[Verglace]

Sell the works and buy a D700 in about a months time when they will sell for $2000 new. Supplement it with a 50mm 1.8 to get you started.

FF lenses do not need to be expensive. Here's my current kit:

Sigma 50/1.4...500 (new)
Sigma 70-200...750 (used)
Tamron 28-75...250 (used)
Nikon 60mm macro...400 (new)

Find me a Pentax kit that is similar that costs less than that and gives you FF coverage and superb IQ.

By the way all these lenses perform spectacularly on the Nikon D700's that I have.

Food for thought...

c[_]

That 28-75 f/2.8 is cheap wow, I'm gonna look up on it, I might get that to start instead of the 85mm

[cmohr]

Thats some good prices. And if your camera body was effectively free, then that gives you a Nikon base, then when you get the cash you can get the FF body

[normhead]

Here's what I'd do... take a few comparison images.... same place as close as possible to the same place as close as possible to the same lens... if you decide to keep the D-90 based on IQ and how it works with your shooting style...go that way.... no half way, no messing around. Also, all my friends that joined a photography club eventually went Nikon... just too many opportunities to borrow and use Nikon equipment, that is none-existent in small towns for Pentax users. A number of people do photography where I live and a number of them do workshops. Basically for $300 they are sharing with you their favourite shooting locations and practices. I've seen from their promotional literature that one of the things you are paying for is being able to borrow their very expensive wildlife lenses for a few images... again, if you shoot Pentax (or in this case you don't shoot Canon ) you're missing half the fun. There is a lot to consider here, and since you're starting out you need to ask yourself, is that the kind of thing I would ever take advantage of) because with those kinds of workshops, you definitely don't get as much bang for your buck shooting Pentax. There are a lot of factors other than even IQ you need to consider if you're a learning shooter. For me it would be strictly an IQ and price decision. But it's also a judgement call. Only you are going to know what the various trade-offs are worth to you.

I know a couple of groups of friends who shoot together, shooting Canon or Nikon where 4 or 5 guys are co-ordinating their lens purchasing and essentially sharing equipment. If you have a chance to do that, once again, you're probably not going to end up with Pentax equipment. Hey, I'd be the happiest one around if it wasn't that way... but until Pentax gets into the popular photographer's head, that's the way it is.

[ll_coffee_lP]

What kind of photography do you do that requires a full 35mm sensor size??? Is a good question to ask yourself when contemplating a change. What exactly do you expect from the FF over APS-C sensor size?? Is it for flatter feilds, of better DOF, or is it because its a FF.

Also I'd check that Nikkor 85/1.8 for around 400. It maybe only a DX series, which is for the APS-C sensor size Nikons not the FX series which are around 1600.00

The 85mm f/1.8 D is a FX, or full frame lens and retails around $400.
You might be thinking of the 85mm f/1.4. It retails for much higher. If the OP is looking to go this route I'd suggest the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 instead. It's a hell of a lens and can be had around $850 used.

As for needing a FF vrs a crop camera...everything doesn't have to do with just the sensor. Have you used a D700 before? Have you used a D300(s)? Both cameras are excellent, but the handling characteristics of the D700 is miles ahead of the D300(s). It's not all about the sensor, not by a looooong shot.

c[_]

[ll_coffee_lP]

are you really sure FF will give you anything you can't have with APS-C ?...

Not to pick on your posts, but no company makes a poor quality FF camera - all are top performers. There's a reason that the tech in FF is what dribbles down to the APS-C market usually a generation, or two, later.

I can think of many APS-C cameras right now that are substandard. In fact, the reason many people on this forum ask the question you posted above is because there are so many substandard crop cameras that don't compare well to Pentax's offerings.

Don't kid yourself though... The current gen of FF cameras are all very high quality in usability, features, sensor, speed of AF, accuracy of AF, and customization.

c[_]

[ll_coffee_lP]

That 28-75 f/2.8 is cheap wow, I'm gonna look up on it, I might get that to start instead of the 85mm

Keep an eye on Ebay, they come up reguarly for that price. Make sure you get the one with the aperture dial (older version), as the newer version doesn't have one and is reportedly not as good.

Do a search on this site and you'll find discussions about this. I think JSherman had a thread on this about a year or so back.

Also, unless you are married to the idea of the 85mm, I'd skip it. It's a great lens, but not a wow lens. I'd recommend the Sigma 50/1.4 for about the same price - it's a wow lens (APS-C, or FF)

c[_]

[Verglace]

I decided I can afford to keep both, I'm going to grab the Tamron 70-300 SP DI VC (it gets amazing reviews) to start with, it will complement the DA*16-50

[aurele]

Not to pick on your posts, but no company makes a poor quality FF camera - all are top performers.

don't worry

What i meant was : will this new camera will offer you something really worth it (sensor, ergonomics, VF, AF, etc ...)or is it just about the idea of getting a new top notch body that appeal you ?

for ex. i'd love to play with a FF dslr, but i have in fact no need of it all i will need is WR. which the k-x doesn't provide, but the k5 provides it. so whatever i'd like, the k5 is more than enought for me.