Next camera body....maybe a Sony.

lesmore49 · 10-20-2014, 10:20 AM

I've got three Pentax DSLR bodies and about 10 + Pentax digital lens (lost count).

So far ...all equipment running well. However if one of the bodies 'conks' out I'm thinking of replacing it with a Sony body and a Novaflex lens mount system that allows Pentax K mount lenses to be used on the Sony camera mount.

So what do you think ? Good idea or any pitfalls ?

Which Sony body would you recommend?

I have the Pentax 18-55,16-45, 10-17 Fisheye, 50 F 1.4, 50 Macro F 2.8, 12-24, 18-135, 55-300, 40, 21 and 70 Limiteds...Sigma 150-500.

Will I lose the AF focus of my Pentax lenses when coupled...via Novaflex adaptor...with the Sony body ?

**luftfluss** · 10-20-2014, 10:35 AM

Yes, you will lose AF.

Depending on the Sony body, you will also lose Image Stabilization.

lesmore49 · 10-20-2014, 10:38 AM

Originally posted by luftfluss

Yes, you will lose AF.

Depending on the Sony body, you will also lose Image Stabilization.

Which Sony body would provide image stabilization ?

**luftfluss** · 10-20-2014, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by lesmore49

Which Sony body would provide image stabilization ?

I believe all of the SLT's have in-body stabilization. As far as I know, no other Sony body does.

bobpur · 10-20-2014, 10:40 AM

Good new though, Fotodiox now sells replacement E camera mounts that are not plastic like the originals..... no more wiggly lens.

**jatrax** · 10-20-2014, 10:45 AM

Just curious but what is the motivation to move to Sony? I can understand the a7 series if you want to go FF but otherwise?

Honestly looking for what the advantage would be.

LensBeginner · 10-20-2014, 11:03 AM

I'd check this article by Roger Cicala, talking about image degradation when using adapters, just google it:
"There Is No Free Lunch, Episode 763: Lens Adapters"

Short story is that no adapter (and he tested branded, expensive ones) would be exempt from a massive degradation of image quality, mainly because of slight misalignments which are inevitable when using it.
Maybe that won't mean much in real world usage, but it's another thing to be aware of.

A couple of years ago I was considering a NEX in order to have focus peaking in a small body (even though the adapter somewhat nullified the gain), but decided against it (awkward menu structure, it was a Sony - "the" brand of lost causes and failed standards -, and this adapter issue), and bought a K-01...

Last edited by LensBeginner; 10-20-2014 at 11:14 AM.

Tanzer · 10-20-2014, 11:34 AM

I don't think you can practically fit a K-mount lens on a Sony A-mount (SLT) body without a corrective adapter. The lens flange distance and throat diameters are too close.

So you should rule out the SLT bodies.

**jrpower10** · 10-20-2014, 11:45 AM

I'm with jatrax on this one. If you're happy with the k-mount system and APS-C sensor, then buy another Pentax body when your current body dies. If you want full frame then your only option is the A7 series and you'll lose autofocus (definitely) and image stabilization (I think). BTW, the only zoom you have that covers the FF circle is the Sigma, and I don't think any of your limited primes will cover it, so unless you're going to buy new lenses as well I'd stick with APS-C.

**jatrax** · 10-20-2014, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by jrpower10

I'm with jatrax on this one. If you're happy with the k-mount system and APS-C sensor, then buy another Pentax body when your current body dies.

Well, I wasn't completely saying 'bad idea', I really would like to hear from the OP why a move to Sony is of interest. What features do you gain? Personally I do think it is a bad idea, but I would like to hear the reasons why it is being considered.

Just trying to keep an open mind and maybe learn something.

**jrpower10** · 10-20-2014, 12:24 PM

Fair comment

**luftfluss** · 10-20-2014, 12:24 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

Well, I wasn't completely saying 'bad idea', I really would like to hear from the OP why a move to Sony is of interest. What features do you gain? Personally I do think it is a bad idea, but I would like to hear the reasons why it is being considered.

Just trying to keep an open mind and maybe learn something.

You gain the feature of being able to use new Zeiss glass.

DSims · 10-20-2014, 12:31 PM

Don't even bother unless you want some nice Sony lenses. For example, the Sony Zeiss 135/1.8 is a good justification for getting a Sony body.

You have some good Pentax lenses, but none so special as to require you to move them over. Like others here, I can't imagine what you're hoping to gain from this. By the time one of your Pentax bodies dies you'll probably even have at least one Pentax FF option. Right now, you barely have any FF lenses anyway. Again, not sure what you're hoping to achieve.

D1N0 · 10-20-2014, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by LensBeginner

I'd check this article by Roger Cicala, talking about image degradation when using adapters, just google it:
"There Is No Free Lunch, Episode 763: Lens Adapters"

Short story is that no adapter (and he tested branded, expensive ones) would be exempt from a massive degradation of image quality, mainly because of slight misalignments which are inevitable when using it.
Maybe that won't mean much in real world usage, but it's another thing to be aware of.

A couple of years ago I was considering a NEX in order to have focus peaking in a small body (even though the adapter somewhat nullified the gain), but decided against it (awkward menu structure, it was a Sony - "the" brand of lost causes and failed standards -, and this adapter issue), and bought a K-01...

MASSIVE DEGRADATION OMG OMG DISASTROUSSSSS or

Originally posted by Roger Cicala:

What Does It Mean in the Real World?

Like a lot of laboratory testing, probably not a lot. Adapters couldn’t all stink or people wouldn’t use them. Like a lot of tests, you can detect a very real difference in the lab that doesn’t make much difference at all in the real world.

LensBeginner · 10-20-2014, 01:36 PM

Originally posted by D1N0

MASSIVE DEGRADATION OMG OMG DISASTROUSSSSS or

Hey, mister "all caps", which part of "Maybe that won't mean much in real world usage" you didn't read or understand?
Just pointing out some bit of knowledge I came to acquire.
Your post, on the contrary, doesn't bring much to the discussion apart for repeating what I already said myself...

10-20-2014, 10:20 AM	#1
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,342	Next camera body....maybe a Sony. I've got three Pentax DSLR bodies and about 10 + Pentax digital lens (lost count). So far ...all equipment running well. However if one of the bodies 'conks' out I'm thinking of replacing it with a Sony body and a Novaflex lens mount system that allows Pentax K mount lenses to be used on the Sony camera mount. So what do you think ? Good idea or any pitfalls ? Which Sony body would you recommend? I have the Pentax 18-55,16-45, 10-17 Fisheye, 50 F 1.4, 50 Macro F 2.8, 12-24, 18-135, 55-300, 40, 21 and 70 Limiteds...Sigma 150-500. Will I lose the AF focus of my Pentax lenses when coupled...via Novaflex adaptor...with the Sony body ?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New Sony 99 successor next month?	gryphongryph	General Photography	3	10-16-2014 05:55 PM
Pentax, please add in camera focus stacking to the next Q body.	barondla	Pentax Q	8	06-07-2014 03:00 AM
Next leap: Non-bayer sensors from Sony	Clavius	Photographic Industry and Professionals	7	12-15-2013 03:31 AM
Sony SLT-A58 [20.1 Exmor HD CMOS] (??Maybe K3 Sensor??)	joe.penn	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	11	03-07-2013 01:04 PM

10-20-2014, 10:35 AM	#2
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Yes, you will lose AF. Depending on the Sony body, you will also lose Image Stabilization.

10-20-2014, 10:38 AM	#3
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,342 Original Poster	Originally posted by luftfluss Yes, you will lose AF. Depending on the Sony body, you will also lose Image Stabilization. Which Sony body would provide image stabilization ?

10-20-2014, 10:40 AM	#4
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by lesmore49 Which Sony body would provide image stabilization ? I believe all of the SLT's have in-body stabilization. As far as I know, no other Sony body does.

10-20-2014, 10:40 AM	#5
bobpur Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 328	Good new though, Fotodiox now sells replacement E camera mounts that are not plastic like the originals..... no more wiggly lens.

10-20-2014, 10:45 AM	#6
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Just curious but what is the motivation to move to Sony? I can understand the a7 series if you want to go FF but otherwise? Honestly looking for what the advantage would be.

10-20-2014, 11:03 AM	#7
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	I'd check this article by Roger Cicala, talking about image degradation when using adapters, just google it: "There Is No Free Lunch, Episode 763: Lens Adapters" Short story is that no adapter (and he tested branded, expensive ones) would be exempt from a massive degradation of image quality, mainly because of slight misalignments which are inevitable when using it. Maybe that won't mean much in real world usage, but it's another thing to be aware of. A couple of years ago I was considering a NEX in order to have focus peaking in a small body (even though the adapter somewhat nullified the gain), but decided against it (awkward menu structure, it was a Sony - "the" brand of lost causes and failed standards -, and this adapter issue), and bought a K-01... Last edited by LensBeginner; 10-20-2014 at 11:14 AM.

10-20-2014, 11:34 AM	#8
Tanzer Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Perrineville, NJ Posts: 1,375	I don't think you can practically fit a K-mount lens on a Sony A-mount (SLT) body without a corrective adapter. The lens flange distance and throat diameters are too close. So you should rule out the SLT bodies.

10-20-2014, 11:45 AM	#9
jrpower10 Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Richland, Washington, USA Posts: 935	I'm with jatrax on this one. If you're happy with the k-mount system and APS-C sensor, then buy another Pentax body when your current body dies. If you want full frame then your only option is the A7 series and you'll lose autofocus (definitely) and image stabilization (I think). BTW, the only zoom you have that covers the FF circle is the Sigma, and I don't think any of your limited primes will cover it, so unless you're going to buy new lenses as well I'd stick with APS-C.

10-20-2014, 11:59 AM	#10
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by jrpower10 I'm with jatrax on this one. If you're happy with the k-mount system and APS-C sensor, then buy another Pentax body when your current body dies. Well, I wasn't completely saying 'bad idea', I really would like to hear from the OP why a move to Sony is of interest. What features do you gain? Personally I do think it is a bad idea, but I would like to hear the reasons why it is being considered. Just trying to keep an open mind and maybe learn something.

10-20-2014, 12:24 PM	#11
jrpower10 Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Richland, Washington, USA Posts: 935	Fair comment

10-20-2014, 12:24 PM	#12
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by jatrax Well, I wasn't completely saying 'bad idea', I really would like to hear from the OP why a move to Sony is of interest. What features do you gain? Personally I do think it is a bad idea, but I would like to hear the reasons why it is being considered. Just trying to keep an open mind and maybe learn something. You gain the feature of being able to use new Zeiss glass.

10-20-2014, 12:31 PM	#13
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Don't even bother unless you want some nice Sony lenses. For example, the Sony Zeiss 135/1.8 is a good justification for getting a Sony body. You have some good Pentax lenses, but none so special as to require you to move them over. Like others here, I can't imagine what you're hoping to gain from this. By the time one of your Pentax bodies dies you'll probably even have at least one Pentax FF option. Right now, you barely have any FF lenses anyway. Again, not sure what you're hoping to achieve.

10-20-2014, 01:15 PM	#14
D1N0 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Location: --- Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,802	Originally posted by LensBeginner I'd check this article by Roger Cicala, talking about image degradation when using adapters, just google it: "There Is No Free Lunch, Episode 763: Lens Adapters" Short story is that no adapter (and he tested branded, expensive ones) would be exempt from a massive degradation of image quality, mainly because of slight misalignments which are inevitable when using it. Maybe that won't mean much in real world usage, but it's another thing to be aware of. A couple of years ago I was considering a NEX in order to have focus peaking in a small body (even though the adapter somewhat nullified the gain), but decided against it (awkward menu structure, it was a Sony - "the" brand of lost causes and failed standards -, and this adapter issue), and bought a K-01... MASSIVE DEGRADATION OMG OMG DISASTROUSSSSS or Originally posted by Roger Cicala: What Does It Mean in the Real World? Like a lot of laboratory testing, probably not a lot. Adapters couldn’t all stink or people wouldn’t use them. Like a lot of tests, you can detect a very real difference in the lab that doesn’t make much difference at all in the real world.

10-20-2014, 01:36 PM	#15
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Originally posted by D1N0 MASSIVE DEGRADATION OMG OMG DISASTROUSSSSS or Hey, mister "all caps", which part of "Maybe that won't mean much in real world usage" you didn't read or understand? Just pointing out some bit of knowledge I came to acquire. Your post, on the contrary, doesn't bring much to the discussion apart for repeating what I already said myself...