Any K-5 users out there to convince me away from Nikon?

I really liked my Nikon D90, and was excited with the D7000 announcement, but in the end chose the K-5, despite the fact that I have a collection of Nikon lenses. I do think the Nikon produces excellent JPGs directly from the camera, and Nikon has a lot of legacy glass. Pentax has all the essential prime lenses in FF or crop, but you don't always have ready availability on used glass.

For me there were several factors in choosing the K-5.

First the weather-resistance/weather-proof, the solid feel, and small size. But, the two things I really love about the Pentax are the single-mode knobs rather than menus and menus, the green-for-auto and the famous "green button". (1) All the buttons you need, aperture, shutter, ISO, EV+/-, are right under your right-hand fingers; none of the essentials are in some menu or on the other hand. (2) The green button takes you to the camera's optimum exposure, which makes manual exposure extremely easy. In manual, you hit the green button, and you have a light-meter that sets your optimum exposure.

Any regrets? I think Nikon is supremely dependable on autofocus, and it has better availability of used lenses.

The specific Pentax lenses that are really hard to come by are birding telephoto lenses. On Nikon, they may be expensive, but you can always find them; even the least super-tele, the 300mm f2.8 produces amazing images in terms of crisp focus and bokeh.

If you are happy on crop frame (and I think APS will stay cheaper and continue to produce ever better, high ISO sensors), then you should be fine with a professional quality APS camera and set of lenses. I have an MZ-S, which is just beautiful, but that means I want full frame lenses, i.e. the FF 21mm (30mm on APS), not the DA 21mm. (I must say, the 31mm Limited feels great on K-5, but it trluy comes into it's own on the MZ-s.)
 
I got caught up in the X100 hysteria too but on reflection, when I really look at what pictures matter to me... the old ones shot on my old 6mp Nikon D70 at ISO 400 are great, I mix them in with all the film and later DSLR shots just fine, I bet you can't tell either. And even though I've upgraded and have tried most of the Nikon SLRs by now, I can't help but feel that the last or second-to-last generation cameras are really the best value.

One of the things I looked at is shooting at high ISOs. Like most people I assume that higher ISO performance and faster lenses are better.... But now I figure that if I need ISO 3200 or 6400 to get the shot, then the light is CRAP anyway and it will very rarely be anything worthwhile. (I am not a sports photographer or shooting things that really need high ISOs). In fact, for a grainy-noise look, the older cameras's files pressed up just until the point of banding look really good to me.

Same for lenses. Owned a couple Summiluxes but got the best shots with the Summarons, even in low light, indoors, TMZ1600, etc.

So take a deep breath, step back, and realize that you can find a Nikon D90 for $500 and a D300 for only $700 these days. If you can't do it with fine cameras like those then give up and go home.... haha sorry, but you get my point?

If you are a working professional, then what you ought to get is two of the same cameras, even if it means getting two cheapies. Expensive cameras fail too, and a real pro isn't going to be caught empty-handed. So I rather have two modest cameras than one honking pro body.

I know I am rationalizing here but in a good way during the coming tax season....
 
I'll second Frank's advice about two identical bodies (and I would add backup lenses that cover the important focal lengths). Another consideration is flash. I've played with a K-7 and loved it, but Nikon's CLS flash system is highly regarded and for weddings I'd go for whichever camera has the most reliable (in results) and flexible lighting system. Nikon's CLS is built-in and a one-manufacturer solution with the SB-series strobes. To rival that with Pentax you would need to purchase 3rd party lighting solutions, including a controller.
Compare the flash specs on page 2 of the respective reviews on dpreview.
Also the two card slots in the Nikon is a potential life saver.
My heart would go with the Pentax, they're the underdog making great products. My head and the interests of my clients would go with the Nikon. Interchangeability of lenses and flash with your backup camera wins every time.
 
IQ is the last thing you have to worry about for both Nikon and Pentax, so I judge them by look and feel. One big plus to me here: there's hardly anything in the AF reflex world as beautiful and well-crafted as the limited series lenses.
 
Uwe_Nds said:
Actually, that's what I like about those old Pentax primes: tried and tested reliable old tech. 😉

Cheers,
Uwe
Click to expand...

Actually this isn't too far off the mark - Pentax is somewhat infamous for it's ultrasonic (SDM) focusing lenses failing.

The nikon and canon ultrasonic focusing is dead reliable though.

Edit: tongue in cheek! I actually really like the k5 and limiteds
 
Last edited:
fdigital said:
- Good ergo's, but I wouldn't call them brilliant. I found the buttons a little plasticky and cheap feeling when pressed, and I found the body itself a little small and hard edged in my hands.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. I've had a K-5 since November and while I do like the size - that's one of the reasons I bought it - I miss the ergonomics of the 5D2 I had before; much better for my big hands. It also feels more sluggish when for example browsing pictures (SDHC vs CF UDMA...).

I kind of regret selling the 5D2 but I will keep the K-5. I feel more confident about its weather sealing so I'm not the least bit careful, which is good, as I don't like worries about the equipment getting in the way of taking pictures. It's been out in -20c and soaked in rain and snow many times without ever complaining, so I'm happy.
 
Needed video controls and already had nikon lenses, so that made the decision for me. If I didn't, the pentax would have been very appealing.

How's the viewfinder? I'm happy with the d7000's 100% coverage, and good size.
 
It's all kind of Utopian because it's unlikely to come to be, but the interface of the Pentaxes looks rather clunky and aimed at the small fingered crowd. Not that the Nikon is much better but so far they have been the best of the Japanese, Canon's UI is a bizzaro world.

They all are crap. Look at the Pentax MFD body compared to the S2 (or any DSLR to an M9)... It shouldn't cost $16,000 extra to get a clean, logical user interface but it does.

(Now if they put a Droid or iOS interface into a DSLR so we could use different apps then I would jump in a heartbeat, that would be brilliant. And the first app to sell would be a really clean professional UI akin to Leica's).
 
Frank Version Two said:
I got caught up in the X100 hysteria too but on reflection, when I really look at what pictures matter to me... the old ones shot on my old 6mp Nikon D70 at ISO 400 are great, I mix them in with all the film and later DSLR shots just fine, I bet you can't tell either. And even though I've upgraded and have tried most of the Nikon SLRs by now, I can't help but feel that the last or second-to-last generation cameras are really the best value.

One of the things I looked at is shooting at high ISOs. Like most people I assume that higher ISO performance and faster lenses are better.... But now I figure that if I need ISO 3200 or 6400 to get the shot, then the light is CRAP anyway and it will very rarely be anything worthwhile. (I am not a sports photographer or shooting things that really need high ISOs). In fact, for a grainy-noise look, the older cameras's files pressed up just until the point of banding look really good to me.

Same for lenses. Owned a couple Summiluxes but got the best shots with the Summarons, even in low light, indoors, TMZ1600, etc.

So take a deep breath, step back, and realize that you can find a Nikon D90 for $500 and a D300 for only $700 these days. If you can't do it with fine cameras like those then give up and go home.... haha sorry, but you get my point?

If you are a working professional, then what you ought to get is two of the same cameras, even if it means getting two cheapies. Expensive cameras fail too, and a real pro isn't going to be caught empty-handed. So I rather have two modest cameras than one honking pro body.

I know I am rationalizing here but in a good way during the coming tax season....
Click to expand...

I completely agree on all counts. Great post.
 
Frank Version Two said:
It's all kind of Utopian because it's unlikely to come to be, but the interface of the Pentaxes looks rather clunky and aimed at the small fingered crowd. Not that the Nikon is much better but so far they have been the best of the Japanese, Canon's UI is a bizzaro world.
Click to expand...

Agreed - The pentax's buttons are really small and close together. Canon only feels bizzaro to a long time Nikon user - From a long time Canon user that spent a year with a Nikon d300 - I still don't get it! 😀

Japanese software design is atrocious though in terms of user interface... I think that's the sole reason the iPhone is a huge global success. I still swoon when I have to go through the menus or apps in iOS4 - probably the effect of using Japanese software in electronics for the great portion of my life.
 
Last edited:
Frank Version Two said:
(Now if they put a Droid or iOS interface into a DSLR so we could use different apps then I would jump in a heartbeat, that would be brilliant. And the first app to sell would be a really clean professional UI akin to Leica's).
Click to expand...

That would be great. Really great. I too prefer the Nikon UI, though there are some basic things about the M8 that are just right, and missing from the Nikon. And vice versa. But ultimate customizability would be excellent.

In the D7000 I like the customizable menu, where you can pick and choose what features you want displayed, and what order they are in. Very useful.
 
I switched from the K10d to the D300. AF, FPS and lens availablity (i.e. I got great deals on pro Nikon lenses, but couldn't find pro Pentax lenses in my area) and increased IQ, metering ability and flash capability drove my switch. I think they've fixed most of that with the new K5 iirc. I do miss the size and weight of the k10d and lenses I used with it. The D300 gripped, 80-200, 17-35, SB900, etc. get heavy.
 
The thing with user interfaces... I think people often confuse "controls" with "settings". The Nikon DSLR I have (my first), I kept reading all these quibbles about menus and submenus... All this kvetching about having to go into three menus to do stuff... Yes - tiz true, you do. But these are settings. I set the camera up with my preferred settings when I got it. Then, I almost never futz with any of it. I shoot the thing on AP most of the time, like it's a Yashica GSN. Variable ISO is a Godsend. All the controls I need - and there are only a couple - really, are easily controlled by my right thumb. Honestly, it couldn't be easier. I'm actually glad the settings are buried in menus... - Fewer buttons to get activated acidentally, break, and clutter things up. I'm appreciative that by putting settings in menus the cost of the camera is lower with the same control and image quality as the so-called "pro" versions of many of these cameras for the non-professional, like myself. It's a smart trade-off.
 
Last edited:
If K5 has the same chassis as K7, I find the grip too narrow and too deep.
This is not comfortable for long photo-sessions (hours).

Just saying, our hands are different, make sure you try both ergonomically before deciding.
 
shadowfox said:
If K5 has the same chassis as K7, I find the grip too narrow and too deep.
This is not comfortable for long photo-sessions (hours).

Just saying, our hands are different, make sure you try both ergonomically before deciding.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's the same chassis.

fdigital said:
Actually this isn't too far off the mark - Pentax is somewhat infamous for it's ultrasonic (SDM) focusing lenses failing
Click to expand...

This is definitely true, but the new 18-135 has a new focusing system that is much improved.
 
I just sold all my Pentax gear and if I need any digital equipment I'll stick with Canon or Nikon. While I have not used the K-5, I did have the k20 and tried a k7. In comparing them to other brands, it was obvious that Pentax had not put enough processing power in, leading to very slow previews. Shoot 5 shots and you wait 12 seconds. Canon and Nikon were almost instantaneous. The k-5 may well be faster, but reports I've seen indicate it still isn't up to the competition.

As good as my 50-135 was, the focus was, for what would be the centerpiece of a professional's system, infuriatingly slow. It's simply generations behind in motor speed. And the k20 took so long to confirm focus that it was simply impossible to use for candids (even in manual mode). Forget using this lens in low light at a wedding or to catch kids at play.

Pentax uses speak with misty eyes about their lenses, but frankly I didn't see that much that was special. My copy of the 70 2.4 had loads of color fringing--in fact much more than the 50-135. The zoom sometimes had decent bokeh, but often it was busy and swirly.

I also found the flash system to be fairly unreliable, and unsuitable for candids or social events.
 
I love these threads. They bring out both the complete fanboys and the bitter detractors!

I have been a K10D user since the camera debuted and it is still going strong with no issues to date. I demo'ed the K-7 (same form factor as the K-5) when it first came out and was very impressed with the build, weight, quiet shutter, etc.. The only down point from a usage POV was that the body is a little small for my out-sized hands. The optional grip helps, though. As noted above, it is good to test the ergonomics of ANY camera before purchase, it at all possible.

Also good to remember is that there is always the chance that a particular camera, regardless of specs, may not be a good fit for your photographic tasks or style*. Again, if you can demo the camera in advance with your anticipated lens choices, you are far ahead of the game.

On the matter of lenses...Yes, Pentax have the "Limiteds" and an impressive array of supported legacy and off-brand/unusual glass. 3rd-party support is also pretty good, though not as complete now that C/V/Z has abandoned the mount. Having said this, I still feel after several years of being a Pentax user that the lens lineup is pretty moth-eaten in regard to moderately priced "sweet spots". If it were not for my quiver of FSU and 3rd-party lenses, my bag would be pretty empty**. (I am too cheap to put out for the high end glass.) The comments above are well-made.

For me, when the K10D dies, the K-5 will likely be my first choice as a replacement. I have not been actively shopping, but of the cameras I have recently handled (Nikon and Canon in the same price range), the K-5 simply works better in my hands. And no, my current lens ownership is not a huge factor in the decision. Almost everything I own can be sold for the same or more than what I originally paid. If I am lucky, however; the K10D will last until I either win the lottery (will buy 645D) or Pentax comes out with a FF model (I guess that means an immortal K10D 😉).


Steve

*I have the well-regarded Pentax Super Program and despite its compact form and feature list, its features and control layout do not fit well with my shooting style. As a result, it is seldom used.

**I own the FA 77/1.8 Limited and can confirm that it is a sweet lens. I can also confirm that my $15 Helios 44M 58/2 provides very comparable results on APS-C! My current active mix out of the larger collection includes these two lenses plus:
  • FA 35/2 (resident on the camera)
  • KMZ MC Zenitar 16/2.8 Fisheye
  • Tamron 70-150/3.5 (Adaptall-2)
  • Sigma EX DG 50/2.8 Macro
  • DA 18-55/3.5-5.6 (kit...yep, it comes in handy at times)
Notice the absence of DA* or DA Limited glass...
 
Last edited:
I am officially a Pentaxian!

I ordered a K-5 kit today, as well as the 70mm 2.4 :Limited. I'm pretty excited about it, I can tell you. I'm not super thrilled about the 18-55 WR, but I didn't want to bank the 16-50 2.8 yet. I know, zooms are lame but I just want a standard range because I do shoot weddings. I also know they make some great f4 zooms but none of them are weather sealed! I figure why have a sealed body, if you don't have a sealed lens. (Costa Rica in the rainy season anyone?)

So yeah, thanks for all the great info. I'm really glad to be doing something different than buying a Nikon. I'll make sure to post some pics when I get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom