thinking about upgrading to Pentax...your thoughts please?

[Eyeayen]

Have you seen the DSLR group test in issue 105 of Digital Camera Magazine ? It makes some very useful points. I've always had film SLR's made by Pentax and borrowed my mates K20d for a day, it seemed okay until I borrowed another friends D90, then it was apparent from picture quality that the Nikon was best, also it's focusing was much better.

That said I've seen both of my friends get very good pictures from their respective camera's. Maybe you should look at what you'll need to buy later, how much do spare batteries cost, what lenses can you get, remote release, all that sort of thing ?

At the end of the day though it has to be what feel comfortable in your own hands !

[HinFrance]

I was going to pass on the K5 until I saw this:

ISO 51200 and others like it.

Now I'm reconsidering.

I haven't had the benefit of seeing the DCM review, but if past experience is anything to go by I can guess the conclusions; I'm afraid that the sempiternal Cankon bias in DCM is just something you have to read around. Go to DxOmark to find out how good or bad the cameras are. Then physically try them if you can. The Pentax Kx (now replaced by the K-r) has an almost identical score to the Nikon D90 (and much better than a 550D) for half the money. In fact, in terms of features I would say that it is pretty much the Pentax equivalent of the D90. Although the Pentax flash system is long overdue for a major upgrade.

Alas DxO haven't tested the K5 or K-r yet, but I'm willing to bet they'll be right up there with the best of them. As, I am sure, will be the D7000. And probably the A580 too.

Luckily French camera mags are very technical in their analysis, and data are much easier to compare empirically than opinion. Although, major caveat, using the camera is always the main consideration. That said, I borrowed a Canon 500D and I was impressed by the higher ISO performance. Everything else was a disappointment. The focusing was fast, but not always accurate. It just felt light and cheap (even though it isn't) compared to my weapon's grade Pentaxes. The fiddly and limited controls didn't help either. Ghastly menu system IMHO.

I looked at a Nikon D90 too, but dismissed it as too small, too light and plasticky, too low a pixel count, no inbuilt image stabilisation, not 100% backwards compatible with 'classic' lenses, and ergonomics (personal taste there). Yep it definitely focuses faster and quieter - to get near the K20D needs an HSM lens.

It's all, in the end, down to personal preference. They're all good cameras, but for my money paying 30% more for a badge that says Nikon or Canon is always going to be a no-no

[Eyeayen]

That's irritating, I've been following the higher end DSLR market very closely for what is now 5 years, things keep getting in my way to stop me spending my money, ( motorbike engine failing, car needing new gear box, sold if got another car, head gasket went, and other nasty things like that to name a few... ) finally I'd narrowed it down to the Canon 7D and Nikon's new D7000 and I was all ready to go into the shop and get whichever one I liked once I'd tried them next to each other... Now, after seeing that I think I better wait and re evaluate.

Interesting find, and if that picture is genuine ( sorry I'm overly skeptical of everything I haven't seen first hand ) the K5 looks a VERY serious contender.

[amk1977]

Although the ISO numbers look impressive on the Pentax, its only 1 stop over the D7000, which has an expandable ISO to 25600 and is pretty much its only "trump card".

The K5 can shoot 7fps over the D7000's 6fps but, the K5 can only do this for about 3 seconds. The D7000 is capable of 6fps for approximately 15 seconds, which for some people may be an issue, depending on how/what you shoot.

The AF system is superior on the Nikon too, with 39 focus points, compared to the Pentax's 11. The D7000 also has auto focus on its video recording feature, which the Pentax doesn't have. Not an issue for some but a handy feature none the less. I don't use the video on my D90 much, mainly because its a PITA to manually focus constantly and if memory serves you have to preset the exposure too. I would however use it on the D7000 if I had one.

The D7000 also meters with non-cpu lenses (one thing I was disappointed about my D90 )

Warehouse express has both camera bodies at £1100. For the money, the D7000 looks like the better option between the two based on the specs.


Edit:

You can download the original RAW/DNG file of the shot at 51200 ISO to view in Photoshop. here . Just click "slow download"

[GeoffWessex]

True enough about the Nikon but if you've got a few Pentax-fit lenses around then the K-5 makes a better upgrade unless you go through the process of trying to sell the older kit and completely change systems. I must admit I thought the K-5 was good but not enough to put me off my eventual desire for a Full Frame camera.... now I'm fairly convinced that the K-5 has all I need.

6fps for 15 seconds is impressive but I just cannot imagine a scenario where I'd be shooting anything like that, unless I started taking news photographs. Even 3 seconds - imagine it, tap your finger on the desk 18 times in three seconds - is of no relevance to me. 39 focus points - er, the advantage being?

[HinFrance]

And having considered all these things, which camera won the star award at Photokina? I'll give you a clue, it started with 'P' and not 'N'.

I'm really pleased to hear that Nikon have built image stabilisation into their bodies now. And they can use all the 35mm lenses Nikon ever made? Metering non CPU lenses? Well, better late than never. Pentax have already announced a firmware upgrade to increase the buffer capacity. I don't shoot sports, but I can see this could be an issue for those who do.

In practical terms, as they both use brand customised versions of the same Sony sensor I doubt that there will be very much between them.

I'm sorry that video has appeared on DSLRs. Personally I'd no more use a DSLR to take video than I would use a blunt spoon to chop down a tree. I use a video camera to take video. But I'm old fashioned I guess. I'm sure video will be the next feature Hasselblad and Mamiya build into their cameras

As for focus points, I only ever need or use one - the one in the middle. The other 38 the Nikon has are 38 possible points to focus on anything but the bit that the photographer wants sharp. I have experience of using Canon cameras with zillions of focus points and the results have almost uniformly been dismal. Until I switched to spot. I don't even know if multipoint focusing on my K20D works, I've never switched it on.

I have no doubt that the D7000 is a very good camera, very good indeed. And agressively priced. I do feel, however, that its features list is aimed a tad lower than the K5. Although all bodies these days seem to have hidden depths that take months to work out. I have also been considering the D7000 as a serious contender for my next big spend, but then I look at the price of the lenses and the accessories and have second thoughts.

The lack of in body IS has always been the (non existant?) trump card that steers me away from Cankon's offerings.

I'm not actually going to buy anything just yet. I want to wait for the dust to settle and the premium launch prices to soften a tad, if indeed they do.

Then again I might just by some new lenses and maybe some better lights . . .

I'm sure we'll all have lots of fun shopping.

[amk1977]

Originally Posted by GeoffWessex

True enough about the Nikon but if you've got a few Pentax-fit lenses around then the K-5 makes a better upgrade unless you go through the process of trying to sell the older kit and completely change systems. I must admit I thought the K-5 was good but not enough to put me off my eventual desire for a Full Frame camera.... now I'm fairly convinced that the K-5 has all I need.

6fps for 15 seconds is impressive but I just cannot imagine a scenario where I'd be shooting anything like that, unless I started taking news photographs. Even 3 seconds - imagine it, tap your finger on the desk 18 times in three seconds - is of no relevance to me. 39 focus points - er, the advantage being?

Likewise, I couldn't ever see myself needing anything like that kind of shot burst speed, unless I was to become a news photographer or high speed sports, etc. For those that do though, its a very attractive feature of the D7000.

When I moved from the Olympus E-510 to the Nikon D90, I greatly appreciated the extra 8 focal points and I almost felt spoilt for choice. There have been times though when I have framed a shot and the target area (subjects eyes etc) has fallen between the 11 focal points on the D90 and wish there were more. I know the D300 has 51 AF points, which to me sees a bit excessive. The D7000 with its 39 is much more in a sensible region and would prove useful. I'd certainly prefer the option of having more to use, than not having the option at all.

HinFrance, Nikon digital camera body metering for non cpu lenses has been around since at least 2005 with the launch of the D200. With regard to Nikkor 35mm lenses, if memory serves all Nikkor AI lenses, which were first introduced in 1977, can still be used on modern DSLR's. AI converted lenses from 1959-76 can also be used too. Given that, I think there is a pretty good selection to choose from the 55 million Nikkors that have rolled off the production line to date!

Video on the DSLR may not be to everyones tastes but again, its undeniably a handy feature if you don't own a dedicated video camera or don't want to carry one in addition to a DSLR. Humping a heavy camera backpack on a day out is bad enough without the additional weight of a video camera too, so it certainly has its merits. Admittedly on the D90, D3000, D5000 it was pretty much a gimick, having to manually focus and preset the exposure but, the new AF video on the new DSLR's certainly brings it beyond that. Also. if you were being unncessarily hassled by over zealous police officers, security guards or member of the public who are ignorant of the law on photography in public places, then it is also a benefit to record any unfolding events.

True the Pentax body IS certainly is a nice feature. I enjoyed it on the E-510 when using the old glass lenses I had acquired for next to nothing, including a couple of mint condition Asahi 50mm lenses and it is a shame that Nikon hasn't followed suit, which would make all their old AF lenses, VR. That, I would like to see but, I won't hold my breath lol.

Until the likes of Olympus, Panasonic, Sony and Pentax/Hoya take over the lions share of the market, I doubt Nikon or Canon would make the leap. Then again, I can't see those 4 ever knocking Nikon or Canon off the top spot. I honestly would have thought Pentax would have ranked above Panasonic in the BCNRanking

On paper there isn't a massive amount of difference between the D7000 and the K5. For me personally though, the additional AF points and the AF video would be useful features that would sway me towards the D7000 over the K-5.

[HinFrance]

Being locked into a system makes the 'mine's better than yours' argument an intellectual exercise at best. I have no doubt that in real world use they are both excellent bits of kit.

The video on the D7000 is undoubtedly much better implemented than on the K5. But I would never use it. A mate of mine who uses a Canon 7D said to me the other day that he wishes they would make one without it for a few hundred pounds less - for a landscape photographer like him it's just redundant.

Aside from the inbuilt IS and the lack of 'idiot' modes, there are a couple of other Pentax features I find useful on the K20D that have found there way onto the K5 - multiple exposure and 5 shot auto bracketing.

If I was loaded with Nikon kit this certainly wouldn't sway me to change brands.

And the more precise focusing point you're looking for is called 'spot'. I'll get my coat

Geoff - I would say that the K5 is a big leap up from the K10D - the K20D certainly was for me. Although I still use the K10D almost daily , so one has to ask oneself is this constant chasing of the latest shiny thing a fruitful exercise?

Later - clicked the BNC link - Pentax' highest placed camera #6, Panasonic's #7, first 'expert' DSLR much lower down the list- sell fewer at higher margins seems to be the name of the game.

[GeoffWessex]

I used this quote in a previous post (but left out the reference to a particular camera)....
"Whilst there is considerable satisfaction to be obtained from owning the latest model, the rational side of what's left of my brain insists that the only defensible argument for buying, other than one's existing camera being damaged beyond the economic cost of repair, is that it would allow one to explore a more specialised photographic genre or, by virtue of improvements in technology and/or functionality, achieve a higher success rate in an area of photography that has been of long-standing interest."

As a result of this process of thought, I'll stick with what I have (a K10d) because....
a. most of what is offered by the K-5 (that my K10d doesn't have) does not interest me, and,
b. I'm skint!

[HinFrance]

Sorry to hear about the finances Geoff. I do think that you would find the increased resolution of the K5 (or a second hand K20D or K7) to be worth an upgrade.

Or what about the Sony A580? - same sensor near as dammit and much cheaper than either the Nikon or Pentax . .