[pathdoc]

And now Pentax has gone and released the K-70 and the KAF4 mount standard out of the blue and blown EVERYTHING I told her out of the water.

OTOH, with any luck this will crash the prices of current entry-level Pentax bodies and she will be able to pick up a good one dirt cheap.

[bertwert]

OTOH, with any luck this will crash the prices of current entry-level Pentax bodies and she will be able to pick up a good one dirt cheap.

K-50 prices seem to be about $600 with 1 kit lens right now...
Wierd as I got mine (2-ish years ago) for $600 with both kit lenses...

Hopefully the prices drop a bit more

[dwhopson]

Honestly - currently using both NIkon and Pentax systems, there are pluses and minuses to both.

-Pentax - really incredible legacy lens support (down to 42mm) on any body! Manual focus is capable and much better through the finder than it was years ago (to the point of being usable). Features/accessories are sometimes lacking as compared to similar equivalent bodies from canikon/Sony. Size/weight of some Pentax bodies a definite plus! Pentax finally has a variety of bodies to select from (3 DX / 1 FX).

-Nikon - legacy lens support, but limited to higher-end/older bodies. Older lenses can be modified - by Nikon or repair services. Also, auto-focus lenses from the 'current' D-series unusable on 3000/5000 series of cameras (lots of really decent glass here). Manual focus via view finder is useless; however, live-view works better than any other camera I've used. The creative lighting system is hands-down the best on the market. Nikon user customization is overwhelming.

As was said before, I really think it depends on what one is going to do with the camera, If they are going to do this as just a hobby - in many ways Pentax is the best way to go. Pentax autofocus lenses seem to be really affordable now (new and used) and bodies keep becoming more advanced - and the use of manual focus lenses seems to be a no-brainier.

If the thought is to move in a more professional direction - weddings, portraiture, high-art - then going with Nikon seems to make sense. Digital bodies will always be in a state of upgrade (every 3-4 years), but glass will be a life-long investment.

It's a tough decision. A lot of older folks here in DSLR-land were weened on a film-system SLR (Pentax) and it made sense to stay with that brand. For younger generations - it's a complex decision and significant investment.

[pathdoc]

Right now this is just a hobby for her, so I thought if I get her started with a good entry level or previous premier body, it would be the best way to go, while allowing her to carry her lenses forward to whatever she graduated to in her own time. The advent of the KAF4 mount clouds things quite substantially - if I had some reassurance that future bodies going forward would continue to support the aperture control system of older lenses I would be much happier. Even if they don't, in the long run that would still leave her (and me) with everything from the *istD to the K-1 to choose from, which is all that most photographers could ever need.

[UncleVanya]

Right now this is just a hobby for her, so I thought if I get her started with a good entry level or previous premier body, it would be the best way to go, while allowing her to carry her lenses forward to whatever she graduated to in her own time. The advent of the KAF4 mount clouds things quite substantially - if I had some reassurance that future bodies going forward would continue to support the aperture control system of older lenses I would be much happier. Even if they don't, in the long run that would still leave her (and me) with everything from the *istD to the K-1 to choose from, which is all that most photographers could ever need.

We still have screwdrive, so backward compatibility has send to remain a priority. I think the aperture lever Is with yrs for a long while yet to come at least in the bodies.

[reh321]

... Digital bodies will always be in a state of upgrade (every 3-4 years), but glass will be a life-long investment.

People keep saying this, but I really think we need to put as asterisk after that statement. I can still use the lens that was kitted with my first Pentax camera {a K-mount ME SE} in 1979 .... but I hardly ever do. I sometimes wonder at, even brag about, the sharpness of the lens that was kitted with my second Pentax camera {KA-mount Super Program in my signature picture} in 1984. I have bought, and had fun "playing with" some Super Takumar and Adaptall lenses I bought on eBay - but do you know why they were available to me? One or two may have come from an estate, but in most cases I bought it from the original owner who just got tired of having them take up space and decided to turn them into $$.

Likewise, there has been a fair bit of complaining about the new Pentax lens announced this past week - people like and want the new features, but want to be able to use that new lens with those new features on a "old" {released two or three years ago} camera.

The simply fact is that today, with the possible exception of lenses costing $$$$, lenses are as much of a commodity as cameras are. Companies like Nikon and Pentax are continually updating their designs as they engage in an "arms race" in this area also. Who can provide the best corner-to-corner sharpness to feed our addiction to needle-sharpness? Who can make the fastest / lightest / etc elements to supplement the camera in providing ever faster AF? Which lens is the most convenient to handle? Which lens takes up the least amount of space, adds the least amount of weight, in the camera bag? Which camera has the least CA? Etc, etc, etc

[UncleVanya]

People keep saying this, but I really think we need to put as asterisk after that statement. I can still use the lens that was kitted with my first Pentax camera {a K-mount ME SE} in 1979 .... but I hardly ever do. I sometimes wonder at, even brag about, the sharpness of the lens that was kitted with my second Pentax camera {KA-mount Super Program in my signature picture} in 1984. I have bought, and had fun "playing with" some Super Takumar and Adaptall lenses I bought on eBay - but do you know why they were available to me? One or two may have come from an estate, but in most cases I bought it from the original owner who just got tired of having them take up space and decided to turn them into $$.

Likewise, there has been a fair bit of complaining about the new Pentax lens announced this past week - people like and want the new features, but want to be able to use that new lens with those new features on a "old" {released two or three years ago} camera.

The simply fact is that today, with the possible exception of lenses costing $$$$, lenses are as much of a commodity as cameras are. Companies like Nikon and Pentax are continually updating their designs as they engage in an "arms race" in this area also. Who can provide the best corner-to-corner sharpness to feed our addiction to needle-sharpness? Who can make the fastest / lightest / etc elements to supplement the camera in providing ever faster AF? Which lens is the most convenient to handle? Which lens takes up the least amount of space, adds the least amount of weight, in the camera bag? Which camera has the least CA? Etc, etc, etc

But... The old lens can produce stunning images on a modern camera that outperform what the best lens today can make on older digital slrs.

[reh321]

But... The old lens can produce stunning images on a modern camera that outperform what the best lens today can make on older digital slrs.

Maybe it depends on who you are and what your goals are.

We spent last weekend in Dearborn MI.

Last Saturday, while we visited Greenfield Village, I disciplined myself to use only a MIR-1 37mm M42 lens, which has developed a substantial following in the West since the fall of the "Iron Curtain".
On Sunday, while we visited next-door at the Henry Ford Museum, I disciplined myself to use only an Adaptall #44A 28-70mm lens using an M42 mount.
The purpose of these restrictions was to help me evaluate my "fail-safe" plan, to use my K-30 as an M42 camera if its Aperture Control were to fail, as seems to happen with that camera.
My conclusion was that I can do it - and I like the pictures - but I was so glad to get back to AF on Monday morning when we returned to the village and I used my regular 18-135mm DC lens.
Special occasions are different, but for regular day photography I want to think about composition and light, and it turns out that thinking about focusing is just a little more than I want to take on regularly.

And, I don't think I am very unique. Look at the uproar over the new lens - at the number of people who want the PLM instead of {noisy} screw-drive, who are willing to spend another $400 and sacrifice a tiny amount of aperture to get it - but don't want to sacrifice the camera they bought three, four, five years ago.
And based on the number of people who {apparently very honestly} say "I hate to get rid of this lens, I love it but I just don't use it, and I need the space/money", I am quite confident in saying that there is a fair amount of churning in a typical person's collection of lenses. {the guy who sold the #23A to me made of real pain of himself wanting to be sure that I took good care of his "baby"}. So, my conclusion is that lens ownership today is more like marriage is today than what marriage was - you're not making a lifetime commitment; get what seems to be right with the knowledge that you can always re-examine the whole thing.

[K-9]

Some Nikon crop bodies have lens limitations, especially with autofocus. Supposedly, the Nikon Df is the one they tout as being the most friendly with their back catalog of old lenses.

[pathdoc]

Supposedly, the Nikon Df is the one they tout as being the most friendly with their back catalog of old lenses.

Well out of her price range, sadly, or I would recommend it in a flash!