[Oscar1]

Came very close to being seduced after all the QC issues I had with, my now finally fixed, K7's.

What kept it from happening is the 35+ year collection of Pentax Glass.

O

[dylansalt]

I think the D4 is starting to seduce me

[VaughnA]

I was seduced about a 6 months ago after a long flirtation and come-hither looks.

Reasons for my move:
1: I was a bit worried about the Ricoh buyout. Not a major problem but it did concern me a bit. After looking at the CES show stuff I'm feeling that this may have been a valid worry.
2: I just couldn't get that sharp pop that I wanted with my K-x, even with limiteds including the FA-31. I'd aligned lenses with the debug menu etc but it just didn't happen. I think that it was partially the lack of focus points, even though I used center point & recomposed. It may also have been shutter vibration etc.
3: I could find more used lenses and equipment for Nikon on craigslist etc.
4: Lower prices on SDM type lenses and a MUCH bigger selection. I loved the silence and fast focusing.
5: Better flash performance.
6: A lot of my close friends used Nikon, and gave me some prices I coulndn't refuse on good used equipment. Considering the cost of upgrading to a K-5 or even a K-7 it wasn't much of a financial jump to move over.

Impressions After the Move.

I got a used D300 from a friend and after the initial shock of the size of the thing compared to my K-x I fell in love. Great controls, menu and feel. It seemed to fit my hands better after a bit of adjustment time. It just feels natural.

It also focuses. It does a much better job at hitting focus in all conditions than any of my previous Pentax's (K10-K20-Kx). It was also much easier to see the viewfinder data than with the Pentax bodies. I absolutely love the motorized lenses and the through the lens VR is great. It's nice to be able to see the effect and have a nice still image on the viewfinder. Yes the lenses are more, but as someone else said earlier I'm happy with the lens selection that I have more than I ever was with my Pentax Kit. I've got a 18-105VR, 70-300VR, 35 1.8 and a Tamron 17-50 2.8 VR and I'm pretty happy with that setup. I did try the 70-200 2.8 and that alone is a good reason to switch IMHO. Overall I get much sharper and much more well exposed shots from the D300, the metering and focus are much more accurate.

Misses by Nikon.

Not many, I do miss my DA-15 and wish they had something similar. They don't have a really wide prime that compares. Otherwise, not much. And the Nikon forums just aren't as friendly as this joint.

Bottom Line.

I am getting better photos. I think that part of it is confidence, part easy to get what I want from the camera. But I am seeing better shots from my new kit. Do they compare to a lot of the stuff here? Not even close, it's still about the nut behind the viewfinder.

YMMV

[Wired]

I love my Pentax and my M series lenses. I buy M series faster than the local shop can get them in on trade. However, I keep finding myself looking at the "entry level" FF offerings from Nikon.

I've always loved Nikon and would have gone Nikon when I first went digital if it wasn't for my mom giving me her MX and all her old lenses back when I was in high school. It was those old lenses that made my mind up to stay with Pentax. I'm glad I did. Limited glass and M glass is just amazing for the price... but I can't help but paw the D700 whenever I visit the local shop to get some prints done...

I was handling my cousins Canon T2i and found it very plasticy and I was missing my K5 very quickly. On the flip side... he didn't want to give me my K5 back.

---

Last edited by Wired; 01-26-2012 at 05:55 PM.

[extravagrant]

I just went to the D3, but it wasn't easy, and I'm having some trouble giving up my K-5.

No regrets on the D3 though, that camera is amazing.

[audiobomber]

I can't help but paw the D7000 whenever I visit the local shop to get some prints done...

I don't see what there is to prefer in a D7000 vs K-5. ISO and DR are equal, the K-5 has SR. Even AF is not better.

1: I was a bit worried about the Ricoh buyout. Not a major problem but it did concern me a bit. After looking at the CES show stuff I'm feeling that this may have been a valid worry.
I got a used D300 from a friend and after the initial shock of the size of the thing compared to my K-x I fell in love. Great controls, menu and feel. It seemed to fit my hands better after a bit of adjustment time. It just feels natural. YMMV

The K-5 is a better body in virtually every way, except for AF. If sports is your main game, Nikon or Canon makes sense. I'm a generalist, so I'll be staying with Pentax.

Unlike you, I'm psyched by the Ricoh buyout. CES is not important to Pentax or Ricoh. CP+ is a huge show, specializing in photography and it's in Japan. That's the natural place for Ricoh Pentax to debut new product.

[normhead]

It's a camera not a religion. For me it's always been about the old glass. Which in a way is kind of funny, because I didn't even have any good old glass to use, just Tammy 35-300 push pull zoom, which has been on the camera twice and then given to a friend with an ME. So basically I was seduced by the thought of using my tried and trusted old lens. But really it's just a camera. And I'm really a "stick what you have until there is a compelling reason to do something else" kind of guy. So one guy says Lieca lenses are better. I find that interesting... and I'm well aware of Lieca's reputation.. another says they like faster autofocus. I'm not unhappy with the auto-focus, I don't shoot sports.

Most of what I hear when I see these threads is, "I have some money and I'd like to try something else". Absolutely nothing wrong with that. If I had some money to blow, I might try something else to, just to amuse myself. But it would probably be a 645D. Years ago, a buddy of mine brought in a series of pictures taken with his Nikon , taken beneath his bungie jumping brother at 6 frames per second. Perfect auto focus all the way down. Great series. But I didn't rush out and buy a Nikon. A series of images like that while interesting, are of no value to me. I wouldn't even post them on line. You don't expect every camera system to do everything the same. What a lot of these posts say is "I didn't really do any research before I bought my camera and I bought a camera that wasn't suited to my style." Or "As I learned more about photography, my shooting style changed, and this camera is no longer what I need." So while the parade of excited posters who have seem some new light out there keeps on going, I'm not really sure it's posted on an on-line forum, especially a Pentax on-line forum. As we used to say when I sold computers.. if you buy computer to do something now, it will always do that thing, newer computers will be faster and better, but yours will always do this thing you are buying it for." It sounds like people bought Pentax's for something other than the thing it does.

Or maybe it's a "now I have more money than I had then" issue. Funny though, you never see people say that. "I bought a Pentax because I could get what I wanted for the money I had, but now I have more." I agree, it's hard to drop a load of cash to impress your friends on Pentax systems these days.. their best new lens is around $1500. Some of us actually see that as an advantage. Where I go, I don't want to take anything I can't afford to replace off the shelf if it gets dropped and broken. I took a guy out outfitting last year in the park. HIs Canon gear was broken the first day of the trip. A small drop changing lens (butter fingers) and his telephoto zoom was toast. It didn't make me want to invest in anything Canon. He doesn't get back what it cost to have me guide him and make his meals because his kit broke on the first day. He just doesn't get any pictures after coughing up big bucks for a guided trip. I don't guarantee your camera equipment when I book your trip. That to me is inexcusable. Apparently to others, it's not an issue. It doesn't mean one's better than the other. it just means based on my experience I'm happy where I am. Others experience may differ. But make these posts in a Canon forum or a Lieca forum or whatever, and I'm sure lots of people will jump to your aid and give you great advice on how to spend your new found wealth, what are you hoping to get out of a Pentax forum?... I'm not sure? I'm sure not going to put any effort into convincing you to stay Pentax. it's not a religion, and really, I don't care. I hope you'll do what's best for you, no matter what that may be. And if you can't find the technical advice on how to get something done here, it probably can't be done with this camera. There will always be brighter and lesser lights. All that matters is that you're happy where you are. But also, glad you came into some cash...have fun spending it.

[Big G]

I've bought the tools that let me achieve my goals.

My Pentax system was lacking, so I bought a Canon body to cover the cracks where Pentax didn't cover and vice versa.

[RioRico]

I'm not totally brand-agnostic, but pretty close. Before buying my first dSLR (my first Pentax!) most of the cameras I've owned have been Kodak, Minolta, Sony, Olympus, Canon (in that order). Throw in Graflex, Yashica, Zeiss, Petri, Voigtlander, Argus, Fujica, Praktica, Ricoh, Mamiya, Exakta, Lomo, and a few others (in no special order) and it's quite a mix, eh? If photography were still my job, I'd obtain exactly the tools needed to support me. I don't care what the brand is. Whatever works.

When I started research and analysis prior to buying my K20D, I leaned towards (in order) Sony, Olympus, Nikon. What drove me from an advanced P&S to d dSLR was a desire for a fisheye zoom, and the DA10-17 just had no competition. And reading user reviews of camera bodies within my budget, I noted that Pentax got many fewer whines gripes bitches moans p!ssoffs about the need to upgrade soonest. That was a goal: No immediate upgrades! Pentax won on price-performance and longevity.

Would I jump to Canon or Nikon or Sony or any other brand? If I had to, yes. I don't need to so I probably won't. But ya never can tell, eh?

[Wired]

I don't see what there is to prefer in a D7000 vs K-5. ISO and DR are equal, the K-5 has SR. Even AF is not better.


The K-5 is a better body in virtually every way, except for AF. If wildlife is your main game, Nikon or Canon makes sense. I'm a generalist, so I'll be staying with Pentax.

Unlike you, I'm psyched by the Ricoh buyout. CES is not important to Pentax or Ricoh. CP+ is a huge show, specializing in photography and it's in Japan. That's the natural place for Ricoh Pentax to debut new product.

Sorry, I put one to many 0's on the Nikon. D700.

I'm undecided on the Rioch buyout. I'm not phyced, I'm not saddened. I'm just waiting for something to happen.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

"Um, no offense, Lex, but I don't think you took the time to read the other posts in this thread other than the first one."

None taken. I've read all the posts here in this thread, up to the point that I replied originally.

I've just become rather bored with the recurring themes here, such as:

1) My Pentax doesn't love me, make it love me so I'll stay with her

2) Front focus/back focus

3) The idiotic question that could easily be answered by reading your manual

4) add your favorite here. There must be a baker's dozen.

Go take a picture. We'll all be happier

BTW, welcome to Pentax Forums!

[deathdream]

currently i own pentax k-r, da40 and 70 ltds. till 3 years i ve used k100ds, k10d ,50mm 1.7F, 77ltd and sigma 10-20. with all my equipment i was unhappy because i was missing so many shots because of slow and noisy focus mechanism. and with k-r im unable to get as sharp images as i want, not all the time.. after i ve seen 7d and 70-200 f4L lens i ve been tempted by the speed and accuracy of the af canon has. but then i thought eventho i ll sell my equipment i wont be able to obtain 7d and 70-200. and 70 mm is even narrow to me. so i started to think about nikon d7000+50mm 1.8g. Didn't try that combination yet, and i dont know about their af is as good as canon, or even better than k-r+40ltd all i want to achieve is to capture the moments i like to watch
is there any1 out with the same questions in their minds or have found the solution, do not hesitate to tell me what to do
and about 4 pages of men's need of spending money, getting better version of something, i must say it is normal. people tend to change things with money, instead of making things better with effort (same goes for me too) :]

[B Grace]

The OP seems to be satisfied but what's one more post? I think many of us fall into the trap of looking for the next step in improving our photography which often means improving our gear. I started with a couple of beginner Pentax lenses in college, I came to appreciate image quality in my 8x10 prints, and I wanted to buy better lenses but didn't have the money at the time. Fast forward 15 years, I had some money so I began upgrading a bit now and then, and now after 10 years of buying and selling I'm shooting Nikon gear. I'm still not 100% satisfied so I'm still looking.

The copy of the Pentax Guide To Lenses brochure I picked up in the 1980s shows a lens kit described as being professional with the A28/2, A50/1.2 and A-Star 85/1.4 primes. Another shot includes the A15/3.5. I think that if I had just sold my car at that time and taken up walking I could have bought the 28, 50 and 85 combo and been satisfied all of these years. I doubt it though.

Pentax should have kept their high-end prime lens series and a high end camera in place all of this time. I nearly bought the three FA Limiteds when they were first released but I had no clue what I would shoot them with. I've never understood the approach Pentax took during the 1990s with the huge jump down from the MZ-S to the next camera. It's clear the Leica model works when the correct products which are in demand are in place. I would be willing to pay very good money to get the new lenses I want but I just don't see the current Pentax lens system as being that compelling. I won't spend $15k on the Leica kit I would want and I don't see much of an advantage in buying the pro-Nikon lenses over the medium grade lenses I have. Perhaps I'm done with trading gear for a while.

[Jewelltrail]

Due to my frustration with some things Pentax lately (well, some of them for quite some time now), I started a couple of weeks ago reading and researching about Canon and Nikon - I honestly never thought I'd be brought to this point. This past weekend, I got some hands-on with the 5D Mk II, which I quickly put down in favor of the Nikon D300S because I liked how the front and rear dials are similar in location to that of Pentax; with the Canon, I didn't like missing that rear thumb dial just below the top right of the camera. I also don't like how their L-series glass stands out like a sore thumb, all white and black on a black body. To me, that just screams "Steal me!!!" There are other Nikon appeals in my mind over Canon, and these are just a couple.

Anyhow, I strapped a 28-70 onto the Nikon and was quickly seduced by some of the things that I've been lamenting and missing about Pentax: Lightning fast, silent, smooth, and accurate AF. No apparent controversy about their SWM autofocus compared to the SDM complaints from numerous Pentax owners (and why I won't buy the DA* 16-50, for example). Zoom lenses that fill the gap in all ranges. Etc. I also thought to myself, 'If this camera is this nice, what about the D700? (The one I really wanted to try, but was out of stock everywhere due to the earthquake.) I can't imagine how nice it must be."

But then a moment of clarity struck me as I left the store. Why would I need to spend all that money on full-frame equipment then have to lug it around? Is what I'm missing with Pentax really worth the extra expense? What would I gain by becoming a Nikon owner? Other such thoughts and questions have swirled in my mind since then, but I must admit that I've been seduced. My mind can't stop thinking about what being a Nikon owner might be like.

So has anybody else been seduced by Canikon? If so and you have successfully resisted, what has kept you with Pentax? Can you ever see yourself going the route of Canikon?

I don't want to betray my Pentaxian status, but I need to be compelled to stay, to resist the temptation to look elsewhere. Can anybody speak some sense to me in this, my time of weakness? I look forward to your thoughts.

I can not agree with your thread title: seductions seldom have anything to do with rational thinking---unless you are the one doing the seducing. My choice to leave my K20d behind, and pick up a Nikon D700 was based solely upon rational thinking. I think there are a lot of myths out there about FF. I notice Jay Sherman doing his best to dispel them, but they seem to persist.


1) FF is too expensive: Not true. I sold my expensive crop sensor glass & K20d, and purchased a d700 with several lenses--when the dust settled, I broke about even but had a most excellent D700. There are many reasons for this"

a) Many more AF, inexpensive Nikkor zooms available to user--28mm=wide on FF
b) Tons more old Nikkor MF glass around--MF=done easily & precisely on FF
c) I found this saying in my research on a DPreview forum "The worst glass on FF is better than the best glass on APS-c." Though hyperbole, the statement holds a high degree of truth IMO.

2) FF is too heavy: Fact is, the D700 is not much heavier than my K20d was, and with a fast prime, like the 50 1.8 mounted, it is lighter than my K20d and Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 was.

a) There are lots of older Nikkor, high IQ producing zooms which are light, and which need not be nearly as fast as an APS-c zoom in order to provide as much shallow DOF. And on the D700 body you can actually utilize the shallow DOF because you can precisely nail focus, easily, at the widest aperture settings.

Can we say Goodbye......Katzeye!!! another cost savings which still left MF a crap-shoot!

Can you spend tons of money on FF--of course you can, but the point is there is no need to do so. I have gotten free nikkor zooms thrown in deals with a flash (Ebay deal) which produce stunning images--far exceeding and more satisfying than anything APS-c ever gave me.


Do I even need to enter the discussion of AF? I think not--case closed here. The only justification for hanging onto APS-c, from my perspective, is if you are shooting wildlife. But, if that is the case, long glass options are not plentiful here in Pentaxia.

I could go on and on..... and on. Better to post a few pics, with cheap glass on the D700.


$25 Nikon MF E-series 50mm f/1.8:







Nikkor $50 AF 50mm f/1.8 model predating D series










$20.15 Vivitar 28mm f/2.8






$35 Nikkor 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Amazing lens--fantastic flare control & precise AF







$125 Tamron SP 24-135mm f/ 3.5-5.6








$60 Dollar Tamron Adaptall 60-300mm 23a






Ultra-wide angle was most expensive $177= SP Tamron 17mmm f/3.5

[normhead]

c) I found this saying in my research on a DPreview forum "The worst glass on FF is better than the best glass on APS-c." Though hyperbole, the statement holds a high degree of truth IMO.

I think you lost me right there. My FA 50 is not better than my DA 21ltd. And when there is a special FA lens, like the FA 31, I can still use it. So that has to qualify as one of the most idiotic things ever said. Also from DPreview they noted that lenses are usually weaker at the edges, so FA lenses perform better on APS-C than they do used on FF cameras. You use the sharpest part of the image and clip the softer edges.

I'm glad you're happy with your system and results. That was a lot of images to look at. I didn't see anything that made me say "I have to switch." Maybe you could explain to me, because this is the thing I don't get, what is it about any of those images that is better than what I would do with my K-x and kit lens? I must be dense or something. I don't get it.

K-x and DA 18-55.