Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-09-2009, 04:56 AM   #16
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 240
QuoteOriginally posted by causey Quote
On the high ISO topic: Pentax's policy is to leave its customers the liberty to apply the degree of noise-reduction that they desire. On the other hand, noise-reduction means smearing of detail.
Agreed, this is a good thing in my book.

07-09-2009, 05:55 AM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: NJ, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 321
Biff

I dont have time to go into this but in camera IS is as good as in lens. Go to Imaging Resources and see their review of the k20D and see how they rated the Pentax IS system in their k20D review. In fact the k7 is better since it can stabilize rotation about the lens axis, something NO LENS IS SYSTEM CAN DO.

I find Canon and NIkon zealots throw around the In Lens argument but cannot back it up with facts. It is faith.
07-09-2009, 06:56 AM   #18
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 240
The main point about in-body IS is that it has broader applications. It renders all lenses IS, ALL of them, and as a result there's one less thing to break in new Pentax lenses.
07-09-2009, 07:49 AM   #19
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
when I started in film I picked pentax compatable (Ricoh actually) because it was best features for the buck. One Brother in law whot nikon the other canon.

Since then, one brother in law has stopped shooting (except P&S) and the other switched to nikon after canon obsoleted his lenses twice.

I won't argue the benefits of one camera over the other to any great extent because all of the cameras are good, and take good photos there is no question about that.

Some camera makers offer things that are better, also no argument, nikon may have the best flash system, for example, canon has had the most time with CMOS sensors and these may be better.

In camera vs in lenss stabalization is really more a function of getting stabalization on all your lenses or paying each time, but there are advantages also for in lens, specifically that the image in the fiew finder is strabalized with in lens systems, and also the image hitting you rlight meter (specifically spot metering) therefore accuracy is better, but as many have pointed ouot, the K10, K20 and K7 have rotational stabilization which is not done in in lens systems.

there is no right or wrong. its your money do what you think, you won;'t be disappointed with any choise, but beware only a few of the top nikons offer backwards compatability to manual lenses, and canon has none at all to my knowledge.

Depending on where your hobby takes yoou this can be important.

I still have every lens (and camera I ever bought) and while I don't do a lot of film any more, I still like to play with my old Manual lenses, many of them are very good indeed.

as an extra point, one thing to do is read the reviews with respect to ease of use and menus. Here, I think pentax really shines.

07-09-2009, 08:30 AM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by mabelsound Quote
I think that Canon and Nikon have better autofocus, and Nikon is the king at high ISO. But Pentax has the edge on size and prime lenses, and in-body IS allows you to shoot stabilized with old glass. These are key features for me.

<snip>
Emphasis mine.

You know, everyone says that Nikon is the king of high ISO. But honestly, after spending hours upon hours comparing on pixel-peeper.com, I don't see it. The difference is marginal at best in the real-world applications that populate pixel-peeper.com, and I like the way the Pentax gear renders the images. Besides, if your final target is print, at 8x10 you literally can't tell the difference between Nikon and Pentax ISO 1600-3200 (when exposed properly).

Check out the high-ISO thread that's running now. There are some pix there that show how well PTX can perform in high-ISO situations!

But yeah, CaNikon's AF is better, no question. What I like most about my K20D is the IQ and palette of the Pentax glass. I love my prime lenses, and get shake reduction on them - you don't get stabilization on Canon (I didn't check Nikon, but it's probably similar) under 200mm.
07-09-2009, 08:31 AM   #21
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 240
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
as an extra point, one thing to do is read the reviews with respect to ease of use and menus. Here, I think pentax really shines.
The K-7 KILLS in this department. The new menu system is hugely superior to the K20D, and the ergonomics are superb. Personally I would prefer the ISO and green buttons to be switched in position, but I'll get used to that eventually.

It really, truly reminds me of the LX. It feels solid and well thought out.
07-09-2009, 08:36 AM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 240
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
You know, everyone says that Nikon is the king of high ISO. But honestly, after spending hours upon hours comparing on pixel-peeper.com, I don't see it. The difference is marginal at best in the real-world applications that populate pixel-peeper.com, and I like the way the Pentax gear renders the images. Besides, if your final target is print, at 8x10 you literally can't tell the difference between Nikon and Pentax ISO 1600-3200 (when exposed properly).
I totally agree. I've peeped those pics too, and while Nikon seems to come out on top, I personally have almost no practical application for that small improvement. K20D high-ISO pics looked great printed, even up to 13x19 in my opinion, and this will be true of the K-7 as well. Pentax's other advantages, on the other hand, are very important to me.

I recognize the inferiority of Pentax's autofocus, but again, for my uses, it is way, way more than good enough, and on the K-7 it is greatly improved from the K20D.
07-09-2009, 09:34 AM   #23
and
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,472
QuoteOriginally posted by mabelsound Quote
The K-7 KILLS in this department. The new menu system is hugely superior to the K20D, and the ergonomics are superb. Personally I would prefer the ISO and green buttons to be switched in position, but I'll get used to that eventually.

It really, truly reminds me of the LX. It feels solid and well thought out.
I seem to read the menu system is one of the areas reviewers keep complaining about. Imo this is where bias/preference shines through the most. you see comments about canon is made for photographers by photographers, or that it is bad etcetc. It seems the most common mistake for reviewers, they own a certain camera and complain about any camera that doesnt work like the one they are used to in terms of button layout and menus.

07-09-2009, 09:34 AM   #24
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
E
But yeah, CaNikon's AF is better, no question. What I like most about my K20D is the IQ and palette of the Pentax glass.
This is where a not insignificant number of photographers (as opposed to pixel peepers) tend to comment. You hear the terms "plastic" wrt Canon images and "cool" wrt Nikon. One can certainly do a lot in pp, but I do know that out-of-the-box in my hands Nikons have a different image look than Pentax and I prefer Pentax. I really like the Sony a900 images I've seen as well.
07-09-2009, 10:17 AM   #25
Dom
Guest




In answer to the original question Conikan have bigger marketing budgets. You will also find that a lot of experienced photographers have a lot of respect for Pentax equipment.
07-09-2009, 10:29 AM   #26
Veteran Member
VaughnA's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,363
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Nikon and Canon have taken a film solution (lens based stabilization) and applied to digital. Obviously with film there is no possible way to move the film around to stabilize an image, however with digital, there is and with each succesive camera body, the ability to stabilize it improves a little more. I am firmly convinced that the reason that Canon and Nikon continue to sell these lenses is that they get a premium for them. You can't tell me that it costs an extra 400 to 500 dollars to manufacture these lenses as opposed to non-IS lenses, yet that is what they get for them.
They could move the lens mount around so that in-body would show in the viewfinder. But I expect the engineering required and durability would be a problem.
07-09-2009, 11:10 AM   #27
Veteran Member
Duck Dodgers's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the 24½th Century!
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 439
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
[...] after canon obsoleted his lenses twice. [...]
A prime ( ) reason why I am now on-board with Pentax. Canon abandoned the FD lens line (along with my then almost new lenses) when they created the first film EOS bodies. At first it didn't bother me too much; manual focus had always been fine with me. But as the "digital revolution" came to SLRs, it became apparent that there was no path forward for me and my FD lenses. I held out until 2007, and then purchased the K10D. Part of my decision was based on the fact that Canon had orphaned an entire line of lenses. Don't get me wrong; I'm all for progress...I had already seen how Intel crippled their CPUs in order to maintain backwards compatibility with the old 8086 processors and Windows. Sometimes you have to make a clean break. Yet Pentax was able to migrate their lenses to AF/digital, and they're a much smaller company. Maybe AF was an impossibility with Canon's FD breech/bayonet mounts...I don't know. And maybe Pentax will come out with an all-new mount on the K-8. I don't know. But two years ago, for me, Pentax was the obvious choice. I am confident that I would make the same choice today.


[/fanboy_mode]
07-09-2009, 11:17 AM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Duck Dodgers Quote
A prime ( ) reason why I am now on-board with Pentax. Canon abandoned the FD lens line (along with my then almost new lenses) when they created the first film EOS bodies. At first it didn't bother me too much; manual focus had always been fine with me. But as the "digital revolution" came to SLRs, it became apparent that there was no path forward for me and my FD lenses. I held out until 2007, and then purchased the K10D. Part of my decision was based on the fact that Canon had orphaned an entire line of lenses. Don't get me wrong; I'm all for progress...I had already seen how Intel crippled their CPUs in order to maintain backwards compatibility with the old 8086 processors and Windows. Sometimes you have to make a clean break. Yet Pentax was able to migrate their lenses to AF/digital, and they're a much smaller company. Maybe AF was an impossibility with Canon's FD breech/bayonet mounts...I don't know. And maybe Pentax will come out with an all-new mount on the K-8. I don't know. But two years ago, for me, Pentax was the obvious choice. I am confident that I would make the same choice today.


[/fanboy_mode]
Almost exactly my own story. I flirted with Pentax back in the film/MF days, as my wife loved their small cameras (MEs compared to my Canon F1s), and in testing, I fell in love with their glass (even though I had some L series Canons). But LX gear was too hard to come by used, so I stuck with Canon FD (the T90 was an awesome camera!) up until I went digital. Then I remembered the Pentax glass and saw the Pentax bang-for-the-buck advantage, and jumped on board. I haven't looked back since. Love those lenses.
07-09-2009, 01:29 PM   #29
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 874
I was shooting girls softball the other day with my K10d with a long lens, and I noticed how much I was shaking through the viewfinder. That was a good reminder to me to pay attention to my technique and holding the camera steady. I remember thinking at the time that I was glad that I had in body stabilization so that I saw the shaking.

Honestly, I don't know the science about if in-lens IS is better. What I do know is that in-body IS works very well for me. I have it on every lens that I own. Buying it over and over again just seems ridiculous to me.

If you don't need fast AF and sports shooting is not your thing, I think Pentax offers a lot of value. The K20d is a fantastic deal right now.

One thing that does bother me about Pentax is that it is harder to find accessories, it's much harder to rent Pentax stuff or find friends that have items that you may be able to try out. That isolation is becoming significant to me.
07-09-2009, 03:49 PM   #30
Junior Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 38
QuoteOriginally posted by jake14mw Quote
I was shooting girls softball the other day with my K10d with a long lens, and I noticed how much I was shaking through the viewfinder. That was a good reminder to me to pay attention to my technique and holding the camera steady. I remember thinking at the time that I was glad that I had in body stabilization so that I saw the shaking.
In-lens IS is better in "hiding" the real thing - like modern cars with ESP-like things. It helps to cope with difficult situations, but does not help to become technically better photographer (or driver)
QuoteQuote:
Honestly, I don't know the science about if in-lens IS is better.
In-lens IS has better potential to compensate shake on longer focal lenghts, because in-body system has mechanical limits to sensor movement range.
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, cannon, dslr, lens, lenses, nikon, pentax, photography, prices, system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Two Pentax AF-360FGZ flashes, broken/missing hot shoes (Worldwide) dumrox Sold Items 11 10-13-2010 06:44 AM
Pentax MV: Missing Rewind Knob Imperatrix Pentax Film SLR Discussion 8 09-14-2010 04:00 AM
Pentax Me is missing its shutter release button iridescentstripes Pentax Film SLR Discussion 3 01-12-2010 05:37 PM
Pentax v. The World John Kovarik Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 03-31-2008 05:28 PM
Pentax SMC-A 135 F/2.8 missing from DB? rfortson Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 01-12-2007 01:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:32 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