That used to be true but am afraid Sony has surpassed Pentax in the "best bang for your buck" department for a system with good zoom lenses. The availability of old quality Minolta AF zooms makes the Sony system more versatile and less expensive. The only real advantage is weather sealing but IMO that is offset by the better AF of the Sony. The A 700 is over a year old and Sony is still releasing firmware updates that correct problems and improves performance by a significant amount. Contrast that with Pentax's attitude toward the VNP problem with the K10D.

Regards,
Ken

Hi, Ken

I have to respectfully disagree on some points with you. For me what Sony does today is exactly what some pentaxians would of liked to see from Pentax. That being recycle a lot of older lens designs and bring a FF camera on the market. Yet IMHO this is the fastest but more dangerous in medium and long term because most of those older designs just recoated and motorised are not up to the today's standards (check photozone's Sony section for some really low scores).
More than that in between Sony's kit lenses and the very expensive stuff lies a hyatus of modern medium price/better performance lenses both in primes and zooms. One can easily see that Pentax has released a lot of modern designs (albeit APS-C) that are relatively inexpensive and if this year they'll put on the market 3 more that means 9 new lenses in one year. Those lenses will both stand up better to the new sensors with probably more Mp and will have a better price/performance ratio in general.
Now about the Sony FF camera of course it's a bit early to reach a verdict on it but even from the dpreview's samples it's pretty obvious that it puts a lot of pressure on the lenses especially on borders.
I for sure would prefer to:

1) choose to pay extra for a FF lens if I want to or not pay anything more for a similar lens in performance but APS-C only;
2) I rather have 9-10 new lenses a year build with modern designs to boot and spreaded on 3 levels (kit, medium - some DAs, high level - ltds for primes and DA* for zooms and primes) than have 15 old FF lenses rebaged and motorised;


As for your assertion about zooms let's see:

Sony
- ultra wide: 11-18 - 1,5 stars on photozone - 537 Euro;
- wide to medium tele_ 16-80 CZ - 4 stars - 626 Euro;
- tele - 70-300G - 3,5 stars - 758 Euro;

Range covered: 11-300. Price: 1921 Euro

Pentax:
- ultra wide: 12-24 - 4 stars - 578 Euro;
- wide to standard: 16-45 - 4 stars - 379 Euro;
- standard to tele: 50 - 135 - 4 stars - 699 Euro;
- tele - 55 - 300: not tested yet but acclaimed on other tests - 259 Euro

Range covered: 12-300 (minus 45-50). Price: 1915 Euro.

All stars from photozone's all prices from the same dealer: Foto Erhardt - Objektive

Just for fun compare the Sony 35/1,4 old design (2 stars optical - 1210 Euro) with Pentax FA 35/2 (4 stars) a lens that is 299 Euro nevermind to the 31 Ltd (875 Euro - 4,5 stars optical).

Now look again on those two lists and tell me what better investment in glass will you do for you A700 if mount doesn't matter? AF systems will improve but your lenses won't.

My 2 eurocents,
Radu

[regken]

Hi, Ken

I have to respectfully disagree on some points with you. For me what Sony does today is exactly what some pentaxians would of liked to see from Pentax. That being recycle a lot of older lens designs and bring a FF camera on the market. Yet IMHO this is the fastest but more dangerous in medium and long term because most of those older designs just recoated and motorised are not up to the today's standards (check photozone's Sony section for some really low scores).
More than that in between Sony's kit lenses and the very expensive stuff lies a hyatus of modern medium price/better performance lenses both in primes and zooms. One can easily see that Pentax has released a lot of modern designs (albeit APS-C) that are relatively inexpensive and if this year they'll put on the market 3 more that means 9 new lenses in one year. Those lenses will both stand up better to the new sensors with probably more Mp and will have a better price/performance ratio in general.
Now about the Sony FF camera of course it's a bit early to reach a verdict on it but even from the dpreview's samples it's pretty obvious that it puts a lot of pressure on the lenses especially on borders.
I for sure would prefer to:

1) choose to pay extra for a FF lens if I want to or not pay anything more for a similar lens in performance but APS-C only;
2) I rather have 9-10 new lenses a year build with modern designs to boot and spreaded on 3 levels (kit, medium - some DAs, high level - ltds for primes and DA* for zooms and primes) than have 15 old FF lenses rebaged and motorised;


As for your assertion about zooms let's see:

Sony
- ultra wide: 11-18 - 1,5 stars on photozone - 537 Euro;
- wide to medium tele_ 16-80 CZ - 4 stars - 626 Euro;
- tele - 70-300G - 3,5 stars - 758 Euro;

Range covered: 11-300. Price: 1921 Euro

Pentax:
- ultra wide: 12-24 - 4 stars - 578 Euro;
- wide to standard: 16-45 - 4 stars - 379 Euro;
- standard to tele: 50 - 135 - 4 stars - 699 Euro;
- tele - 55 - 300: not tested yet but acclaimed on other tests - 259 Euro

Range covered: 12-300 (minus 45-50). Price: 1915 Euro.

All stars from photozone's all prices from the same dealer: Foto Erhardt - Objektive

Just for fun compare the Sony 35/1,4 old design (2 stars optical - 1210 Euro) with Pentax FA 35/2 (4 stars) a lens that is 299 Euro nevermind to the 31 Ltd (875 Euro - 4,5 stars optical).

Now look again on those two lists and tell me what better investment in glass will you do for you A700 if mount doesn't matter? AF systems will improve but your lenses won't.

My 2 eurocents,
Radu

Hi radu,

Respectfully I must disagree on the premise the new designs are superior to the older ones. The DA lenses are very nice but they are DA in design. I can see having an APS-C body and a FF body but not separate lenses. My old Minolta lenses will serve me well on both bodies when I get a FF body. Can't do that with the DA lenses unless I'm willing to sacrifice a lot of MP's.

Granted the old motor driven AF lenses are not as fast as the new designs but the fact is my old Minolta 28-75 f 2.8 that cost me $230 is so fast on the A700 I don't need any more speed. Plus it will do a very good job on a FF body when the time comes. The same can be said for my $240 Minolta 100-300 APO lens.

In regards to Pentax coming out with more lenses, it's not important to me as to how many low cost or high cost lenses either come out with. The old Minolta lenses work well for me, are priced right, readily available, and will work well on both sized sensors.

Last but not least is your assertion the Pentax AF system will improve. When? I'm 66 years old and time is running out. Some of the action shots I've gotten lately with the A700 would have required more work using the Pentax and I'm having enough of a hard time learning this hobby. When shooting action the A700 is just more responsive and easier to use.

Regards,

Hi radu,

Respectfully I must disagree on the premise the new designs are superior to the older ones. The DA lenses are very nice but they are DA in design. I can see having an APS-C body and a FF body but not separate lenses. My old Minolta lenses will serve me well on both bodies when I get a FF body. Can't do that with the DA lenses unless I'm willing to sacrifice a lot of MP's.

Like I said it's a matter of personal choice but Pentax allows this choice (and Canon, Nikon too) and Sony not. About the new design quality I am talking about respected sites reviews that show great optical qualities for many Pentax lenses at not that expensive prices. Again MHO!

Granted the old motor driven AF lenses are not as fast as the new designs but the fact is my old Minolta 28-75 f 2.8 that cost me $230 is so fast on the A700 I don't need any more speed. Plus it will do a very good job on a FF body when the time comes. The same can be said for my $240 Minolta 100-300 APO lens.

In regards to Pentax coming out with more lenses, it's not important to me as to how many low cost or high cost lenses either come out with. The old Minolta lenses work well for me, are priced right, readily available, and will work well on both sized sensors.

Ok, I see your personal point but you said "That used to be true but am afraid Sony has surpassed Pentax in the "best bang for your buck" department for a system with good zoom lenses" then I assumed you reffer to a new system from scratch.

Last but not least is your assertion the Pentax AF system will improve. When? I'm 66 years old and time is running out. Some of the action shots I've gotten lately with the A700 would have required more work using the Pentax and I'm having enough of a hard time learning this hobby. When shooting action the A700 is just more responsive and easier to use.

I have no doubts that A700 is a more modern camera than K20D in some aspects and even more that K20D has some internal parts that seem too old for its class. It would be plain stupid from me to claim otherwise.

Regards,

......
Radu

[Stratman]

I won't buy anything that says Sony on it

[Jodokast96]

The latest firmware update has corrected that with a NR off option. As I said Sony is still giving the users options.

Indeed it has. Guess they told me where to stick it, lol.

[Lowell Goudge]

Not!

I have thought about it, but examine my signature. There is much more for me to think about than fast focus - since I have some nice lenses, but most of the other stuff I have can be used with any brand camera (tripods, monopods, lighting, etc).

Here is my thought: full frame, fast autofocus! Wow! $3K Ouch! - just for the body.

Well there is more to it. How about the positives of the Pentax system? Weather proofing body and lenses? In-body stabilization? Already have a kit that is pretty darn good? 14.6 MP? Hmmm.... A lot to give up for faster focus....

I am sure that many people are looking and thinking about it. I just thought that I would say it.

Yes, I am stirring the pot, but let's get it out. You cannot do better if you have a good Pentax system (with the same money).

to think I wasted all of 20 seconds thinking you were serious and wanting to put an offer in on your kit

I won't buy anything that says Sony on it

JLO has Sony tattooed on her ass, would you buy that?

[cardinal43]

JLO has Sony tattooed on her ass, would you buy that?

The ass, but not the tatoo.

The ass, but not the tatoo.

Cheeky.

[troywhite]

That used to be true but am afraid Sony has surpassed Pentax in the "best bang for your buck" department for a system with good zoom lenses.

pffffffffft as if I'd wanna buy a camera from a games console company!!


(edit: it would be just as bad as buying a camera from a company who specialises in ink-jet printers )

[Stratman]

JLO has Sony tattooed on her ass, would you buy that?

Hahaha, To be honest, I'm not a big J Lo fan either, Now if it was Jessica Alba, my Sony boycott would end in a jiffy !!!

Hahaha, To be honest, I'm not a big J Lo fan either, Now if it was Jessica Alba, my Sony boycott would end in a jiffy !!!

I'm more of a Jessica Biel guy myself.

[regken]

I'm more of a Jessica Biel guy myself.

Who are these women you are talking about? Now if Sophia Loren had that tattoo, anywhere......

[Stratman]

Jessica Alba.....

[Clicker]

JLO has Sony tattooed on her ass, would you buy that?

This proves it's really BIG because i've never seen Sony on it

I think all these threads about switching brands should just die out Adam started this site for talk about Pentax. I admit some people must switch; so be it, what it should all come down to is the images so can we get back to those.
If people want to switch, don't bother convincing them otherwise, they have their reasons so let them

I would much rather have you guys pay ATTENTION TO ME!!!! and help me shoot better with my entry level K200D