[TropicalMonkey]

I have a Pentax K-5 and several Pentax lenses, that is more than enough for my hobby photography. But if I want to go a bit more serious, I can either stay with Pentax and get a K3-II or wait for the upcoming FF. Alternatively I can jump ship to Nikon or Sony. I like Nikon because it is prevalent and Sony for its mirror-less design. So my question is what will I be missing or gaining in these different cases?

Thanks!

[dansamy]

How many is "several" and are they quality or just a bunch of consumer lenses?

[bertwert]

How many is "several" and are they quality or just a bunch of consumer lenses?

In his sig:

K-5 Pentax 18-135, K-20D Tamron-18-250, Q-02
SMC Tak-50/1.4, A-50/1.4, FA-50/1.4, Sigma 50-150/2.8, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Rokinon 85/1.4, Pentax 85mm/1.8, 135mm/2.5, DA 55-300, AF-540 FGZ

Probably all his lenses.

[dansamy]

Ah. I'm on my phone. I can't see signatures.

[pathdoc]

One thing is for sure - if you jump ship to Nikon, you will be rebuilding your entire lens arsenal and flash system from the ground up. Sony offers the ability to mount your lenses on their mirrorless bodies, but do you get full functionality? Sure, with the Takumar and Pentax MF lenses you have nothing to lose, but you've got some DA stuff in there as well that's not going to port across so well (if at all), and is your flash going to work?

In your situation (which to a large extent I am, having a K-5 and a large amount of DA and FA glass), I would hold fire and wait for the Pentax full-frame to come out. If it's everything it promised to be, jump for it. If it's a complete disaster, I personally would go for the K3 or its immediate flash-bearing successor (I need the onboard flash more than I need pixel shift and GPS; you may be the opposite). If it's somewhere in between, wait for the second generation (provided there is one) once they have the bugs worked out.

[jatrax]

I have a Pentax K-5 and several Pentax lenses, that is more than enough for my hobby photography. But if I want to go a bit more serious, I can either stay with Pentax and get a K3-II or wait for the upcoming FF. Alternatively I can jump ship to Nikon or Sony. I like Nikon because it is prevalent and Sony for its mirror-less design.

If you like mirrorless then its time to go as it is doubtful Pentax will have a camera in that category for a long time.

If you like "prevalent" then sure go with Nikon. But what good is "prevalent"? If there is a particular lens that you need and Pentax does not have it, like maybe a 600mm f/4, then sure go with whatever brand you need to. But just because something is "prevalent" is meaningless. What are you missing with the Pentax line that you would use?

Arguing about minutia of camera performance is just plain a waste of time. There are no bad cameras out there today, you can get amazing photos with any brand. So find something that fits your hand well, has the lenses you need and fits your budget.

Pentax: well made, solid cameras, weather sealing, easy menu system, nice control layout, stabilization in body, limited primes
Nikon: well made, lots of choices in both lens and bodies, very prevalent so you fit in with the crowd
Sony: mirrorless, lots of full frame choices in bodies, can use most lenses out there with adapters at the cost of some automation

I've considered moving to a different brand several times. I actually had a Nikon D610 in my cart at Costco once. Each time I got the urge to change I went to a store and physically handled the other brands, spent some time fooling around with them, playing with the menu and controls. And each time, despite the reasons I had for considering switching I stayed with Pentax. My primary reason was simply that the Pentax camera felt better and more natural in MY hands. If that is not true for YOUR hands go with what feels good. There will be no significant difference in image quality anyway so I prefer to go with what makes me happy to be shooting with.

[boriscleto]

I think the question is why did I bother to even read this?

[mecrox]

I think the question is why did I bother to even read this?

Have you been eating your cheese lately?

I don't think it is worth changing brands unless there is something pretty major one brand doesn't give you or unless the new brand offers a quite different kind of experience, so a change is really a change. Some things are so similar that changing amounts to a side-grade and may just not be worth it.

[RonHendriks1966]

First of all.......it's just three months to cp+, so waiting for the FF isn't to long. You can jump even then if it isn't your thing.

Looking at your lenses, they are nice, but not many can qualify as top notch. So investing in some great lenses is also an option, but this could also be done in another mount.

[AquaDome]

I have a Pentax K-5 and several Pentax lenses, that is more than enough for my hobby photography. But if I want to go a bit more serious, I can either stay with Pentax and get a K3-II or wait for the upcoming FF. Alternatively I can jump ship to Nikon or Sony. I like Nikon because it is prevalent and Sony for its mirror-less design. So my question is what will I be missing or gaining in these different cases?

Thanks!

If you have to ask, maybe it isn't time to switch. I bought Canon, then Nikon, then Pentax and sold the other two. I'm not dedicated to Pentax, but it is what I currently use for digital as well as 35mm & 645 on film. If you see something you think will work for you, get it and try it. You aren't locked into or out of any brand by owning a tool, so get the right tool for the job. But you should have a need for a tool before you buy it. Just shopping for tools gets expensive.

[c.a.m]

But if I want to go a bit more serious...

Depends what you mean by "serious." Are you considering establishing a photography business and making a go as a 'pro'? Your current kit seems pretty good, expecially your lens kit.

What do you feel are your limitations at present?

I have found that the gear is only one lane in the road to achieving high quality output in photography, regardless of whether one is an enthusiastic amateur hobbyist or full-time dedicated pro - for example, knowledge, technique, location, lighting, post-processing, printing, etc.

- Craig

[jatrax]

for example, knowledge, technique, location, lighting, post-processing, printing, etc.

This ^^^^^. Buying a new camera or moving to a new camera brand is not going to make as much difference as working on your actual skills.

[6BQ5]

I think you may get some initial excitement from the new gear and this will make you want to photograph more. You'll come out with more time practicing your craft. This will improve your skills and you may end up equating this improvement with the new gear. However, if you put the same time into the practice with your current gear then you may end up with the same improvement.

In the end, I don't think you're gaining anything specific by switching lens ecosystems.

[Kozlok]

Instead of buying into a new system, I would agree that you should work on skills. Use the money to take a photography-centric trip somewhere.

If you must buy gear, buy one of the limited primes. FA43 would be where I would start. Low-ish price, nice lens, fast. It is much much much better than the 50/1.4's that you have three of. Sell all of your 50's, sell whichever 85 you like less, and get the 43. If you don't need a fast lens, then the 35Ltd is the next logical place to start. I'd get the 15 and 21 too (of course, I did do that, so of course it's what I'd do!). Pentax as a system really is all about small, limited primes in my opinion. It's what's special in Pentax-land.

Buy them used, here on the forum. If you don't love them, sell them along for what you paid, use the money to keep trying different lenses until you find the ones you love. It's like a free lens rental.

[SMcGuire45]

I too am still shooting with the ever so trusty K-5. 99% of my shots are with my K-5 and DA 15mm. I've been in the "market" for a couple of years looking for a replacement. I've nearly bought a K-3 several times, and did buy an A7r and a 610 and promptly returned both. I've been waiting patiently for the Pentax FF, but the new Sony RX1r ii and the A7r ii with a Batis 25mm have my attention.

I think there's two things to consider. Equipment is only part of the equation. I find technique and composition much more important than equipment. I'm in a fairly large local photography group and I have the cheapest setup, yet sell the most work and get the most positive feedback. There's people that have $5-$10k setups/gear but never learned photography. You hear things like "but I have a 36mp sensor, my lenses cost more than a car, etc." I'm not implying that you don't know what you're doing at all, but merely showcasing that equipment isn't everything. The one hang up I have is my desire for more resolution. I've found that clients typically like to print large for their homes or offices. I also carry everything when in the field and only want one lens and as light as possible system, which is why the Sony A7r ii is so appealing right now. To overcome the lack of resolution if you will, I just shoot and stitch panoramics now.

As far as gaining and losing...that's up to you.