather opt for an accurate and reliable exposure and metering system than a more convenient exposure bracketing feature. A wide Dynamic Range is the *only* way to go.

Advantages of EOS 5D over K20D

o Image quality. The 5D is lower resolution but the larger pixels and higher lens quality more than make up for it.

Yes.

o Future of full frame. I thought that with increasing resolutions, the advantage of full frame would be reduced until I read about the issue of diffraction and pixel size. This implies that as resolutions rise, the sensor size will become more important, not less important. Diffraction Limited Photography: Pixel Size, Aperture and Airy Disks and Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography. The Canon is impacted by diffraction at f13, the Pentax at f7.6

True.

o Quality Control. The Pentax lens is based on a Tokina design and I am reading lots of reports about quality problems.

It seems to be. Those MIJ Canon products seem to suffer less from QC issues (So did those MIJ Pentax products in the past. But, those were the days).

o Lens quality. The Canon L is a much higher quality lens.

If you get the older Pentax film glass like the FA Limited, I think your statement will be rephrased.

o Manufacturer viability. I am a little concerned about the long term viability of Pentax.

Yes.

o Viewfinder. The Pentax has a larger viewfinder than most DSLRS, but the 5D is even bigger.

Yes. I can surely tell as I have used them all for a long time.

o Lower noise at high ISO. This is exacerbated by the fact that the Canon is more sensitive and the Pentax less sensitive.

Sure.

(Pentax tends to underexpose - this could be a metering problem, or the fact that the sensor is actually lower ISO than indicated.)

It is not an actual ISO speed issue. It is about an inaccurate meterig and exposure system plus a narrower DR afterall.

[cputeq]

You're pretty funny Rice High. While I'm certain some of your points are true, the following one is not only weak, but downright ridiculous given the context of this discussion...

But there is not many Pentax lenses that are sealed.

Is what you quoted in reply immediately after these two statements were made:

I am considering either a Pentax K20D with 16-50 2.8 zoom or Canon EOS 5D with 24-70 2.8L.
.....

Advantages of K20D over EOS 5D
o Waterproof & Dustproof . I have lost two compact cameras to dust and I shoot outdoors. The Canon 'L' is sealed, but the 5D is not.

Pentax has him weather sealed from 16mm to 135, then at 200, then 300, whereas the Canon 5D will never offer him complete weather sealing. He's also considering a lens that...yep, is weather sealed.

Yet, despite this, you take an opportunity to somehow find a way to point out a "flaw" with the Pentax system because they don't offer many sealed lenses, while somehow "forgetting" to mention he'll never have a sealed 5D system. All this directed to an hiking, backpacking individual who will probably be constantly exposed to the elements and whos focal length needs are probably 100% covered by the sealed Pentax offerings.


Extremely weak "point" you made which in no way would be helpful to the OP.

I mean, technically, you are right. Maybe Pentax should make a DA* 136mm-199mm, and a DA* 201mm-299mm to cover everything?



--------

Now that I'm off my soap box, I wanted to inquire about this exchange, in regard to the Canon system costing $1000 more, minimum:

I think you'll get for what you pay, for the price difference.

Are full frame shots really that much better than say a K20D with a nice lens? I'm actually asking here, not making an argument. I've never seen objective, side-by-side comparisons of the 5D shots compared to Canon's nicer APS-C line (40D?). I'd be very curious to see a comparison.

[RiceHigh]

The lens collection will be used over years but the body is not. If I have made all the collections of those Canon L lenses, once I upgrade a weather sealed body, I can use the whole system under adverse weather.

But of the Pentax system, you are right that there are four sealed lenses: DA* 16-50, 50-135, 200 and 300. But then these lenses are not cheap and as for the DA* primes, they are still difficult to find and the high price tags are ridiculous.

So, what I suggest the OP to consider is about the *system* but not solely on the bodies alone. It is nothing to be arguable that Canon has a far more complete lens system as well as a more complete weather sealed L lenses series, which are all full frame.

Lastly, to find out the differences between an APS-C and a FF DSLR is easy. Take your example of a 40D compared to a 5D, the noise level at higher ISO speeds is obvious, the shadow details and noise difference is obvious, the dynamic range difference is obvious, the 3d feel and depth of image is obvious. Go figure out yourself. Go to the Canon showroom, insert a card and try (yes, they allow you to do so, at least at Canon HK). Or, simply find a shop where let you to try if you really want to.

You're pretty funny Rice High. While I'm certain some of your points are true, the following one is not only weak, but downright ridiculous given the context of this discussion...
(snipped)

[arbutusq]

I think everyone on this thread should read Benjikan's response. In practical situations most modern DSLR's can produce incredible results for landscapes.

If weather sealing is important than the only real choice is the K20d, and the resolution at base ISO will give you all the detail you'll need. Actually 6mp will probably give you all the resolution you need.

[RiceHigh]

I think everyone on this thread should read Benjikan's response. In practical situations most modern DSLR's can produce incredible results for landscapes.

If weather sealing is important than the only real choice is the K20d, and the resolution at base ISO will give you all the detail you'll need. Actually 6mp will probably give you all the resolution you need.

It is indeed very demanding for a good landscape camera. People used to use medium to large format to do professional landscape, just because of the highest possible resolution needed and also the dynamic range requirement is high.

As for 6mp, it is just too low a resolution to be considered to be adequate for any application now and actually it is just not enough.

IMHO, the K20D does have good resolution and colors, but the DR and noise are worst than the K10 and of course the competition. The 5D is unbeatable here for all the four performance aspects.