[normhead]

6 fps at 24 MP is so 2013.

[Rondec]

The Premium Kit is not available in Europe anymore, unfortunately. The Z5 is 1200€, the K-3iii sans grip is 2000€, the Z6ii is 1920€ at FotoKoch (each of the Nikons is currently discounted about 200€, though).

Not nearly double the price of the Z5, but significantly more expensive.

Sure. Obviously I live in the US (as does Lee) and I was going based on B and H pricing: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1578204-REG/nikon_z_5_mirrorless_digi...981& https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1670930-REG/pentax_k_3_mark_iii_dslr....981&

[Serkevan]

Sure. Obviously I live in the US (as does Lee) and I was going based on B and H pricing: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1578204-REG/nikon_z_5_mirrorless_digi...981& https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1670930-REG/pentax_k_3_mark_iii_dslr....981&

Oh yeah, I know, it's just frustrating that, as usual, Pentax stuff is a fair bit more expensive this side of the pond . (I'm still hurt by the prices of the 31. The SMC costs used almost as much as a new HD does in the US).

I dread the day I go visit my friends over there...or rather, I dread customs on the way back .

[surfar]

6 fps at 24 MP is so 2013.

Just like 4fps@36mp is so 2012 another 10 years later.

[normhead]

Apparently no one here has heard that you can't compare lenses across systems. Pentax is usually less than other brands with the same lens. They do other things to make up for it. Those lenses don't change when they are put on Pentax cameras. But Pentax focusses on other things beyond MTF charts.

[Rondec]

Oh yeah, I know, it's just frustrating that, as usual, Pentax stuff is a fair bit more expensive this side of the pond . (I'm still hurt by the prices of the 31. The SMC costs used almost as much as a new HD does in the US).

I dread the day I go visit my friends over there...or rather, I dread customs on the way back .

Maybe a new Netflix show: "Smuggling Pentax," dealing with the dangerous life of a K mount black market dealer?

[Serkevan]

6 fps at 24 MP is so 2013.

I mean, if it's FPS you want, the Nikon Z6 has 10 of those with AF-C*. Buffer's fairly alright as well, at 140ish raw files.

*and if you drop to 12-bit raw, you can get 14 fps, but I don't know that I'd like to drop quality for a speed increase when 10 fps should be more than I ever need to get the shot.


Nikon doesn't make FA Limiteds, though, and their DSLRs are far less interesting than the K-1, though, so they are out of the question for me.


---------- Post added 02-02-22 at 05:17 AM ----------

Maybe a new Netflix show: "Smuggling Pentax," dealing with the dangerous life of a K mount black market dealer?

If Netflix pays me the trips and the gear, I'm willing to make the effort

[normhead]

I mean, if it's FPS you want, the Nikon Z6 has 10 of those with AF-C*.

This is about the Z5.
The K-3iii has 12, 11 with AFC and tracking. What was your point again?

Maybe read the title of the thread. All my comments are directed specifically at the Z5. Just in case that's has you confused.
Maybe start another thread if you'd like to discuss the Z6. See you there.

I recently read over the spec sheet for the Z5, and found the hype was way more impressive than the actual camera. I seriously would prefer not to have to do the same for the Z6. Especially given the lack of innovation and mediocre specs of the Z5. I reserve the right to opt out.

To me the Z5 is like a hi-res camera, without the hi-res part.

[luftfluss]

Normhead:

This is about the Z5.
The K-3iii has 12, 11 with AFC and tracking. What was your point again?

Maybe read the title of the thread. All my comments are directed specifically at the Z5. Just in case that's has you confused.
Maybe start another thread if you'd like to discuss the Z6. See you there.

Also Normhead:

There would seem to be many people who think a crippled 24 MP FF is good thing. Why would it be better than a 26MP K-3iii? I'd like to see a few images people think would be improved shooting 24MP against 26 MP APS-c.

I'm not sure I have any. And I don't really compare my K-3 to my K-1. The K-1 - K-5 pixel size would seem to be the ultimate in terms of sensor performance. MY K-3 for things that move and telephoto , my K-1 for things that don't move, landscape, macro etc. A 24 MP FF, it really doesn't have a use. Same resolution as the K-3iii but without the extra reach for telephoto. Altogether a losing combination.

Nikon Z6 body from henry's Canada. $2199
Pentax K-3iii after year long discount $2249

For reach the Z6 with a 150-600 doesn't even match the reach of my DA 55-300 PLM with the 1.4 TC.
There are 31 S-line WR lenses available for the Z6.

I like most others buy what's good for me. Comparing the K-3iii to the Z6, I'll go with the K-3iii, because 24 MP is action and birding gear, and the K-3 will get me more for my money. I may be true that the Z6 is good for others, but, we're all different, and when I look at it, I don't see a 50/50 situation with the tie breaker going to all the Pentax lenses I own.

[gatorguy]

I honestly feel i gave the Nikon Z5 a fair chance to win me over. Yup there's some things I do like about it, along with some things I don't. On balance I couldn't see the value of adding one to my stable since it didn't really perform better overall than my current Pentax gear, the controls were a bit awkward for me, the focus was pretty good but not great....

For the $2000 it would cost me for a refurbished camera and Nikkor S 24-70 lens, (yup just one single lens), I didn't see where it made sense. In simple terms it was not a more enjoyable experience, in fact in some odd unexplainable way a less personally satisfying one, the AF performance was less than I had been led to expect, and the images from the admittedly reasonably-priced Nikkor S 50 I rented with it weren't any more compelling than the ones captured by my Pentax glass. I even purchased an adapter to use my Pentax lenses with it, but as purely manual focus they weren't going to be a solution. One 50mm AF lens wasn't going to cut it, which is why I did consider the 24-70 F4 at $900+. Spending $1600 on the 2.8 version was out of the question.

My curiosity was satisfied, so I'm now far more comfortable with Pentax. I'd strongly suggest that anyone considering a change of platforms rent a competitors camera for a week (I use LensRental) before committing to selling off your Pentax stuff. The Z5 and a lens isn't expensive to rent.

[normhead]

Normhead:



Also Normhead:

Oops... no doubt a senior moment. I did look up the price of a Z6, and it's almost the same as the K-3iii as are the features, at almost the same price. This idea you can get better dumping your Pentax gear is ridiculous, and not supported by any facts. All the reasons I've seen revolve a around intangibles.

Your defence of not wandering off topic is admirable.

[luftfluss]

Your defence of not wandering off topic is admirable.

I can only assume this is sarcasm, because I am one of the worst when it comes to staying on topic In fact, just a couple days ago a mod deleted one of my posts because I was off topic

I think I'm doing it again, so I'd better stop...

[normhead]

I can only assume this is sarcasm, because I am one of the worst when it comes to staying on topic In fact, just a couple days ago a mod deleted one of my posts because I was off topic

I think I'm doing it again, so I'd better stop...

If you're like me, you have to actually look up what the topic is every now and then.

It's not always made clear by the discussion.

[repaap]

I honestly feel i gave the Nikon Z5 a fair chance to win me over. Yup there's some things I do like about it, along with some things I don't. On balance I couldn't see the value of adding one to my stable since it didn't really perform better overall than my current Pentax gear, the controls were a bit awkward for me, the focus was pretty good but not great....

For the $2000 it would cost me for a refurbished camera and Nikkor S 24-70 lens, (yup just one single lens), I didn't see where it made sense. In simple terms it was not a more enjoyable experience, in fact in some odd unexplainable way a less personally satisfying one, the AF performance was less than I had been led to expect, and the images from the admittedly reasonably-priced Nikkor S 50 I rented with it weren't any more compelling than the ones captured by my Pentax glass. I even purchased an adapter to use my Pentax lenses with it, but as purely manual focus they weren't going to be a solution. One 50mm AF lens wasn't going to cut it, which is why I did consider the 24-70 F4 at $900+. Spending $1600 on the 2.8 version was out of the question.

My curiosity was satisfied, so I'm now far more comfortable with Pentax. I'd strongly suggest that anyone considering a change of platforms rent a competitors camera for a week (I use LensRental) before committing to selling off your Pentax stuff. The Z5 and a lens isn't expensive to rent.

Seems pretty much in line with my experience with Panasonic S5 + 20-60 combo, which I did actually did change my BMPCC 4K for and paid the difference. To get my video updated for and perhaps even get 'hybrid' experience with photos too. I could have gone Nikon Z5 route too, but video is very nice with Panasonic. Next time I'll have a look what can be rented around here when I think about 'upgrading' my S5, which I will do. EVF of S5 does make my eye hurt and it feels very artificial(more expensive models should not have this problem?)


For photos K-3III and K-1 is very nice and K-3III has very nice AF too on top of that.

[gatorguy]

Last warning, the next action is simply closing the thread:
If it's not concerning the Z5 then please find a more appropriate thread to comment in, or start a new one if you must.