Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-25-2009, 11:21 AM   #76
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by Samsungian Quote
,offered just to get new owners who'll then pay more for equivilent Sony mount lenses.

I've read the A900 is a loss leader, but at $2699 maybe they are not converting enough buyers into Sony mount, yet. At $999 there would likely be a big wave of new sony buyers.

Both A900 and Nikon D3x share same sony sensor. D3x costs almost 3 times the money the Sony a900 costs thesedays. Sony has proven they'll take a loss to compete in full frame marketplace.
Hmm, I suppose it is a variation on the "razor" strategy (or for those not old enough to remember non-disposable razors, the printer cartridge). I can believe that the a900 is a loss leader, and am sure that at $1700 they are making a profit on the Zeiss glass. But unless they have a much bigger profit margin than Canikon on the lenses I don't see how it is sustainable.

I've read that the dSLR division at Sony is bleeding money and they can't do that forever. If the other divisions were doing well they could support it but the rest of the company isn't exactly beating the world (*cough* Playstation *cough*).

I like the a900 files a lot. I like the body though it feels a little unrefined wrt UI. I do kinda hate Sony though and in general avoid their products. Not sure when that somewhat irrational thing started but Sony just annoys me. Even still I've come close to getting an a900 system on a couple of occasions.

07-25-2009, 11:24 AM   #77
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Well, Canon currently has 53 FF lenses, and something like 7 APS-C ones. They are pretty well invested in FF and that is clear from their lineup.

As for cheap FF glass, they do have quite a bit. Like the sub-$100 50/1.8, the 70-300 zooms, the 28-135 IS, etc.
I will admit to not knowing much of the Canon lineup (I never bonded with the bodies). It seems like Nikon has a lot more "DX" glass out there so they are pretty invested in APS.

Does Canon have any "ltd prime" equivalents? I think I've looked from time to time (the Canon web site sucks) but didn't see (m)any equivalents.
07-25-2009, 11:25 AM   #78
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
No "Limited" equivalents like the Pentax APS-C ones. They do have some amazing FF primes, like the 35L, 85L and 135L that I suppose would be the equivalent FF glass. Fast, expensive and amazing image quality.

Here's a good overview page:
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ProductCatIndexAct&fcategoryid=140
07-25-2009, 11:41 AM   #79
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
No "Limited" equivalents like the Pentax APS-C ones. They do have some amazing FF primes, like the 35L, 85L and 135L that I suppose would be the equivalent FF glass. Fast, expensive and amazing image quality.

Here's a good overview page:
Canon EOS Camera Lenses
But if I read it right, there are no primes with IS until you get to 300mm. That ends up being a bit of a deal breaker for someone like me that shoots available light and handheld. While I could crank up the ISO, having IS makes a difference.

It does look like 5Dmk2 and 24-105/4 with IS is a good "do it all" setup, though a bit slow. The 24-70/2.8 doesn't have IS but is a few hundred less than the Zeiss/Sony.

Feh - they're all good. Just comes down to personal preference.

07-25-2009, 11:53 AM   #80
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
Yeah, the 24-105 is very very good. I love mine.

IS with primes definitely helps, and I wish that was an option. That said, IS only gets you so far if the subject isn't static, so there's something to be said for fast primes and high ISO too. If you can shoot at f/1.4 with nice ISO 3200 you have a pretty capable setup!
07-25-2009, 12:07 PM   #81
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,087
QuoteOriginally posted by mickey Quote
Welcome back RH.


+1

07-25-2009, 12:12 PM   #82
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
Canon announced the Next Wave of IS glass the other day

Canon has no limited type primes, however their best primes are lens motor outfitted "USM" which is their version of Pentax SDM and they are gasketed and weathersealed. None of the Pentax LTDs have SDM or are weathersealed. LTD's are unique to Pentax. If lens size matters most then Pentax wins. If inbody shake reduction matters most, then pentax wins again. But if Sony launches a consumer rebel type full frame for $999 Canon will respond with its own plastic fantastic full frame for same money:

I'd Guess ;^)


" Here's the Canon Info

"Canon Inc. announced today the development of Hybrid Image Stabilizer (IS), the world’s first* optical Image Stabilizer which compensates for both angular camera shake and shift camera shake. The technology will be incorporated in an interchangeable single lens reflex (SLR) camera lens planned for commercial release before the end of 2009.

Several different preventative methods and corrective procedures have been introduced to compensate for errors caused by camera shake. Canon began researching methods to compensate for camera shake in the 1980s. In 1995 Canon launched the EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM, the world’s first interchangeable SLR camera lens to feature a mechanism that compensates for optical camera shake. Since then, the company has continued to produce a variety of interchangeable lenses with image stabilisation capabilities, and boasts a total of 21 such lenses in its current product line-up, including the EF 200mm f/2L IS USM which features up to 5-stops of blur correction.

Canon’s newly developed Hybrid IS technology optimally compensates for angular camera shake (rotational) and shift camera shake (linear). Sudden changes in camera angle can cause significant blur in images taken during standard shooting, whereas blur caused by shift-based shaking, when a camera moves parallel to the subject, is more pronounced in macro and other close-up photography.

The new Hybrid IS technology incorporates an angular velocity sensor that detects the extent of angular camera shake which is found in all previous optical Image Stabilizer mechanisms, as well as a new acceleration sensor that determines the amount of shift-based camera shake. Hybrid IS also employs a newly developed algorithm that combines the output of the two sensors and moves the lens elements to compensate for both types of movement. Hybrid IS dramatically enhances the effects of Image Stabilizer especially during macro shooting, which is difficult for conventional image stabilisation technologies.

Canon is actively engaged in ongoing research and development of interchangeable SLR camera lenses incorporating Hybrid IS technology, and is aiming for the early commercialisation and inclusion of the technology in a wide range of products.

So, a 24-70 2.8 IS anyone? :-) "






QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
But if I read it right, there are no primes with IS until you get to 300mm. That ends up being a bit of a deal breaker for someone like me that shoots available light and handheld. While I could crank up the ISO, having IS makes a difference.

It does look like 5Dmk2 and 24-105/4 with IS is a good "do it all" setup, though a bit slow. The 24-70/2.8 doesn't have IS but is a few hundred less than the Zeiss/Sony.

Feh - they're all good. Just comes down to personal preference.
07-25-2009, 12:36 PM   #83
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by Samsungian Quote

So, a 24-70 2.8 IS anyone? :-) "
Of course it'll weigh 5 lbs and have it's own gravitational field

I have no doubt that Canon will put IS into all their new lenses. They are just waiting for it to be cheap enough to do so. Canon will also be in the edge of raw performance for the immediate future. Pentax will never beat Canikon at their own game, and I think they (Pentax) have made the exact correct decision to go "tough/weathersealed" on one hand and "small/elegant" (ltd primes) on the other.

Resolution/"performance" chasers will *never* be happy with Pentax and frankly should avoid the brand. I think they can make it with the "be different" approach. "Me too" will kill them.

It actually is a pretty clear differentiation in the $500-$1500 dSLR field of play. If you want weather sealed and/or small light primes with IS, you go Pentax. If you want better AF, fps and other numbers, you go Canikon. If you want to "be like the Pros," you go Canikon. If you want to "be different," you go Pentax (or maybe Olympus). The better camera depends entirely on the user.

07-25-2009, 12:40 PM   #84
Veteran Member
pentaxmz's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 647
QuoteOriginally posted by amphysics Quote
MOSTLY NONSENSE DELETED
This is all troll and nothing more. Can we just delete this thread?

I have no problem speaking about the flaws of a particular brand (as most of you know), but when someone just joins this group to spew out nonsense... I just don't think this type of posting contributes anything to the forum.

There is very, very little factual information here and I see no purpose in having this stupid posting getting indexed by Google.
Attached Images
 
07-25-2009, 01:46 PM   #85
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Interesting post.
I might just reply out of boredom. Obviously 500D has less apparent (shown) noise, has a bit higher resolution (i believe only few lenses can out-resolve, even L ones) but both cameras are able to deliver stellar images (i think most DSLR now days can do that).

You could observe a bit of detail loss in red elements of 500D images, as well as some fidelity being lost because of the noise in the dark parts of K-7 images, but both cameras produce images so good, that it already requires precision scientific methods to compare them.

Such small differences are of no importance to using camera for photography (unless you push beyond conventional ISO ranges, like 6400..12800 where it is so dark, other cameras systems usually fail - like AF) and so invisible in general images.

I've included some crops from imaging-resource to illustrate what i'm saying. But this is enormous pixel peeping having lost any link with general photographic quality.
This means that all there is left to compare are other qualities of camera, where K-7 as being higher grade camera excels.

P.S. FlickR's JPEG recompression did a "good" job smearing both of the samples a bit, so the exact red circles may not show difference, but looking around will still show it.

Last edited by ytterbium; 07-25-2009 at 01:58 PM.
07-25-2009, 01:50 PM   #86
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
ytterbium: is that the 500D on the right? If so, so much for the claim that Canon "smears" higher ISO shots.

pentaxmz: there's been plenty of interesting chat in this thread aside from that unfortunate rant; please keep that in mind when you request just erasing it.
07-25-2009, 01:51 PM   #87
Veteran Member
pentaxmz's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Seattle
Posts: 647
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Interesting post.
I might just reply out of boredom. Obviously 500D has less apparent (shown) noise, has a bit higher resolution (i believe only few lenses can out-resolve, even L ones) but both cameras are able to deliver stellar images (i think most DSLR now days can do that).

You could observe a bit of detail loss in red elements of 500D images, as well as some fidelity being lost because of the noise in the dark parts of K-7 images, but both cameras produce images so good, that it already requires precision scientific methods to compare them.

Such small differences are of no importance to using camera for photography (unless you push beyond conventional ISO ranges, like 6400..12800 where it is so dark, other cameras systems usually fail - like AF) and so invisible in general images.

I've included some crops from imaging-resource to illustrate what i'm saying. But this is enormous pixel peeping having lost any link with general photography quality.
This means that all there is left to compare are other qualities of camera, where K-7 as being higher grade camera excels.
My troll posting seems like a 'gut' reaction. I never considered that this would turn into a meaningful thread.

I am really wondering about the image you attached. Although I realize that it is a reduced and noisy jpg, it seems very clear that the Canon images are sharper! Is Pentax to the left, Canon to the right??? I wish you had provided a link.

[CORRECTION] It seems there is a link. What an interesting 'optical illusion' the jpg posted above actually makes it seem as though the Canon images are sharper but going to the link and seeing the full resolution reveals there are clear differences. It's difficult to draw a definite conclusion from this example because of the following influences: difference in lenses, camera settings, lighting, angle, distance, focal length... unless all of these factors were scientifically matched up... such comparisons have little value... IMHO.

Last edited by pentaxmz; 07-25-2009 at 01:58 PM.
07-25-2009, 01:56 PM   #88
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Updated picture, flickr still spoiled jpeg.
I didn't named them on purpose, but to reduce confusion 500D (left) <----|----> (right) K-7.
I cannot provide direct link, only to "comparometer" itself and you have to pick camera and images (unfortunately they dont show up in URL when picking, framed page design):
Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page
07-25-2009, 01:58 PM   #89
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
Ah, that makes more sense -- the pic on the right looked a little noisier but a shade more detail. So that agrees with the general NR approach of the two cameras.
07-25-2009, 02:04 PM   #90
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,845
QuoteOriginally posted by amphysics Quote
It is an unfortunate thing to compare the professional level camera of Pentax with the Canon's entry level camera 500D. However, if you observe the two, you will get a disappointing conclusion.

1, Canon 500D has 15 million pixels, more than 14.6 million for K7.

2, Canon 500D has much cleaner picture than K-7. Just look at the comparasion
Canon EOS 500D Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

Pentax K-7 Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

It is seen that ISO3200 for 500D is just equivalent to ISO800 for K7

3, Canon 500D has FULL HD movie, but K7 does not have.

4, Canon 500D has almost all the functions that K7 boasts, such as Dynamic Range Expansion, Anti-Shake(Lens), Self-Cleaning, Fast Focus. In addition, Canon is known to have the accurate metering, in stead of dark Metering for Pentax.


In sum, there is nothing that is unique to K7 except the 100% viewfinder, but does it worth the extra $1500-$800=$700????????????

The worst thing for K7 is that the IQ does not improve much. It is a big drawback for Pentax.

I'd rather have a low-noise 10 million pixel camera than have a noisy 14.6 million camera, not to mention the fact that pixel # for 500D is 15 million.

In sum, 500D is much much better than K7. I will not spend extra money to become a Pentaxian.
This is so funny, thanks



A friend of mine with the Eos 450 keeps asking me about advice on how to get proper pictures.
He can't get a 50 mm stabilized, and the stabilized kit lens is slow.
Iso 1600 does not look good in JPEG, and it cannot devide in smaller like e.g. K20/K7. And Iso 800 from Eos 450 is often too low.
It is hard to give advice, when he can’t skip corners, like it would have been possible with the Pentax.
However, I do find the Eos 450, one of the better rebel, in a long time.

The 15 MP sensor in the Eos 50D, was not well received. But if it is good enough for you, than I guess it shouldn’t be revealed to you.

Best of luck, and be happy with what you've got. But best of all, learn how to use it properly.


QuoteOriginally posted by amphysics Quote
In my experience with K10D, ISO1600 is most frequently used in the evening. If 1600 is usable, then K-7 will be perfect.
I usually go for Iso 1250 in the evening on K10. Or top it with a fast lens, like my 50/1.2, (or just an f/1.8 lens)
I have been most impressed with the K20, at Iso 1600. Guess, you were never a film SLR shooter.

I don’t think you should go for the K7, it would be way too advanced, if Eos 500 is the league you’re looking at. (No offence meant)




QuoteOriginally posted by KungPOW Quote
More low light with a K10D:



K10D, f/2 @ 50 mm, 1/13, ISO 1600

Hand held at 1/13?!!? Thats just insane!

Go Pentax SR!
Great shots, thanks for showing.


It is so nice that threads like these are so rare, compared to DPR. Where people wanna fight to prevent others from going Pentax.
Here we can every once in a while, enter threads like these and have a laugh.


QuoteOriginally posted by zeus Quote
I've been browsing around here the last few weeks and decided it was time to chime in being I think you have brought up the arena where I am stuck.

I use a 40D at work but don't own a DSLR of my own was ready to finally make a purchase before the end of the summer. Being I don't have any lens systems in my bag, I am free to start anew with which ever product manufacturer is offering me the most camera for around $1500 (I'll then dig deep and add quality lenses over time.)

I know we are talking about the T1i in this thread, but I am wondering how people feel the K-7 stacks up to the 50D as that is where I am currently looking as well (and it still comes in a few hundred cheaper with the 28-135 IS USM Kit lens.) It would seem like the more reasonable comparison.

Video is not a deal breaker to me, but built quality is very important being I live in a very cold environ. I was impressed right away with the K-7 specs (as far as weather sealing and cold tolerance) which is why I am particularly drawn to it right off the bat. I've spent the last few weeks digging through reviews, but am still awaiting a definitive final word on the K-7 from a reputable source with the production firmware.

Anyway, not trying to feed the troll with my first post - I'd just like to hear some thoughts being I will probably be getting one of these cameras over the next few months and am primary interested in using it for mostly landscape and wildlife shooting. It seems like a tough choice to me, but maybe it is not.

It is always a big choice, when deciding on a system. The mid series Semi-Pro segment; Eos 30D etc. have always been good, from Canon hand. And really, the place most people ought to start, if they wanna continue with photography. Or else the Nikon D80 level.

50D has higher frame rate, than the K7. And more advanced AF than the Eos 5D Mark II. If you already like the Eos 40D, then 50D is probably gonna be easy to go to.

Landscape is easy, with a compact sealed Pentax and some pancake lenses.
But if AF-C is of high importance to you, you really get a great package in the 50D.
Here is a Pro Canon user, going with Pentax and pancakes, when out hiking :
76031684 photo - Chris Miller photos at pbase.com

Duplo, working in Greenland, has given his view on the K7 here :
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/67678-taking-k-7-w...valuation.html



How important sealing is to you, you gotta find out for yourself. And as important, how the ergonomics work for you. The sealing of 50D is probably gonna resemble Eos 5D Mark II :
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-talk/49674-fate-one-5d-mkii.html
Canon retain full gasketing, for the top-line Eos 1’series.

Best of luck with your choice. And most importantly, just have fun with your choice. Life it too short, to naggle over little things like camera brands

Last edited by Jonson PL; 07-25-2009 at 03:26 PM.
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, canon, dslr, k7, million, pentax, photography, photographyblog, pixel, sum
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Switching to Canon 5D, advice needed on adapting Pentax lenses on canon camera hangu Photographic Technique 4 08-19-2010 09:09 PM
Pentax Kx - Canon EOS 500D dilemma DavoMrMac Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 12 02-02-2010 01:46 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 55-300mm, Sigma 105mm Macro, Canon 500D Filter zinj Sold Items 2 07-28-2009 09:08 AM
Canon EOS 500D reveiw Pentax KM \ 2000 is better :) Adrian Owerko Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 5 05-25-2009 02:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:35 PM. | 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