What would you choose? D700 & K5 vs D800?

Emacs · 05-19-2012, 04:08 AM

Originally posted by causey

FF means more distortion with the same lenses.

FF means more FOV with the same lens and much better IQ for the purpose (just try to get it: IQ of 31mm should be better than one of 20mm at the same part of an image while larger sensor actually needs lesser quality lens to match APS-C sharpness and details. So we got up to 1.5² higher sharpness and details)
And if were any affordable FF mirrorless (I don't count bad substandard jokes from leica that they call "camera"), it would be lighter than APS-C ~~mirrorless~~DSLR with much higher IQ.

Updated: I meant APS-C DSLR, not mirrorless

Last edited by Emacs; 05-19-2012 at 06:11 AM.

causey · 05-19-2012, 04:15 AM

Originally posted by Emacs

FF means more FOV with the same lens and much better IQ for the purpose (just try to get it: IQ of 31mm should be better than one of 20mm at the same part of an image while larger sensor actually needs lesser quality lens to match APS-C sharpness and details. So we got up to 1.5² higher sharpness and details)

I knew that.
But then I'd have to pay more for spine pills.
Sometimes we have to choose: portability vs IQ... (Actually, the wight difference btw. a FF and K-5 isn't significant. For me, the question is whether I should get a FF instead of something like the new K30.)

bossa · 05-19-2012, 04:21 AM

After buying a D800E (and a Sigma 50 for it) and seeing the results I can't wait to see my Pentax lenses on a FF body. If Pentax (or Ricoh) don't release a FF body for K-mount they have the wrong people in charge as they would definitely be clueless. It's almost impossible to believe they aren't #1 after hunting for lenses for this Nikon and finding less choices (able to live up to the FF dream) than for the K-5. The D800E is a demanding camera and any crap lenses will be crap no matter what you do in PP. i.e. The Nikon 50/1.4G was a POS and I had to replace it with a Sigma and thank god I did.

The 31LTD is unmatched on APS-C but would return to it's intended place in the scheme of things on FF.

bossa · 05-19-2012, 04:23 AM

Originally posted by causey

I knew that.
But then I'd have to pay more for spine pills.
Sometimes we have to choose: portability vs IQ... (Actually, the wight difference btw. a FF and K-5 isn't significant. For me, the question is whether I should get a FF instead of something like the new K30.)

D800E body weighs 900g... K-5 weighs 750g. If you are careful about lenses there's hardly any difference at all. When I had a Nikon 50/1.4G on my D800E it actually weighed LESS than my K-5 and FA31LTD.

TOUGEFC · 05-19-2012, 04:26 AM

Originally posted by bossa

D800E body weighs 900g... K-5 weighs 750g. If you are careful about lenses there's hardly any difference at all. When I had a Nikon 50/1.4G on my D800E it actually weighed LESS than my K-5 and FA31LTD.

And a gripped K-5 is about 1KG

bossa · 05-19-2012, 04:32 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by causey

I knew that.
But then I'd have to pay more for spine pills.
Sometimes we have to choose: portability vs IQ... (Actually, the wight difference btw. a FF and K-5 isn't significant. For me, the question is whether I should get a FF instead of something like the new K30.)

I don't think I have sacrificed image quality at all with my K-5.

31LTD

FA*300

DA*50-135

Emacs · 05-19-2012, 05:57 AM

Originally posted by bossa

I don't think I have sacrificed image quality at all with my K-5.

You did actually. In fact any decent $150-$200 50mm lens on FF will outperform 31Ltd on APS-C.

bossa · 05-19-2012, 06:01 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Emacs

You did actually. In fact any decent $150-$200 50mm lens on FF will outperform 31Ltd on APS-C.

Yes I know that.... but that doesn't equate to a sacrifice of image quality.. only money.

Hence my contribution on another thread and why I bought a D800E:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/110876...ml#post1956734

PS: 50mm lenses are only part of it.

Verglace · 05-19-2012, 10:26 AM

I think at this time going for a k-5 because it is smaller and lighter doesn't make sense. It did a year ago but not anymore now. Why? Simply because mirrorless cameras with APS-C sized sensors are available that can provide the same IQ as a k-5. If you want portability and size then they are the way to go. This is why I would recommend a D700 + Mirrorless. With the D700 you get the benefit of a full frame with all the lenses and IQ available for it, and at the same time if you need portability you get the benefit of a mirorless that is lighter and more compact than any "small" dslr can be with the same sized sensor. If pentax can make a FF dslr the same size as a k-5 (hopefully 1cm taller for more comfort) that and a mirrorless would be the ultimate kit.

scottk13 · 05-19-2012, 10:42 PM - **1 Like**

Last year when the market hadn't changed yet the K5 was the top rated APS-C chip in resolution ranked at #6 in all cameras, FF and smaller. The Nikon D7000 was #7 with the same chip. I know all the new releases will change that, but the K5 is still a very good camera. For size and weight in my hand it beats the Nikon D700, D7000, and the Canon 7D. I put my 35mm/2.8 macro on it, and it's incredibly easy to use and provides stunning images. I'm sure you limited lenses would do the same on the K5. Canon and Nikon users have tried my K5 and they seem a bit taken back by how balanced and good it feels in their hands. I do have the FF bug, but I stopped and really looked at how I shoot, and most of my images are mid-range, and an APS-C sized chip works very well for that. Like someone else mentioned here my spine takes a beating with extra weight. The 17-70/4 I just bought from you takes beautiful photos with the K5 and is the perfect compliment to my 60-250. I can make those long vertical climbs in the Columbia Gorge with only two lenses now, and along with the K5 body that is a big plus for me. I think the important thing is to really look at how you shoot and let that be a major factor in your equipment choice. The other question I ask myself is, "Have my skills pushed the limits of the system I'm currently using?" I came to the conclusion that I haven't done that yet with the K5 and the current lenses, so for me waiting is currently the best choice. Best of luck in your decision making process!

**todd** · 05-20-2012, 12:02 AM

You make good sense Scott. I am one who has had a K100D for four years now, mostly because I have always been stretched financially. At the same time, I make the most of it by trying to make sure I stay focused on the images (not to say I am any good but) to be as prepared as I can be when my time does finally come to get a new body/system.

I originally chose K100D because I was a beginner and did my homework and it was a better camera for a lesser price than the Nikon D40. I also had the impression that I could get more and better glass at cheaper prices by going Pentax. I am not very invested in Pentax glass (unfortunately but maybe fortunately) so ironically now I find myself with a case of the FF outbreak as well and looking at the FF/D700 threads and elsewhere, it seems like the glass options going forward might be in favor of the Nikon FF platform, should I be able to squeeze my way into a used D700.

Even so, I could still see myself going K5 because of reasons you mentioned, and the reality that expandable income is rare for me to come by and I may find myself getting a much better deal on a used K5 than I can a D700. So it will probably come down to what I can find at market when the money comes together, (which there is a chance at happening in the next few months). At that time I am thinking that I'll just look at what packages of used camera+lenses in each brand that I can put together with the money I have, and then whichever gives me more bang for the buck will win..

Good luck OP figuring it out! ;-)

Blue · 05-20-2012, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by Emacs

You did actually. In fact any decent $150-$200 50mm lens on FF will outperform 31Ltd on APS-C.

There is someone making exactly the opposite argument in the Photokina thread in News&Rumors.

bossa · 05-20-2012, 10:04 PM

Actually it depends on whether you want deep DOF or shallow. The FF 50 might do better (sharper for the same DOF) at f2.8 than the 31 at f/1.8 but beyond f5.6 the 31 would win due to diffraction issues on the FF. So it does depends on your use of the lens and which format it will be used on.

jsherman999 · 05-20-2012, 10:29 PM

Originally posted by bossa

Actually it depends on whether you want deep DOF or shallow. The FF 50 might do better (sharper for the same DOF) at f2.8 than the 31 at f/1.8 but beyond f5.6 the 31 would win due to diffraction issues on the FF. So it does depends on your use of the lens and which format it will be used on.

I doubt that diffraction is going to really limit a 50mm on 36MP FF until about f/11, based on some of the lens data I've seen. You'll start to see diffraction take effect after f/5.6, but the 36MP sensor will still resolve more than the 16MP sensor even after the effects of diffraction past (probably) f/8, possibly up to f/13.

Below is the 50mm f/1.8G on the 12MP D3 vs. 24MP D3x - notice how the diffraction-limited 24MP sensor still outresolves the 12MP sensor's peak performance (the d3 + 50 peaks at f/5.6) until about f/13... the 31ltd on a 16MP sensor is going to have a different curve, but it almost assuredly won't be able to start out-resolving the 50mm on a 36MP sensor by f/5.6 already.

bossa · 05-20-2012, 11:02 PM

Yes I understand that but I didn't express myself as well as I'd have liked.

You will 'see' the affects of diffraction on a D800E more easily than on a D700 (at more open apertures). There would be an averaging affect based on the size and density of the pixels on the sensor as well as a masking affect due to the AA filter in cameras with those filters for starters.

I wasn't talking about diffraction limiting a D800 but only that it would become clearly visible (contradiction in terms there..

)

05-19-2012, 04:32 AM - 1 Like	#36
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Originally posted by causey I knew that. But then I'd have to pay more for spine pills. Sometimes we have to choose: portability vs IQ... (Actually, the wight difference btw. a FF and K-5 isn't significant. For me, the question is whether I should get a FF instead of something like the new K30.) I don't think I have sacrificed image quality at all with my K-5. 31LTD FA300 DA50-135 Last edited by bossa; 05-20-2012 at 06:35 PM.

05-19-2012, 06:01 AM - 1 Like	#38
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Originally posted by Emacs You did actually. In fact any decent $150-$200 50mm lens on FF will outperform 31Ltd on APS-C. Yes I know that.... but that doesn't equate to a sacrifice of image quality.. only money. Hence my contribution on another thread and why I bought a D800E: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/110876...ml#post1956734 PS: 50mm lenses are only part of it. Last edited by bossa; 05-19-2012 at 06:09 AM.

05-20-2012, 12:02 AM	#41
todd Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,799	You make good sense Scott. I am one who has had a K100D for four years now, mostly because I have always been stretched financially. At the same time, I make the most of it by trying to make sure I stay focused on the images (not to say I am any good but) to be as prepared as I can be when my time does finally come to get a new body/system. I originally chose K100D because I was a beginner and did my homework and it was a better camera for a lesser price than the Nikon D40. I also had the impression that I could get more and better glass at cheaper prices by going Pentax. I am not very invested in Pentax glass (unfortunately but maybe fortunately) so ironically now I find myself with a case of the FF outbreak as well and looking at the FF/D700 threads and elsewhere, it seems like the glass options going forward might be in favor of the Nikon FF platform, should I be able to squeeze my way into a used D700. Even so, I could still see myself going K5 because of reasons you mentioned, and the reality that expandable income is rare for me to come by and I may find myself getting a much better deal on a used K5 than I can a D700. So it will probably come down to what I can find at market when the money comes together, (which there is a chance at happening in the next few months). At that time I am thinking that I'll just look at what packages of used camera+lenses in each brand that I can put together with the money I have, and then whichever gives me more bang for the buck will win.. Good luck OP figuring it out! ;-) Last edited by todd; 05-20-2012 at 12:08 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
645D & D800 The question?	Whats_edoo	Pentax Medium Format	80	04-25-2012 12:06 PM
Looks like D800 may have almost a stop on D700	jsherman999	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	32	03-27-2012 06:42 AM
D700 remains in production, inaddition to both D800	Samsungian	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	03-01-2012 11:23 AM
The Politics of Fashion Part 21 Choose Your Camp and Choose it Well	benjikan	Photographic Industry and Professionals	2	05-24-2011 11:20 AM
Neos choose the K-5 & K-X DSLR of 2010	bobmaxja	Pentax News and Rumors	17	11-11-2010 04:23 PM

05-19-2012, 04:08 AM	#31
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by causey FF means more distortion with the same lenses. FF means more FOV with the same lens and much better IQ for the purpose (just try to get it: IQ of 31mm should be better than one of 20mm at the same part of an image while larger sensor actually needs lesser quality lens to match APS-C sharpness and details. So we got up to 1.5² higher sharpness and details) And if were any affordable FF mirrorless (I don't count bad substandard jokes from leica that they call "camera"), it would be lighter than APS-C ~~mirrorless~~DSLR with much higher IQ. Updated: I meant APS-C DSLR, not mirrorless Last edited by Emacs; 05-19-2012 at 06:11 AM.

05-19-2012, 04:15 AM	#32
causey Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arlington, VA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,757	Originally posted by Emacs FF means more FOV with the same lens and much better IQ for the purpose (just try to get it: IQ of 31mm should be better than one of 20mm at the same part of an image while larger sensor actually needs lesser quality lens to match APS-C sharpness and details. So we got up to 1.5² higher sharpness and details) I knew that. But then I'd have to pay more for spine pills. Sometimes we have to choose: portability vs IQ... (Actually, the wight difference btw. a FF and K-5 isn't significant. For me, the question is whether I should get a FF instead of something like the new K30.)

05-19-2012, 04:21 AM	#33
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	After buying a D800E (and a Sigma 50 for it) and seeing the results I can't wait to see my Pentax lenses on a FF body. If Pentax (or Ricoh) don't release a FF body for K-mount they have the wrong people in charge as they would definitely be clueless. It's almost impossible to believe they aren't #1 after hunting for lenses for this Nikon and finding less choices (able to live up to the FF dream) than for the K-5. The D800E is a demanding camera and any crap lenses will be crap no matter what you do in PP. i.e. The Nikon 50/1.4G was a POS and I had to replace it with a Sigma and thank god I did. The 31LTD is unmatched on APS-C but would return to it's intended place in the scheme of things on FF.

05-19-2012, 04:23 AM	#34
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Originally posted by causey I knew that. But then I'd have to pay more for spine pills. Sometimes we have to choose: portability vs IQ... (Actually, the wight difference btw. a FF and K-5 isn't significant. For me, the question is whether I should get a FF instead of something like the new K30.) D800E body weighs 900g... K-5 weighs 750g. If you are careful about lenses there's hardly any difference at all. When I had a Nikon 50/1.4G on my D800E it actually weighed LESS than my K-5 and FA31LTD.

05-19-2012, 04:26 AM	#35
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Originally posted by bossa D800E body weighs 900g... K-5 weighs 750g. If you are careful about lenses there's hardly any difference at all. When I had a Nikon 50/1.4G on my D800E it actually weighed LESS than my K-5 and FA31LTD. And a gripped K-5 is about 1KG

05-19-2012, 05:57 AM	#37
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by bossa I don't think I have sacrificed image quality at all with my K-5. You did actually. In fact any decent $150-$200 50mm lens on FF will outperform 31Ltd on APS-C.

05-19-2012, 10:26 AM	#39
Verglace Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 468	I think at this time going for a k-5 because it is smaller and lighter doesn't make sense. It did a year ago but not anymore now. Why? Simply because mirrorless cameras with APS-C sized sensors are available that can provide the same IQ as a k-5. If you want portability and size then they are the way to go. This is why I would recommend a D700 + Mirrorless. With the D700 you get the benefit of a full frame with all the lenses and IQ available for it, and at the same time if you need portability you get the benefit of a mirorless that is lighter and more compact than any "small" dslr can be with the same sized sensor. If pentax can make a FF dslr the same size as a k-5 (hopefully 1cm taller for more comfort) that and a mirrorless would be the ultimate kit.

05-19-2012, 10:42 PM - 1 Like	#40
scottk13 New Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Pacific Northwest, USA Posts: 20	Last year when the market hadn't changed yet the K5 was the top rated APS-C chip in resolution ranked at #6 in all cameras, FF and smaller. The Nikon D7000 was #7 with the same chip. I know all the new releases will change that, but the K5 is still a very good camera. For size and weight in my hand it beats the Nikon D700, D7000, and the Canon 7D. I put my 35mm/2.8 macro on it, and it's incredibly easy to use and provides stunning images. I'm sure you limited lenses would do the same on the K5. Canon and Nikon users have tried my K5 and they seem a bit taken back by how balanced and good it feels in their hands. I do have the FF bug, but I stopped and really looked at how I shoot, and most of my images are mid-range, and an APS-C sized chip works very well for that. Like someone else mentioned here my spine takes a beating with extra weight. The 17-70/4 I just bought from you takes beautiful photos with the K5 and is the perfect compliment to my 60-250. I can make those long vertical climbs in the Columbia Gorge with only two lenses now, and along with the K5 body that is a big plus for me. I think the important thing is to really look at how you shoot and let that be a major factor in your equipment choice. The other question I ask myself is, "Have my skills pushed the limits of the system I'm currently using?" I came to the conclusion that I haven't done that yet with the K5 and the current lenses, so for me waiting is currently the best choice. Best of luck in your decision making process!

05-20-2012, 09:35 PM	#42
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Emacs You did actually. In fact any decent $150-$200 50mm lens on FF will outperform 31Ltd on APS-C. There is someone making exactly the opposite argument in the Photokina thread in News&Rumors.

05-20-2012, 10:04 PM	#43
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Actually it depends on whether you want deep DOF or shallow. The FF 50 might do better (sharper for the same DOF) at f2.8 than the 31 at f/1.8 but beyond f5.6 the 31 would win due to diffraction issues on the FF. So it does depends on your use of the lens and which format it will be used on.

05-20-2012, 10:29 PM	#44
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by bossa Actually it depends on whether you want deep DOF or shallow. The FF 50 might do better (sharper for the same DOF) at f2.8 than the 31 at f/1.8 but beyond f5.6 the 31 would win due to diffraction issues on the FF. So it does depends on your use of the lens and which format it will be used on. I doubt that diffraction is going to really limit a 50mm on 36MP FF until about f/11, based on some of the lens data I've seen. You'll start to see diffraction take effect after f/5.6, but the 36MP sensor will still resolve more than the 16MP sensor even after the effects of diffraction past (probably) f/8, possibly up to f/13. Below is the 50mm f/1.8G on the 12MP D3 vs. 24MP D3x - notice how the diffraction-limited 24MP sensor still outresolves the 12MP sensor's peak performance (the d3 + 50 peaks at f/5.6) until about f/13... the 31ltd on a 16MP sensor is going to have a different curve, but it almost assuredly won't be able to start out-resolving the 50mm on a 36MP sensor by f/5.6 already.

05-20-2012, 11:02 PM	#45
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Yes I understand that but I didn't express myself as well as I'd have liked. You will 'see' the affects of diffraction on a D800E more easily than on a D700 (at more open apertures). There would be an averaging affect based on the size and density of the pixels on the sensor as well as a masking affect due to the AA filter in cameras with those filters for starters. I wasn't talking about diffraction limiting a D800 but only that it would become clearly visible (contradiction in terms there.. )