[Urkeldaedalus]

Since this is an off-brand forum within a Pentax forum, I thought this would be an interesting question. The truth is that no camera brand or system is perfect, so what other brand does the best job of complimenting Pentax's weaknesses?

I have been pondering this one for awhile as I think about buying a second camera for some events I have coming up later in the year, and I wait to see what Pentax is going to do with their new cameras.

My main thought has been matching the Nikon full frame system (D700) along with a nice zoom with the smaller, video capable Pentax. The D700 would fill in the greater 3200 than high ISO hole that is the K-7s main weakness, and is by all reports a solid camera in most respects. The Nikon zooms are also basically the best on the market.

Then I think -- no wait a second -- prime lenses is where it is at. Why not pick up a Canon 5D Mark II with a 24 f/1.4 and match it with my K-7 with either an FA31 or FA77 attached. With this simple set up I'd be able to cover most situations with excellent image quality, and I'd get the super video capabilities of the Mark II to boot.

But wait, what if Olympus releases an update to their E3. Are they ever going to do that? The Zuiko f/2 zooms have always been intriguing to me, but can they make up for the 4/3 sensor? I have a sweet spot in my heart for Olympus, but man I have no idea if they know what they are doing as far as their pro stuff goes.

Sony I am less interested in, for whatever reason. Their full frame cameras seem to appeal a lot to landscape photographers who want the resolution advantage. But I've always felt the Samsung sensor in the K20D and K-7 does a pretty admirable job on this front. I'm not planning on printing any huge poster landscapes any time soon.

Or how about Leica? No, forget that, I am never going to be able to afford a Leica. Maybe an X1, but I'd rather buy a k-x as a second camera than an X1.

So what do you guys think? I'm sure it will differ from person to person. If nothing else, it's a fun thought exercise.

[RioRico]

In the non-P&S world, I can't think of another brand that would 'complement' Pentax. Nikon, Canon, Sony are all tiny slices of corporate giants, with huge (almost incomprehensible) lineups of offerings designed to induce purchasers to 'upgrade' ASAP. Olympus has far fewer lens options (new and legacy). Fujifilm and Sigma (as camera makers) are much more specialized. Leica and Hassy and Mamiya are in a different ball park (although Pentax is moving in). Maybe if Zenit introduced a dSLR line...

[Peter Zack]

I solved my problem with this debate the other day. I was giving Nikon (D700) some very serious thought. Test one several times. Very disappointed with the VF and the same for the 5DMkII. No brighter than the K20D. FF? WTF?

My main issues were higher ISO's and AF. The K-7 was an improvement on the K20 in AF but not ISO, so that body was of no value to me. I mean how many bodies can you carry at once? I only have 2 hands. The IQ of the K20D was perfectly fine IMO and still exceeds my skill level. So gimme High ISO and better AF.

The K-X. Yup a base model cheapo camera. Does both better than I expected and to boot, the VF equals the brghtness of my K20D's. The best possible solution. You usually have 3 choices. 1) price 2) IQ 3) features and performance. Usually you can't get all 3 with one camera. In this case, I think you can.

Plus things like missing the top LCD, no visible AF points etc are no big deal. I've taken about 700 shots with it and really like this camera.

[er1kksen]

The only things I really feel like I'm missing are the 35mm fov/dof and a wide range of good, inexpensive primes.

For me, that means the Canon 5D (or 5D ii if we want to get really fancy, but the extra pixels and high ISO performance are not necessary for me anymore... as long as it's as good as the Kx or better, I am satisfied). Lenses like the 28mm f1.8 or 85mm f1.8 or 100mm f2, they call to me... not to mention the registration distance allows pretty close to any legacy lens to be mounted with an adapter (the primary exception would be Canon FD mount, ironically). So it can use EF lenses and 2 out of my three K-mount lenses.

I'm sure a different user with different preferences/needs would have a different answer, of course.

[RioRico]

The K-X. Yup a base model cheapo camera. Does both better than I expected and to boot, the VF equals the brghtness of my K20D's. The best possible solution.

Don't forget the upcoming square 15.3 mpx Pentax K-y for all those 6x6 fans.

Should I mention again that the camera is the least important factor in photography? What matters are 1) photographer, 2) light, 3) subject, 4) lens, and then 5) camera. Unless the camera is smarter than the photographer. In which case, the photographer should be replaced by a robot.

[Peter Zack]

I get all that but trust me, you don't perform surgery with a butter knife. You may have an idea and know how to shoot it, but if the tool can't perform the task, then all your skill is wasted.

In my case I had 2 big issues. I shoot over 30 weddings a year.
1) Bad lighting in churches were near impossible to get many of the shots I wanted. Resorting to too many wide open fast prime thin DOF shots at shutter speeds that were too low. Using ISO's that the K20D just can't handle well.

2) Tracking moving people again in poor lighting. Too many missed shots when the camera should have been able to follow someone walking at normal speed.

The K-X has solved both those problems and stopped a consideration of switching brands. If they hadn't put this camera out, I would be posting on a Nikon forum by May. As much as I like many of the advantages of Pentax, I couldn't see keeping 2 systems going for both professional reasons and economical reasons.

The K20D produces incredible photos but in the 2 situations above, it really does a poor job. There's a huge difference between taking 20 minutes and 40-50 shots of the same thing in a tough light situation until you get it right and having one opportunity to take the important image with no retakes.

[Urkeldaedalus]

The K-x as a second camera is clearly the front runner for me now for the reasons Peter mentions. I'm waiting to see if Pentax releases a slightly more advanced version of the camera that still has the K-x sensor in it. As it stands now the K-7 can do about 80-85 percent of the shots I want it to do, and I think having that high ISO option in my second camera would really help diversity my options.

If Pentax is able to do this, I really will only have one major gripe left, and that's the lack of a high-quality f/2 or lower wide angle prime (think 18-20 mm) for Pentax users to choose from. If they add a lens like that, I probably won't ever need to consider full frame until it is much more affordable.

For example, I could get this from the Canon 5D Mark II + 24 f/1.4 option I mentioned, but that's a $4,000 solution compared to a $500 K-x. Hypothetically the Canon option solves my problem, but when it comes to real money spent, that's a big chunk of change.

As for the camera meaning the little compared to other things that go into making a photo, I agree. I actually think the order of importance goes something like this:

1. Photographer's skill/vision/luck
2. The quality of the light
3. Lens quality
4. Photographer's post processing abilities
5. Camera

However, the camera becomes much more important when it is designed for certain tasks that need to be performed. For example, I think the K-7and a Nikon D3S could both do about the same job taking photos of a politician giving a speech at a well lit podium, but I know which camera would be the only choice if you had to shoot basketball in a dimly lit gym and wanted noise free images.

Of course cameras are only tools, so it is really a subset of the photographer's ability to know what tool to pick for what job. Actually that goes for all the items on the list above.

[dugrant153]

hmm... I've been considering an "upgrade" for myself since I shoot in low lights and do take lots of pics of people (especially of them moving).

Peter, interesting that you brought up the K-x! I use a lot of multi-point focus and am curious how you deal with the lack of "focus dots" on the K-x?

[LeDave]

I would go with Sony if you are considering to use two-brands, although Sony has some of the costliest lenses but it is Carl Zeiss, they also have a awesome lens line-up coupled with Pentax-similar bodies. Their bodies also have screw-drive, backwards lens compatibility with Minolta, and in-body SR.

I would probably wait it out a bit, there are a few rumors that an A900 replacement announcement is near unless you want to jump on the attractive price of the A850.

300 f/2.8 G, 70-200 f/2.8 G, 16-35 f/2.8 Zeiss, 24-70 f/2.8 Zeiss, 85 f/1.4 Zeiss, and 135 f/1.8 Zeiss, beautiful lenses. Then aside from the 24 f/2 Distagon let's not forget, 500 f/4 G anyone?

[rustynail925]

Anyone here interested of the samsung nx10? I hope pentax Kx successor will be base on that size.

[Big G]

I guess the question is: what is your current setup not giving you?

If you were wanting to move into a professional wedding photographer setup, I would think a D700 based setup would make a lot of sense. If you were wanting to sell highly detailed landscape prints, I would be hanging out for the Pentax 645D and skip full-frame altogether.

For me, my K20D wasn't giving me what I wanted autofocus wise, so I moved to a Canon EOS 7D as I wanted the best I could get in an APS-C format. I also toyed with a 5D Mk2, but that's an older body that doesn't have the autofocus or frames per second that I was looking for, so stayed APS-C. I also wanted to tap into Canon's top spec L glass which is available to rent from a web suppliers for a small amount of money - I couldn't get the same for my K20D.

[Peter Zack]

Well I posted the first part of my review on the KX. See the Enticing the Light link below in my signature.
As for fast and wide glass or fast and long like the Sony 500/4. why not look at Sigma's lens lineup? Much less expensive and they build some great lenses. They aren't just a 3rd party lens company, they have DSLR's as well. I own a few including the 28/1.8 which is a very nice lens and gets used a fair amount in tough lighting situations.

So you can get a fast 20mm from them if you like. I see no need for Pentax to build a 500/4 or 600/4 as much as I'd like to have some fast long glass. The sales of this would be so low as to make it completely cost ineffective. With the Sigma available to us and their expanding of PKA mounts, you can have the best of all. Fast, price and quality. No need for Pentax to break the bank for a lens that they would be lucky to sell 100/year/worldwide.

[Peter Zack]

hmm... I've been considering an "upgrade" for myself since I shoot in low lights and do take lots of pics of people (especially of them moving).

Peter, interesting that you brought up the K-x! I use a lot of multi-point focus and am curious how you deal with the lack of "focus dots" on the K-x?

I'm not sure I'm clear on what you're doing. Do you mean that you highlight one of the other (than center) focus points? Say as you might in portrait mode and use one of the far right points?
Or do you mean you have them all on and try to use a few to get your subject in focus?

In my case, I don't fiddle with the focus points when I'm shooting. In over 200,000 shots on a Pentax DSLR I've literally done it 20 times. Mostly for fun when shooting macros and I didn't want the bee or flower right in the center of the frame.

But I do shoot in portrait mode almost 50% of the time. I just don't have time to fiddle with rear buttons and move focus points around. Although, on the K-X it's just as fast and easy to do it as on the K20D.

So I use the center point and I'll lock on to the eye's or important subject and then hold that focus and recompose. Simple, fast and easy. I've tried it on this body and it's just as easy.

In fact it has something of an old school style to it. Back when we used the center split screen to get focus, we essentially only had one focus point. You focused on the subject and recomposed the shot. I like not having the blinking lights in the VF.

[Samsungian]

John Shaw is a professional & he doesn't use medium format

Alot of photographers earn their living without using medium format.


Anyone seriously think he'll cash out of LOWLY Nikon Full Frame Dslrs to buy into 645D to improve his sales and artistic vision ???


Here's Shaw's linky to his current equiptment list:



My Photo Equipment


& while I'm at it, how about B Moose Peterson, is HE heading to the exits cause Pentax has an affordable medium format camera some 5 years after Pentax announced it was coming soon ???

http://moosepeterson.com/blog/


Seriously, I guess very few established pros will dump, cash out, sell off their money making other brand gear to buy 645D.

Some will add 645D to their kit & see how Pentax caters to Pro's who buy into 645D camera and all the old non~digitally optimized lens system.

645D costs more than any Canon or Nikon camera costs today. And the hot rumour is Canon's 1Ds MARK IV PRO spec FULL FRAME with HD will not start at $8,000 as usual, but instead $6,000~$7,000. Photokina this fall should prove VERY INTERESTING


http://www.canonrumors.com/

I guess the question is: what is your current setup not giving you?

If you were wanting to move into a professional wedding photographer setup, I would think a D700 based setup would make a lot of sense. If you were wanting to sell highly detailed landscape prints, I would be hanging out for the Pentax 645D and skip full-frame altogether.

edit edit

[er1kksen]

John Shaw is a professional & he doesn't use medium format

Alot of photographers earn their living without using medium format.


Anyone seriously think he'll cash out of LOWLY Nikon Full Frame Dslrs to buy into 645D to improve his sales and artistic vision ???


Here's Shaw's linky to his current equiptment list:



My Photo Equipment


& while I'm at it, how about B Moose Peterson, is HE heading to the exits cause Pentax has an affordable medium format camera some 5 years after they announced it was coming soon ?

Moose Peterson's Website


edit edit

...are you replying to something in this thread? 'Cause I don't see it...