[Rondec]

Its a pretty well known that pentax is still playing [URLhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPAu0q6rRSE]catch up with regard to aufofocus[/URL]. You wont get any advantage in low light. I guess there is the metering thing but i usually use manual exposure for low /light stuff. My d600 had no trouble metering at night in downtown (there are some pics on my flickr.) During day time, the af will destroy the k3. You have amazing subject tracking (even with with subjects moving towards you which have typically posed enormous challenges.) Go watch the drtv review. The hit rates on their af tracking tests were basically 100%. So, i dont know, a little advantage at night (for something thats not really af) or a huge advantage for the d750 during the day. This is seems like a no brainer. Im also seeing some reports of underexposing.

If you use wi fi too (and i believe this is something that can com in handy for many photographers), the d750 destroys the k3 here too as its all built in and much, much less painless. No need to sacrifice one of your sd card slots. Much better video too on the d750 as well. The k3 doesnt even have continuous af in video. The k3 records at low bit rate and from what ive seen video on the k3 just looks tedious. With the d750 you can get modded firmware that lets your record at a whopping 64 mbps. Part of the upside about nikon is that you get access to a much larger selection of 3rd part things. You will be giving up the full frame advantage. Full frame gives you better sharpness, dynamic range, etc.

I would say that imho nikon has the advantage when it comes to lenses too. Nikon offers a wider selection of lenses. For a little over $200 you can get the nikkor 50mm which fits both full frame and aps c cameras. It has fantastic image quality and near silent af. If you want to get the same thing with pentax.. well there isnt really anything like it. Alot of pentax's lenses tend to be pretty noisy which poses problems for video.

Bottom, line is that the d750 is all around very solid package for stills and video. There are lots of things that can be expressed in a specs sheet. I love the sleek, modern look of nikon cameras, how easy everything is to do in the menus. Shooting in live view is almost zen like. I didnt even bother cracking the menu when i got my d600 and i was still up and away shooting. Plus, you have to consider that you are trading a $2000 camera for an $800 one.

I am not sure why you bringing up wifi, styling, and auto focus in video. These don't seem to be the main concerns of the photographers here.

Auto focus is an area where Nikon does tend to have an advantage. The K3 is awfully good in AF-S but, while its tracking auto focus is decent, it still isn't as good. Probably biggest issue is that a lot of Pentax's lenses have SDM motors and long focus throws, the combination of which makes the lens take pretty long to get where it is going. There have been plenty of folks who have tested someone biking towards them and the K3 does seem to keep up pretty well as long as you get an initial lock on your target.

A lot of these things are more about knowing your camera. As rawr says, there are lots of different ways you can customize tracking auto focus on both of these cameras and figuring out which bests fits how you shoot and learning to use it to your advantage is the key.

[rawr]

Is it almost always very accurate or is it rather usual that front/backfocus can be about 5-7cm?

AF accuracy at distance with the older 70-200 VR1 I've been using w. D610 has always been very good wide open. I don't have many portraits shot with it, but maybe these two shots come close to displaying the AF accuracy under various circumstances at 200mm and wide-open (or close enough):


Red safety clown
D610, Nikon 70-200 VR1, ƒ/2.8, 200.0 mm, 1/400, ISO 8063


Junior going forward - Lismore Show Rodeo
D610, Nikon 70-200 VR1, f3.2, 200mm, 1/800, ISO 2500

But note that front/back focus is not dependent on the lens alone for any camera - it's a product of lens and body interacting with each other's manufacturing tolerances and AF settings. You can take one lens and mount it on two identical camera bodies, and require different levels of AF correction for each body. And vice versa.

Case in point: my Tamron 28-75 on Pentax requires significantly different AF adjustment settings when used on my K-5 or K-3, but seems 100% fine on my K-x.

[neostyles]

Has anyone had any hands on time working with d750 footage? Good video codecs are the one thing that i feel like nikon lacks. I dont know why they dont use ProRes or something.

[B Grace]

Can you advise me with what Nikon-mount lenses I can easily substitute Pentax FA*24/2.0, 31/1.8 Lim and get a super-creamy bokeh without spending a fortune? (Sigmas are great but their bokeh doesn't come close to Pentax.)

I'm going to say the simple answer here is, no, there aren't really any Nikon lenses which produce an image style similar to the better Pentax lenses. Nikon has always been about super sharp image quality and, in my opinion, stopped down shooting giving in-focus documentary style photos. Having stated that, I do know the AiS 45/2.8P lens, originally introduced as a collectible kit lens with the FM3a, has a nice reputation and it will meter on any Nikon DSLR offered. There is a cult following of the older 85/1.4 lenses and the AF28/1.4 is an interesting lens, if you can find and afford one.

[skyer]

I'm going to say the simple answer here is, no, there aren't really any Nikon lenses which produce an image style similar to the better Pentax lenses. Nikon has always been about super sharp image quality and, in my opinion, stopped down shooting giving in-focus documentary style photos. Having stated that, I do know the AiS 45/2.8P lens, originally introduced as a collectible kit lens with the FM3a, has a nice reputation and it will meter on any Nikon DSLR offered. There is a cult following of the older 85/1.4 lenses and the AF28/1.4 is an interesting lens, if you can find and afford one.

Thank you for your reply!
I looked for the prices of AF28/1.4 a few days ago. It is too expensive. As for 85/1.4, I orderd a new version, 85/1.4G. It is said that it's better than previous lenses but I don't know for sure.

[neostyles]

Nikon has alot of fantastic primes. The 35mm only costs $200. Theres the 20mm too
AF-S NIKKOR 20mm f/1.8G ED | Interchangeable Lens from Nikon

[rawr]

The 35mm only costs $200.

Sure, you could buy that for your D600. But the $200 Nikon 35mm is a DX lens

[neostyles]

Well, theres said 20mm, 24, etc You can always use DX lenses but just enable DX crop mode

[FantasticMrFox]

[COLOR="SeaGreen"]Every pentax i owned was so akward to hold. They clearly werent even designed to be held by a human being. Pentax has a thing for very angular designs (for example the k3) which doesnt really lend itself to good ergonomics.

I have/had the K-r and found its ergonomics very good, I now have the K3 and find it much better than DSLRs from other manufacturers. The angular parts you're referring too are nowhere you actually put your hands, the places you actually put them (especially the grip) are very well designed. It's one of the first comments I get from users of other brands, that they really like the ergonomics. Have a friend who shoots Nikon and prefers the ergonomics of my K3 over his D5100 and D90.

The aesthetics are just way off ...

Aesthetics are a very subjective thing - I like the rugged, angled design of Pentax cameras, others don't.

Not to mention that their af is some of the noisiest, unrefined stuff i have ever seen in a camera. My k20 honestly sounded like a japanese robot or something then i autofocused. And so jerky. The af on the entry level t3i's that i borrowed one day in class ate it alive. The af is just flat out primitive compared to canon/nikon/sony. It's like the af is 90s technology or something.

I totally agree with you here - the AF is noisy. At the same all lenses being released at the moment have silent and quick DC focussing, so something is being done about it. But you seem to forget positive points such as the fact that the K5 II was one of the earliest (or even the earliest?) DSLR to be able to focus down to -3 EV. Hardly 90s technology.

Never mind that i couldn't even understand half of the menu items on the settings page on the k20.

That's a problem with your fluid intelligence, not the menus. Most people find Pentax's menus better designed than Nikon or Canon ones.

Yet, nikons are contoured for the human hand, not a giant lego man as the drtv review notes. Pentax has no entry level camera that has 24 megapixels.

And why would they? It's in the name of an entry level camera that it doesn't offer all the perks of the semi-pro models. On the other side, Nikon and Canon do not offer entry level cameras with two control wheels, weather sealing and a 100% pentaprism viewfinder like the K50.

The d5300 has much better battary life (even the d3100 does), better af, and awesome video. I doubt an entry level shooter would want to go out and shoot in the rain anyway. Oh and better dynamic range. And you can shoot around 100 shots in continuous shooting mode. A beginner isnt going to have any use for raw. A quick google search turns up 30 shots for continuous shooting on the k50.

You're kind of re-defining and making stuff up here, aren't you? Who are you to decide what a beginner needs and what not? I know tons of beginners who would benefit from weather sealing (everyone doing outdoor sports, everyone who wants a camera to travel etc.) while I know very few beginners who actually need 24 MP to make large prints. And how many beginners do you know who want to take 100 continuous shots? What's the purpose of that, not even professional sports photographers do that.

... and this is just something that i dont see a whole lot from pentax.

Do you actually consciously choose to ignore all the innovation from Pentax or do you just have no clue? How about their internal shake reduction system that they have quite creatively modified to offer a) a selectable AA filter (K3 is the only camera out there that has this) and b) to adjust the field of view to combat falling lines and/or get more into the frame in tight locations. How about the focusing to -3EV I mentioned before?

Pentax still has very sub part marketting if you didnt have an internet connection, you probably wouldn't even know they exist. If you have a question about your camera or simply need to buy a new one, you can just go to your local camera store.

True, they aren't as omnipresent as CaNikon, at the same time quite a few stores (and almost every larger one) has Pentax. There are several chains f photography stores in Australia and they all have dedicated Pentax shelves.

[skyer]

I have a Pentax K-3 and a few days ago also received D750.

The ergonimics of D750 is said to be the best among all Nikon DSLR lineup. Actually, it makes me wonder what ergonomics do have other Nikon cameras if D750's is so great. K-3's grip, buttons layout and shape and overall handling is much much better!
The K-3's menu is not so sophisticated, but anyway what did Nikon engineers think about when they were developing such an unfrendly user interface?

Well, D750 also have good points. Its AF.C is really interesting. One can point a focusing point at something (on an eye, for example) and D750 will track this object no matter where it moves across the focusing frame. I thought that this kind of tracking is only available in mirrorless cameras.
ISO is better.
AF.S is also a bit better. AF points are very small! One can easily focus on very small objects on the foreground while the background is rather distracting. AF.S speed in a dim light also seems faster.

What else? Hmm... That's it.

What do we have on a downside in addition to the D750's design flaws mentioned above? The bayonet button is placed in such a bad place! I can easily change lenses on Pentax cameras pointing the bayonet to the ground. With D750 I didn't figure out how I can do the same operation. The free space on the left of the camera is small and it's hard to hold it down and press the bayonet button with one hand securely.

I also acquired 24-70/2.8G and 85/1.4G.
The design of 85/1.4G is also much inferior to the design of FA*85/1.4. I feel so much pleasure holding the FA*85. It is all metal, even its hood. The hood has a rubber band. On the other side, Nikkor's hood is ordinary plastics (the plastics of DA*50-135's hood is much better). The Nikkor's body may have metal inside but it feels also plasticy. A good news is that Nikkor is weather sealed. I haven't made any thorough tests yet of their optical performance. My first impression is that Nikkor has less fringing but FA* has smoother transitions from focused to unfocused areas. Personally, for a portrait lens I would prefer the latter.
I can't say anything bad about NIkkor 24-70 (maybe because I have no experience of using FA*28-70 ) ) A range from 24mm to 70mm is convenient.

Now let's address the most annoying part - the colors. I had time to shoot in the evening. Having great ISO capabilities, one can hope that the final result will be also good. In reality, the images I got in tugsten light are almost unusable! (I am talking here about jpegs out of the camera.) All images have such a strong yellowish-greenish tint! I made a few shots with my K-3 and they all look just great in AWB!
Nikon has two options of AWB for tungsten light (with less/greater correction). I am talking about the greater correction, with less correction everyhing looks even worse. I can't add images at the moment, I will try to do it later. Now you can look for my images on this forum - message #1120 ???? ?????????? D750 - Club Nikon - ???????? 56

Yes, after editing the raw files I think I will be able to get similar results with D750. I also edit Pentax raw files. However, I am so used to the workflow when every image looks almost perfect and all I have to do is to make some little adjustments. I don't want to process every single image for hours.

So now I am confused. I was thinking that I will replace my Pentax linup with Nikon FX lineup. Now I am not so confident about it. How I wish that Pentax had a FF body with D750 specs but made with good Pentax traditions in mind!

[Rondec]

I have a Pentax K-3 and a few days ago also received D750.

The ergonimics of D750 is said to be the best among all Nikon DSLR lineup. Actually, it makes me wonder what ergonomics do have other Nikon cameras if D750's is so great. K-3's grip, buttons layout and shape and overall handling is much much better!
The K-3's menu is not so sophisticated, but anyway what did Nikon engineers think about when they were developing such an unfrendly user interface?

Well, D750 also have good points. Its AF.C is really interesting. One can point a focusing point at something (on an eye, for example) and D750 will track this object no matter where it moves across the focusing frame. I thought that this kind of tracking is only available in mirrorless cameras.
ISO is better.
AF.S is also a bit better. AF points are very small! One can easily focus on very small objects on the foreground while the background is rather distracting. AF.S speed in a dim light also seems faster.

What else? Hmm... That's it.

What do we have on a downside in addition to the D750's design flaws mentioned above? The bayonet button is placed in such a bad place! I can easily change lenses on Pentax cameras pointing the bayonet to the ground. With D750 I didn't figure out how I can do the same operation. The free space on the left of the camera is small and it's hard to hold it down and press the bayonet button with one hand securely.

I also acquired 24-70/2.8G and 85/1.4G.
The design of 85/1.4G is also much inferior to the design of FA*85/1.4. I feel so much pleasure holding the FA*85. It is all metal, even its hood. The hood has a rubber band. On the other side, Nikkor's hood is ordinary plastics (the plastics of DA*50-135's hood is much better). The Nikkor's body may have metal inside but it feels also plasticy. A good news is that Nikkor is weather sealed. I haven't made any thorough tests yet of their optical performance. My first impression is that Nikkor has less fringing but FA* has smoother transitions from focused to unfocused areas. Personally, for a portrait lens I would prefer the latter.
I can't say anything bad about NIkkor 24-70 (maybe because I have no experience of using FA*28-70 ) ) A range from 24mm to 70mm is convenient.

Now let's address the most annoying part - the colors. I had time to shoot in the evening. Having great ISO capabilities, one can hope that the final result will be also good. In reality, the images I got in tugsten light are almost unusable! (I am talking here about jpegs out of the camera.) All images have such a strong yellowish-greenish tint! I made a few shots with my K-3 and they all look just great in AWB!
Nikon has two options of AWB for tungsten light (with less/greater correction). I am talking about the greater correction, with less correction everyhing looks even worse. I can't add images at the moment, I will try to do it later. Now you can look for my images on this forum - message #1120 ???? ?????????? D750 - Club Nikon - ???????? 56

Yes, after editing the raw files I think I will be able to get similar results with D750. I also edit Pentax raw files. However, I am so used to the workflow when every image looks almost perfect and all I have to do is to make some little adjustments. I don't want to process every single image for hours.

So now I am confused. I was thinking that I will replace my Pentax linup with Nikon FX lineup. Now I am not so confident about it. How I wish that Pentax had a FF body with D750 specs but made with good Pentax traditions in mind!

Well, I certainly wouldn't sell your Pentax gear. I have a feeling that spring is going to bring full frame to Pentax (at last).

[skyer]

Well, I certainly wouldn't sell your Pentax gear. I have a feeling that spring is going to bring full frame to Pentax (at last).

I wish it would be true. I would gladly exchange my D750 for it.

[skyer]

Any thoughts on low light AF?

Low light AF.S is almost the same.

Well, I can't decide what combo is better: D750 + 85/1.4G or K-3 + DA*55/1.4...
On pixel level Nikon is better. In low light (now I am only able to shoot at home in the evening) it shows less noise, crisper details and even AF.S is more reliable if we talk about the accuracy (D750 has smaller AF points and it's much easier to focus on small objects).
On the other hand, if we look at normal magnification, Pentax images are so much better because of the colours! K-3's AWB and Bright picture style (I like it the most) are just superb!

I tried to adjust a lot of D750's WB settings and picture styles. It's all in vain. Yes, I can get similar to K-3's resulys if I cteate my own WB setting + make a few manual adjustments to it aftewards. However, it takes so much time and it can be applied only when one has a lot off free time. With Pentax I can get satisfactory results every time.
But D750's AF.C is really interesting.

You can advise me to shoot in raw. I do shoot in raw but after thorough examination I came to a conclusion that real differencies between raws and jpegs are very little. Now my workflow is very simple. Almost always I am satisfied with just jpegs and only a few images process from each photoshoot. And what I like the most is that I get quite natural colors (I process raws in PDCU).
With D750 I'll have to adjust every single photo in post processing...

[Winder]

You can advise me to shoot in raw. I do shoot in raw but after thorough examination I came to a conclusion that real differencies between raws and jpegs are very little. Now my workflow is very simple. Almost always I am satisfied with just jpegs and only a few images process from each photoshoot. And what I like the most is that I get quite natural colors (I process raws in PDCU).
With D750 I'll have to adjust every single photo in post processing...

You can set most RAW processors up to apply presets on import so you don't have to do any actual editing. If you like the look of a certain film or style set it up to apply on import. You just have a lot more options and control if you do it in the RAW processor... and better IQ.

[neostyles]

Aesthetics are a very subjective thing - I like the rugged, angled design of Pentax cameras, others don't.

True, but few people would say that their 2 year old kid is better designer than johnny ives. Pentax's design has been something that hasnt exactly been cited as a strength. TCS noted the peculiar, almost Frankenstein like design of the k30 in their review, and drtv had a few concerns about the design of the k-r. Much has been made of the some of the bizarre color combos that are offered that have kind of a toy like feel.. Pentax can put whatever it wants on the spec sheets, but, imho, because of their design they still kind of carry a dated feel.

I totally agree with you here - the AF is noisy. At the same all lenses being released at the moment have silent and quick DC focussing, so something is being done about it. But you seem to forget positive points such as the fact that the K5 II was one of the earliest (or even the earliest?) DSLR to be able to focus down to -3 EV. Hardly 90s technology.

Yet, having used the k20d for around a year, it sometimes did feel like 90s technology. The af would sometimes take several seconds to focus on things that wouldnt have posed a challenge for any other camera. Even with the kit lens it would sometimes refuse to focus on things in broad day light. At the very least, it felt a few years behind the canon T3Is that i borrowed from the school every now and then. I would be really curious to see what newer pentax cameras are like but theres no way to really get your hands on one, which is why i think the op is much safer going with the d750. I can go to my local camera store and try out any canon/nikon i want and really get a feel for it, but with pentax you are essentially placing your hundreds of $$ in a review you read online. My local Frys electronics does have one pentax camera (the water proof one i think) but they dont have any of their dslrs. I like to actually get my hands on my gear before i put down my hard earned cash on it..

That's a problem with your fluid intelligence, not the menus. Most people find Pentax's menus better designed than Nikon or Canon ones.

Really? I was able to pick up my d600 and start shooting without even cracking the manual. Thats something that i have never been able to do with any other camera and i found it remarkable. Plus, the k30 still use numbers in the custom settings menu. This is something that i really hoped they would do away with after the k20.. The designer in me also kind of cringes when i look at this screen
Pentax K-30 Digital SLR Menu Walkthrough - YouTube