The Dark Side Has Taken Me - I Am Going To Be Jumping on A 5D Mk2

RolloR · 11-30-2010, 02:11 AM

Hopefully my cash flow will be good when the Mark III comes out!

It's just such a joy looking through the viewfinder of a 35mm camera.

Larger than 35mm would be much more fun i suppose, and I would not need AF with it! Although $10k+ is ridiculous unless i'm making money out of it. I'd rather buy a used car for that price.

Impartial · 11-30-2010, 07:33 AM

Originally posted by RolloR

Hopefully my cash flow will be good when the Mark III comes out!

It's just such a joy looking through the viewfinder of a 35mm camera.

Larger than 35mm would be much more fun i suppose, and I would not need AF with it! Although $10k+ is ridiculous unless i'm making money out of it. I'd rather buy a used car for that price.

And I'd rather buy a used violin. A cheap one. :-p

ll_coffee_lP · 12-01-2010, 05:25 PM

$10k is ridiculous even if you are making money with it...

I'd never buy a Ferrari if I didn't live anywhere near where I could drive it like it should be driven, but that doesn't mean that I can't choose a VW Passat over a Hyundai Accent.

c[_]

K-9 · 12-02-2010, 08:06 AM

What's hilarious is when I see magazine cover shoots that were done with a Hasselblad, yet with the cover size, it could have been taken with a K-x and still looked the same!. Then there's the shoddy printing I've seen in mags, which totally negates the cost of an immensely expensive MF system.

To me, the only people who should buy medium format systems are the ones who sell gigantic prints for gigantic prices. Otherwise, there isn't a job or assignment on the planet that couldn't be fulfilled with a $2000 camera vs a $10,000 camera.

Urkeldaedalus · 12-02-2010, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by ll_coffee_lP

$10k is ridiculous even if you are making money with it...

c[_]

As a business decision, I always think it's a good rule of thumb that if you can make more than your investment in equipment than it's not a bad investment, especially if you can recoup your expenses before the camera loses too much of its initial value. This is why Aps-C is the best cost to performance ratio for most people who only get photographic work infrequently. If you get regular photographic work every week, then full frame is more reasonable. If you regularly shoot for nature magazines or art exhibits and have great insurance, then medium format may be for you.

On the other hand, if you're a well heeled hobbyist, do whatever the hell you feel like.

ll_coffee_lP · 12-02-2010, 08:15 PM

I agree.

c[_]

a a i b · 12-02-2010, 09:14 PM

I bought a 5D Mk II in August, and recently the K-5 (crazy, I know.)

There certainly are plusses to the Canon. Though it pains me to say it, the 5D fits better in my hand, and the quality of high ISO / low light pictures has a edge (though not a big one) over the K-5.

But: apart from wide angle/tilt-shift (which is why I got FF), I tend to reach for the K-5 more. It's a better travel and everyday camera, and Pentax lenses are generally a much better value than their Canon counterparts. One example: my DA55 comfortably holds its own versus my Canon 85/1.8; I'd say the DA55 is superior as a portrait lens, while being much cheaper than the 85/1.2.

The K-5 is just a more refined, better sorted camera. My Canon's body flexes a bit gripping it, and the shutter clunk is comical. Canon's ergonomics leave a bit to be desired, though I do like the control wheel on the back.

In the end my conclusion is that each camera is in a pretty different position, and I'm not sure one camera "style" could really cover both niches. There's no doubt that Pentax is the better value, and its lenses really are terrific. But I do also like the Canon's "fit," viewfinder and controls. Ideally, Pentax lenses on that Canon body, or some of those T/S lenses on Pentax ... well, can't have it all.

Bart · 12-04-2010, 06:56 AM

I was just wondering: what's with this "Dark Side"?
I suppose it's a reference to Canon (with the white lenses

)
I don't get it.

dylansalt · 12-05-2010, 02:14 PM

Over here in SA, the term "going over to the Dark Side" is for a Canon user moving over to Nikon

ll_coffee_lP · 12-05-2010, 03:39 PM

In Pentaxland it means that you are going with another system.

c[_]

Urkeldaedalus · 12-05-2010, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by ll_coffee_lP

In Pentaxland it means that you are going with another system.

c[_]

For Pentax users I've mostly seen that rhetoric being used for people switching to the big two, and sometimes Sony. I think switching to Panasonic, Olympus or especially Leica is still considered the light side of the Force

ll_coffee_lP · 12-05-2010, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by Urkeldaedalus

For Pentax users I've mostly seen that rhetoric being used for people switching to the big two, and sometimes Sony. I think switching to Panasonic, Olympus or especially Leica is still considered the light side of the Force

That may very well be, but for all intents and purposes 0.0001 % of the conversations at this site are about people switching from Pentax to Panny/Oly/Leica - so pardon me for "lumping" them in with the big three.

c[_]

Urkeldaedalus · 12-05-2010, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by ll_coffee_lP

That may very well be, but for all intents and purposes 0.0001 % of the conversations at this site are about people switching from Pentax to Panny/Oly/Leica - so pardon me for "lumping" them in with the big three.

c[_]

I think you've arrived at exactly the reason Sony, Nikon and Canon make up Pentax's Axis of Evil. The other brands aren't exactly threats to blot out Pentax even if they are competitive.

And I think I wasn't quite honest earlier. I don't think I've ever once seen an actual "I'm switching to Olympus" thread. I've seen threads about being happy with Olympus, or trying the new Micro 4/3 cameras, but never seen "I'm selling all my full frame system. It's Zuiko or bust!" Kind of sad, really.

Bart · 12-06-2010, 12:48 PM

Got it.
Pentax = Skywalker & Jedi
All other systems = Empire

JonPB · 12-06-2010, 01:40 PM

Personally, all of my impressions indicate that the 5D mkII is a perfectly good camera. Jumping on it won't do much good. Some initial satisfaction, sure, I can understand that--but, please, instead of ruining the thing you'd be better off selling it and buying some equipment you'd be happier with.

That said, if you do jump on it and don't ruin it, that'd be an interesting durability anecdote. So you may want to make a video of the jumping and put that up to youtube.

Seriously, now: buy the equipment that suits your needs best, Pentax or otherwise. I'm a fan of this brand because they make things that suit my desires better than anyone else--which is weird, because other brands have pretty much the entire market locked up, except for the gaps Pentax fills. Those gaps hit my desires perfectly. Why doesn't Canon or Nikon fill them? Because they're afraid of cannibalizing their upmarket items. If anyone else came out with a solid competitor for the Pentax lineup, I wouldn't feel guilty about looking and possibly buying them. Until then, I'm a Pentaxian...and until then, I'm buying more and more into the Pentax system, which makes me less likely to switch.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
My dark side	gowerray	Monthly Photo Contests	0	02-12-2010 04:11 AM
Horse: On the Dark Side	creampuff	Post Your Photos!	11	03-04-2009 05:54 AM
The dark side (don't hate me :) )	palmor	General Talk	7	03-02-2009 10:12 PM
One from the dark side	pingflood	General Talk	5	01-01-2009 09:23 PM
Yes, I've gone to the dark side...	solarisdreams	General Talk	114	08-26-2008 01:40 PM

11-30-2010, 02:11 AM	#16
RolloR Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 264	Hopefully my cash flow will be good when the Mark III comes out! It's just such a joy looking through the viewfinder of a 35mm camera. Larger than 35mm would be much more fun i suppose, and I would not need AF with it! Although $10k+ is ridiculous unless i'm making money out of it. I'd rather buy a used car for that price.

11-30-2010, 07:33 AM	#17
Impartial Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 208	Originally posted by RolloR Hopefully my cash flow will be good when the Mark III comes out! It's just such a joy looking through the viewfinder of a 35mm camera. Larger than 35mm would be much more fun i suppose, and I would not need AF with it! Although $10k+ is ridiculous unless i'm making money out of it. I'd rather buy a used car for that price. And I'd rather buy a used violin. A cheap one. :-p

12-01-2010, 05:25 PM	#18
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	$10k is ridiculous even if you are making money with it... I'd never buy a Ferrari if I didn't live anywhere near where I could drive it like it should be driven, but that doesn't mean that I can't choose a VW Passat over a Hyundai Accent. c[_]

12-02-2010, 08:06 AM	#19
K-9 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,971	What's hilarious is when I see magazine cover shoots that were done with a Hasselblad, yet with the cover size, it could have been taken with a K-x and still looked the same!. Then there's the shoddy printing I've seen in mags, which totally negates the cost of an immensely expensive MF system. To me, the only people who should buy medium format systems are the ones who sell gigantic prints for gigantic prices. Otherwise, there isn't a job or assignment on the planet that couldn't be fulfilled with a $2000 camera vs a $10,000 camera.

12-02-2010, 09:16 AM	#20
Urkeldaedalus Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Iowa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,369	Originally posted by ll_coffee_lP $10k is ridiculous even if you are making money with it... c[_] As a business decision, I always think it's a good rule of thumb that if you can make more than your investment in equipment than it's not a bad investment, especially if you can recoup your expenses before the camera loses too much of its initial value. This is why Aps-C is the best cost to performance ratio for most people who only get photographic work infrequently. If you get regular photographic work every week, then full frame is more reasonable. If you regularly shoot for nature magazines or art exhibits and have great insurance, then medium format may be for you. On the other hand, if you're a well heeled hobbyist, do whatever the hell you feel like.

12-02-2010, 08:15 PM	#21
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	I agree. c[_]

12-02-2010, 09:14 PM	#22
a a i b Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Brooklyn Photos: Gallery Posts: 315	I bought a 5D Mk II in August, and recently the K-5 (crazy, I know.) There certainly are plusses to the Canon. Though it pains me to say it, the 5D fits better in my hand, and the quality of high ISO / low light pictures has a edge (though not a big one) over the K-5. But: apart from wide angle/tilt-shift (which is why I got FF), I tend to reach for the K-5 more. It's a better travel and everyday camera, and Pentax lenses are generally a much better value than their Canon counterparts. One example: my DA55 comfortably holds its own versus my Canon 85/1.8; I'd say the DA55 is superior as a portrait lens, while being much cheaper than the 85/1.2. The K-5 is just a more refined, better sorted camera. My Canon's body flexes a bit gripping it, and the shutter clunk is comical. Canon's ergonomics leave a bit to be desired, though I do like the control wheel on the back. In the end my conclusion is that each camera is in a pretty different position, and I'm not sure one camera "style" could really cover both niches. There's no doubt that Pentax is the better value, and its lenses really are terrific. But I do also like the Canon's "fit," viewfinder and controls. Ideally, Pentax lenses on that Canon body, or some of those T/S lenses on Pentax ... well, can't have it all.

12-04-2010, 06:56 AM	#23
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	I was just wondering: what's with this "Dark Side"? I suppose it's a reference to Canon (with the white lenses ) I don't get it.

12-05-2010, 02:14 PM	#24
dylansalt Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Durban, South Africa Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,052	Over here in SA, the term "going over to the Dark Side" is for a Canon user moving over to Nikon

12-05-2010, 03:39 PM	#25
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	In Pentaxland it means that you are going with another system. c[_]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-05-2010, 04:48 PM	#26
Urkeldaedalus Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Iowa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,369	Originally posted by ll_coffee_lP In Pentaxland it means that you are going with another system. c[_] For Pentax users I've mostly seen that rhetoric being used for people switching to the big two, and sometimes Sony. I think switching to Panasonic, Olympus or especially Leica is still considered the light side of the Force

12-05-2010, 05:59 PM	#27
ll_coffee_lP Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 1,972	Originally posted by Urkeldaedalus For Pentax users I've mostly seen that rhetoric being used for people switching to the big two, and sometimes Sony. I think switching to Panasonic, Olympus or especially Leica is still considered the light side of the Force That may very well be, but for all intents and purposes 0.0001 % of the conversations at this site are about people switching from Pentax to Panny/Oly/Leica - so pardon me for "lumping" them in with the big three. c[_]

12-05-2010, 10:01 PM	#28
Urkeldaedalus Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Iowa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,369	Originally posted by ll_coffee_lP That may very well be, but for all intents and purposes 0.0001 % of the conversations at this site are about people switching from Pentax to Panny/Oly/Leica - so pardon me for "lumping" them in with the big three. c[_] I think you've arrived at exactly the reason Sony, Nikon and Canon make up Pentax's Axis of Evil. The other brands aren't exactly threats to blot out Pentax even if they are competitive. And I think I wasn't quite honest earlier. I don't think I've ever once seen an actual "I'm switching to Olympus" thread. I've seen threads about being happy with Olympus, or trying the new Micro 4/3 cameras, but never seen "I'm selling all my full frame system. It's Zuiko or bust!" Kind of sad, really.

12-06-2010, 12:48 PM	#29
Bart Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: WW community of Pentax users Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,646	Got it. Pentax = Skywalker & Jedi All other systems = Empire

12-06-2010, 01:40 PM	#30
JonPB Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Portland, OR, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 430	Personally, all of my impressions indicate that the 5D mkII is a perfectly good camera. Jumping on it won't do much good. Some initial satisfaction, sure, I can understand that--but, please, instead of ruining the thing you'd be better off selling it and buying some equipment you'd be happier with. That said, if you do jump on it and don't ruin it, that'd be an interesting durability anecdote. So you may want to make a video of the jumping and put that up to youtube. Seriously, now: buy the equipment that suits your needs best, Pentax or otherwise. I'm a fan of this brand because they make things that suit my desires better than anyone else--which is weird, because other brands have pretty much the entire market locked up, except for the gaps Pentax fills. Those gaps hit my desires perfectly. Why doesn't Canon or Nikon fill them? Because they're afraid of cannibalizing their upmarket items. If anyone else came out with a solid competitor for the Pentax lineup, I wouldn't feel guilty about looking and possibly buying them. Until then, I'm a Pentaxian...and until then, I'm buying more and more into the Pentax system, which makes me less likely to switch.