Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-17-2009, 10:06 AM   #166
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 464
QuoteOriginally posted by dylansalt Quote
To continue

Nikon D300 & Nikon 70-200 2.8 combo = R 55 000 & ZERO VR

Pentax K20D & Sigma 70-200 2.8 combo = R 22 500 - lens VR stabilised

Whichever way one looks at it the Pentax allows a serious photographer to get superlative images for a fraction of the cost of the Nikon.

Dylan
A bit of a nitpick here -- The Nikon 70-200 has VR.

It's an amazing lens, but a bit way too expensive, which is why I sold mine. I think I'm "backing down" to the Sigma 70-200, as it's 1/2 the price and seems to produce fine images.
Also, I believe the Nikon is going to definitely outperform the Pentax combo in what this combo would probably be used for -- fast-action sports or event photography.

Thanks to the person that uploaded those Sigma 70-200 examples They look pretty good!


Last edited by cputeq; 03-17-2009 at 10:12 AM.
03-17-2009, 10:11 AM   #167
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 464
QuoteOriginally posted by dylansalt Quote
The Nikon D300 body only= R 30 000

Pentax K20D body only = R 10 100

For it's price the Nikon "should" perform a bit better don't you think?

Does the Nikon produce pics R 20 000 better - debatable


Dylan
There is an important detail to this argument and I'm glad you brought it up.

IQ-wise -- I will never argue for any system. Seriously, they all produce outstanding images in the hands of a person knowing what they're doing.


So, if you're moving to/from the K20D to get "better IQ" under various circumstances, you're fooling yourself, as it's not going to happen (assuming parity in glass quality). This is something very important for people to realize, as many seem to think the "more expensive" stuff will automatically look better.


What the Nikon will allow you to do, though, is just get shots you can't get with the K20D due to frame rate limitations, AF tracking speeds, or lens availability.

It really depends on what you're shooting for and what your goals are -- which is why it's good to look at the system instead of just the body
03-17-2009, 12:01 PM   #168
Site Supporter
Pentaxke's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Belgium
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 409
I haven't read the entire topic, so I don't know if the OT already bought sth new or not, but I would advise against it...

Half a year I switched systems too, and sold all of my gear (well kind of) to go Fuji S3. I regret it. Not for the camera, which is great for me and delivers, but for the lenses. I now miss Pentax glass. No mather how you put it, Nikkors don't stand up in any way to Pentax lenses. I have now tried and used over 10 different Nikkors and none of them could match the Pentax equivalent. I even tried the Nikkor 17-55 f/2,8 and 70-200 f/2,8, and optically they were average at best. Kinda makes you wish that Nikon skipped making lenses altogether and leave that for the brands who know how to make superior optics (Pentax and Olympus in my book.)

Moreover, if you have already invested in pentax glass I would opt for the K20D. I can't think of anything that the D90 does what the K20 doesn't...
03-17-2009, 12:22 PM   #169
Site Supporter
Pentaxke's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Belgium
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 409
QuoteOriginally posted by cputeq Quote
Sure, here are some pros for Nikon -- They may not apply to advantages against Pentax, for instance, but are pros nonetheless (for me at least):

[Snip]

7) Zooms are outstanding in quality.
I would love to know what zooms you're talking about?
Do you mean the freakin' expenssive but mediocre 17-55? Or by any chance the still freakin' expenssive but still more mediocre 18-200...? Like I said above, I have tried various Nikkors now, and every each and one of them peforms, optically speaking, less than their Pentax counterpart... Maybe I haven't tried enough? Maybe I had lemons (in which case Nikon has a serious problem in the QC department...?)

I finally set for a 16-85 and a 60 micro Nikkor, but please, spare me the phrase 'Nikkors are best', as a DA 16-45 and FA 50 macro easily outperforms the two...

(I am only speaking of optical quality - sharpness, vignetting, CA, ed all - because I couldn't care less how fast the thing focusses...)

03-17-2009, 12:43 PM   #170
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxke Quote
I would love to know what zooms you're talking about?
Do you mean the freakin' expenssive but mediocre 17-55? Or by any chance the still freakin' expenssive but still more mediocre 18-200...? Like I said above, I have tried various Nikkors now, and every each and one of them peforms, optically speaking, less than their Pentax counterpart... Maybe I haven't tried enough? Maybe I had lemons (in which case Nikon has a serious problem in the QC department...?)

I finally set for a 16-85 and a 60 micro Nikkor, but please, spare me the phrase 'Nikkors are best', as a DA 16-45 and FA 50 macro easily outperforms the two...

(I am only speaking of optical quality - sharpness, vignetting, CA, ed all - because I couldn't care less how fast the thing focusses...)
I'm no Nikon user, but the 14-24 if you count that is probably the best ultrawide on the market. Even a lot of Canon users are getting adapters for it. No clue about the rest of 'em though...

For Canon I can pimp the 24-70/28-70,70-200 (all 4 versions!), 100-400... some very very good glass!
03-17-2009, 03:43 PM   #171
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: US
Posts: 41
No the Canon 24-70mm is not very good glass, its mediocre. The Sigma 24-70mm hsm looks like it will be better.

Do you really want to pay $1700 to have an image stabilized 70-200 f2.8?

Having owned a Canon 5D 2 there is a shortage of good Canon glass below 70mm.

It makes you realize just how good Pentax glass is and how useful in-body stabilization is.

The Nikon D90 is a smudge machine, I suppose image quality is not so important now that autofocus speed is the must-have.

Last edited by Ted1212; 03-17-2009 at 03:44 PM. Reason: missed a word
03-17-2009, 03:59 PM   #172
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxke Quote
I have tried various Nikkors now, and every each and one of them peforms, optically speaking, less than their Pentax counterpart... Maybe I haven't tried enough?
I've seen the Nikon 24-70 and I think it's prime sharp (on a friend's D700).
The 14-24 is also supposed to be amazing. The 70-200VR is also sharp and contrasty.
None of these have Pentax equivalents in production though Except maybe the 12-24 but that's really a Tokina...
03-17-2009, 04:37 PM   #173
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by kenyee Quote
None of these have Pentax equivalents in production though Except maybe the 12-24 but that's really a Tokina...
Perhaps you mean, there is a Tokina 12-24 that is really a Pentax?

Anyhow, true, Pentax doesn't make lenses in the other specific ranges you mention. But then, Nikon doesn't make lenses in some of the specific ranges Pentax does, either. Between Tamron, Sigma, and Tokina, though, most possibilities are covered one way or another.

03-17-2009, 05:33 PM   #174
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Perhaps you mean, there is a Tokina 12-24 that is really a Pentax?
Yes, the Pentax 12-24 is really a Tokina in other brands. Still highly regarded, but definitely a Tokina and less expensive in other mounts.
Each system has different strengths. I was mainly replying to pentaxke who said all the nikon lenses he's tried have been unimpressive
03-17-2009, 05:45 PM   #175
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Ted1212 Quote
No the Canon 24-70mm is not very good glass, its mediocre. The Sigma 24-70mm hsm looks like it will be better.
.
MEDIOCRE?

C'mon now, this is getting a little silly. Maybe you got a bad copy or something, but it's a friggin' fantastic zoom and one that's acknowledged as such by quite a few pros.

And shortage of good glass below 70? Have you ever shot a 35L? 24L? 14L II?

Really, this "Canikon" bashing is getting a little tiring -- why not acknowledge that there are great things in all brands rather than take every opportunity to put the "competition" down?
03-17-2009, 05:48 PM   #176
Veteran Member
jct us101's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rohnert Park, CA
Posts: 3,695
The Pentax bashing gets kind of tiring too, just sayin
03-17-2009, 05:56 PM   #177
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by jct us101 Quote
The Pentax bashing gets kind of tiring too, just sayin
Who's doing the bashing?

It ain't me, I think the Pentax system is great, the lenses are great, and the K20D is an outstanding camera. Perfect? No, and neither is my pro body Canon -- you just have to pick the one that matches your shooting.

edit: I want to state that the reason I stick around here after switching systems is that there's a lot of good discussion, the people are great, and I enjoy reading about what everyone and Pentax are up to. But I will admit that I see quite a bit of anti Canon and anti Nikon sentiment -- it makes me feel quite unwelcome at times. I know that I do point out what I consider areas for improvement in Pentax gear (and honestly, I don't think improving AF and fps is entirely unreasonable), but I will freely admit that other brands could benefit from things like in body stabilization and the great weather sealing on entry/mid level cameras.

Last edited by pingflood; 03-17-2009 at 06:01 PM.
03-17-2009, 06:02 PM   #178
Veteran Member
jct us101's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Rohnert Park, CA
Posts: 3,695
There was NEVER any anti-pentax sentiment on POTN, of course.
03-17-2009, 06:03 PM   #179
Site Supporter
Mallee Boy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hindmarsh Isl. Sth Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,490
QuoteOriginally posted by blwnhr Quote

Grant, I'm not familiar with the D60's capabilities as I stepped straight to the D300. As a result I cannot remember if the D60 has provision for both screw and in-lens drive for AF.

I have had the fortune of using 4 different 70,80-200 f/2.8 lenses in Nikon mount. These were the Nikkor 70-200 VR, Nikkor 80-200, Sigma 70-200 and Tamron 70-200. The Nikkor VR was the best at pretty well everything on the D300, AF, sharpness wide open etc. The Sigma was not very far behind, stop it down to f/4 and it is soooo sharp, AF was every bit as quick as the VR. The 70-200 Tamron was equal to the 80-200 D in sharpness, but better than the D in AF. That being said the Tamron wasn't a patch on the Sigma.
Thanks Adam, your observations are very much appreciated.

and thanks for posting the samples, very helpful. Very good work as usual.
My daughter's budget however is the over riding factor and I am staying out of that .

It was interesting trying to buy one of these in HK; the sales assistants are saying adamantly that the AF features of either the Sig or Tammy will not work on the D60...while reviews are saying the opposite (no screw drive on D60), so the discussions with these guys gets very interesting (throw in the language & it also gets very tiring). Some of the sales people did not believe that Tamron even made such a lens.

Finally got down to price with a couple of them and the Tamron came tumbling down ....$400 less than Australia.....then they couldn't (wouldn't??) supply....out of stock.

Sigma they were less inclined to deal on as aggressively. And the Nikkors were out of reach.

Interesting day that saw us come home with holes in our shoes and our wallets still full as a result of no purchases. Saw lots of Pentax offerings though.

Thanks again.
Cheers
Grant
03-17-2009, 06:04 PM   #180
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by jct us101 Quote
There was NEVER any anti-pentax sentiment on POTN, of course.
Hell, you think POTN is bad, check out dpreview forums sometimes. But what does that have to do with *this* site?

edit: actually, I decided to do a search on "Pentax" on POTN and the first bunch of hits were people talking about the cameras they used to have, and how Canon/Nikon are concerned about Pentax having their built in IS... and some people poking fun at the white K-m, probably far kinder than the comments on THIS site... but failed to spot much bashing. Perhaps you can point it out?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, d90, dslr, fun, iso, k20d, lot, love, movie, nikon, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Equivalent of Pentax primes on Canon and Nikon FF systems dexmus Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 10-01-2010 11:16 PM
I'm Switching to Nikon . . . Blue Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 06-27-2010 12:54 AM
For Pentax users who changed systems or thinking about switching rustynail925 Pentax DSLR Discussion 34 03-04-2010 01:22 AM
Nikon and Pentax - Question on Flash systems comparison VAV Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 9 08-13-2009 07:24 AM
ProMaster 70-300 - seeking Image quality opinions RoxnDox Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 06-26-2007 12:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top