[Ferdinand]

I am wondering what you think about the two combos, especially those of you who had a chance to try both.
I am mostly interested in the use of these two cameras purely for low ISO landscape photography (where shallow DOF is rather a disadvantage). What do you think about the IQ differences? Is it significant or it can only be seen if you submerge in the pleasures of pixel peeping?

[sb in ak]

I have the K5 and D600, but neither of those lenses. First, you'd likely get decent images from either. I suspect the Tamron might be the sharper lens...but not sure on that. I've heard the 24-85VR kit is actually fairly decent. The D600 has the FF body going for it....large viewfinder, higher MP, etc. so if you are printing /looking for best possible IQ it might be the better bet. There are a few annoying handicaps with the D600, like the 1/4000 max shutter speed and poor live view implementation (ie, poor exposure simulation.....I've found this annoying as I like to use ND filters with live view). The K5 is also a much better field camera with the weathersealing and nice metal frame (though the Tammy isn't weathersealed). The K5 feels closer to a pro body to than the D600. The K5 is much more fun to shoot....all of the buttons are better placed. I can run the K5 with a thick pair of gloves on in the Alaska weather far easier than the D600, despite it being smaller.

You might check out the K5IIs as well. The lack of AA filter really seems to lead to a sharper shot than with the K5. I just wish Pentax had a killer zoom around 17-50 with WR, killer optics, and no SDM issues.

[deadwolfbones]

Been using the 24-85 for the last couple weeks. It's absolutely great for a kit lens.