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

[sper]

I'm trying to choose between a K-5 and a Nikon D7000...

I love the features of the Nikon, like double card slots, F mount, fantastic auto focus... But something about the K-5 is drawing my attention. Those Limited primes are pretty cool and unique, plus the build seems to be fully professional. However I can NEVER upgrade to a full frame unit, and the Nikon seems like such a great system to build on.

Can anybody weigh in on this? I use my DSLRs for wedding photography. I'm ditching my 5D2 because I bought an X100, and I want a 'prosumer' DSLR to go with it. I'll go back to full frame when my client billing warrants it...unless I buy a Pentax.

 

[rover]

Pentax prime lenses have it all over those yucky Nikkors. Nikon zooms have it all over Pentax zooms. I don't do zooms.

If you do imagine you will be going back to full frame at some point, then there is no decision to make between the two, you have to go with Nikon.

 

[ChrisN]

The K5 shutter is even quieter than my Leica M4.

The files are very very good.

The sensor is ranked as one of the best on the market (equal to the Nikon D3S and ony bettered by the medium-format sensors - see here).

The Limited lenses are sublime.

The camera is light and compact, and has a range of very useful features.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Just buy both.

 

[Keith]

The K5 shutter is even quieter than my Leica M4.

The files are very very good.

The sensor is ranked as one of the best on the market (equal to the Nikon D3S and ony bettered by the medium-format sensors - see here).

The Limited lenses are sublime.

The camera is light and compact, and has a range of very useful features.

That K-5 sounds like quite a camera Chris ... any sample images you can post here?

What's the fastest lens you can get for it that gives an equivalent 35mm field of view?

 

[sper]

Ugh! You guys are making my choice so much HARDER!

Those Limited lenses are really attractive... 15mm, 31mm, 77mm all super compact...

I do wedding photography outside of my job at a camera store, do you think it can deliver professionally? I know that's kind of a silly question, but would you shoot a wedding with it, in combination with the X100?

 

[NickTrop]

Pentax prime lenses have it all over those yucky Nikkors. Nikon zooms have it all over Pentax zooms. I don't do zooms.

If you do imagine you will be going back to full frame at some point, then there is no decision to make between the two, you have to go with Nikon.

I'm sure Pentax makes a fine lens - but the Nikkor 35/1.8 is good and it's cheap, as is the 50/1.8, and the 55-200 VR zoom. Good cheap glass. Look up the reviews and tech analysis all over the web.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_35_1p8g_n15/page4.asp

Conclusion - Pros

* Excellent image quality when stopped down just a little
* Fast and accurate autofocus with full-time manual override
* Generally attractive rendition of out-of-focus regions ('bokeh')
* Resistant to flare
* Low price

Conclusion - Cons

* Slightly soft and low in contrast wide open
* Lateral chromatic aberration somewhat higher than traditional 50mm 'standard' primes
* Prone to purple fringing and bokeh chromatic aberration, most visible at large apertures


Dirt cheap, plentiful... Excellent wide open, totally flare reisistent, and the "cons" in my use rarely, if ever rear their ugly head. Conversely, I shoot this thing wide open - no worries. And it's the most flare resistant lens I've owned. I've yet to observe purple fringing - I'm sure it's there if I pixel peeped but purple fringing is easy to fix. When they say "stopped down a little" - yeah, from 1.8 to, like f2... And 1.8 is completely usable imo...

Nikon makes great affordable glass these days - their whole DX line. Light, cheap, excellent IQ. I can't imagine what Pentax offers that makes their offerings better by any meaningful margin.

The only downside I see of the lenses Nikon is coming out for their DX lines is they're maybe too inexpensive to be taken seriously? Seriously.

 

[nanthor]

I don't have the K5, yet, but use a K200d for my dslr. I can't convince you to switch due to the camera body but the lenses of the Pentax system are spectacular. They are the closest to the Leica look in any system (except Leica). They have the sharp, crisp subject standing out against a great bokeh background. I think it might have to do with the coating since even the zooms give this rendering. Nikon has a very sharp set of lenses but they don't have the rendering you'll find with Pentax.

 

[rover]

I'm sure Pentax makes a fine lens - but the Nikkor 35/1.8 is good and it's cheap, as is the 50/1.8, and the 55-200 VR zoom. Good cheap glass. Look up the reviews and tech analysis all over the web.

http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/nikon_35_1p8g_n15/page4.asp

Conclusion - Pros

* Excellent image quality when stopped down just a little
* Fast and accurate autofocus with full-time manual override
* Generally attractive rendition of out-of-focus regions ('bokeh')
* Resistant to flare
* Low price

Conclusion - Cons

* Slightly soft and low in contrast wide open
* Lateral chromatic aberration somewhat higher than traditional 50mm 'standard' primes
* Prone to purple fringing and bokeh chromatic aberration, most visible at large apertures


Dirt cheap, plentiful... Excellent wide open, totally flare reisistent, and the "cons" in my use rarely, if ever rear their ugly head. Conversely, I shoot this thing wide open - no worries. And it's the most flare resistant lens I've owned. I've yet to observe purple fringing - I'm sure it's there if I pixel peeped but purple fringing is easy to fix. When they say "stopped down a little" - yeah, from 1.8 to, like f2... And 1.8 is completely usable imo...

Nikon makes great affordable glass these days - their whole DX line. Light, cheap, excellent IQ. I can't imagine what Pentax offers that makes their offerings better by any meaningful margin.

The only downside I see of the lenses Nikon is coming out for their DX lines is they're maybe too inexpensive to be taken seriously? Seriously.

Realistically I think we split hairs too much when comparing lenses or cameras. At this point in time all DSLRs are very good, and the most recent generation of sensors used in the K5 and D7000 are apparently quite a step forward in technology.

I personally am not attracted to the results from a number of Nikkors, but that is just my opinion, far from the be all end all regarding if anything is any good or not.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

These are comparably good cameras, to be sure. But the Pentax has a unique look and feel, and it seems to meld with your hand when you use it. I've got the set of FA Limiteds (31, 43, 77), Sigma's amazing 8-16mm zoom, and Pentax's new 18-135mm. The 18-135 is a capable weather-sealed lens that focuses faster than anything I have ever used in my life. The perfect walkaround. The whole K5 is fully weather-sealed, by the way, and ChrisN is right, the shutter is quieter than the M9. I find this extraordinary.

For me though, ultimately, it's the all-metal primes. There is nothing like them anywhere else in the SLR world.

IF YOU LIKE LEICA RANGEFINDERS, YOU WILL LIKE PENTAX'S K5 AND CURRENT PRIME LINEUP.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Oh one more thing, I used to think full frame was never going to happen at Pentax, but now I'm thinking maybe they'll actually do it. They have kept the FA Limiteds in the lineup against my expectations, and the K5 has given them some fairly serious pro credit in reviews. A long shot, but you never know.

 

[jan normandale]

heh... your OP sounds like you've already made the decision. So "do it" ;D

 

[Keith]

The more I read about the K-5 the better it sounds.

There's a full review of the camera at the Pentax Forum.

Probably a little like asking the rabbits if they like the lettuces ... but there are some very impressive results. Particularly low light focusing IMO and the sample images at 3200 and 6400 are equally impressive.

 

[KEH]

One example with a manual focus 50/1.4 @ 2.8

Small, solid, quiet body with excellent array of manual controls for almost everything. Plus the lenses - pancakes and the Limiteds.

I really loved my old istDS2 (despite the name), and the K5 is one of the best going.

Kirk

 

[NickTrop]

Realistically I think we split hairs too much when comparing lenses or cameras. At this point in time all DSLRs are very good, and the most recent generation of sensors used in the K5 and D7000 are apparently quite a step forward in technology.

I personally am not attracted to the results from a number of Nikkors, but that is just my opinion, far from the be all end all regarding if anything is any good or not.

Yes - I agree in full. All the players are putting out fine, comparable stuff... Point I was trying to make is that since this is the case, and what we're saying is these cameras are largely commodity items now... Why not simply pick the one with the best value proposition? As I see it, Nikon might have an edge in value proposition for the cost conscious due to the pricing of their DX lens lines. Yes, plastic and made in China (which is absolutely fine, doesn't matter) - but they're light, reasonably durable, excellent optical quality and are a good value imo. As always, YMMV...

Also? Stuff like optical signature (except maybe "bokeh") is a thing of the past when such things couldn't be altered easily - if at all. Make your own "signature" in your choice of photo editing software... You can make pictures look however you want for the last 15 years... The only thing that matters now is performance at wide apertures and flare control, really... and the value proposition.

 

[ampguy]

I think the sensors in these are the same, so it comes down to price, form factor, and lens.

If you plan to use a lot of adapted lens, even Nikons, I think the flange to sensor distance is shorter on the Pentax and I think you can still get focus confirmation visual and beep.

With the Nikon, you're pretty much stuck with Nikon mount lens, unless you're willing to go with less than infinity focus, or with an adapter with optics that my degrade the performance a bit.

Both are probably great cameras, from the specs they show.

 

[NickTrop]

With the Nikon, you're pretty much stuck with Nikon mount lens, unless you're willing to go with less than infinity focus, or with an adapter with optics that my degrade the performance a bit.

Yes - that is one admitted downside.

 

[gavinlg]

I'm rather fond of the K-series - especially the K5. I've spent some time with one in Japan and I would have the following things to say about it:

- Well built and (apparently) well sealed
- 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.
- Menus pretty outdated
- I LOVE the da* limited lenses - especially the 15mm f4 which is a tiny and beautiful gem with wonderful IQ. The 21mm has a fair bit of barrel distortion which I noticed pretty quickly.
- Pentax cameras definitely have their own 'colors' which are pretty different to nikon and canon colors.
- Shutter so very very quiet
- The full frame FA limited lenses like the 31mm and 43mm are really lovely, but the crop sensor in the k5 doesn't do them justice - the crop itself takes away some of the lenses magic and makes them that much less special. Once again this is my opinion, but I'd stick with the da* limited series lenses.
- One big downside is that most of the good pentax primes are screw drive AF only, which is fairly old tech.

Overall I thought it was the nicest crop dslr I've used, and I'd consider one with the da* limited lenses as a travel camera. I personally though don't think in terms of outright image output the k5 compares to a full frame camera like a 5d or d700.

 

[ChrisN]

Just on the distortion with the 21mm - the K5 will correct that with the in-camera software; same for all the modern lenses. There's an option for this in the menus. Apparently it slows the write-time down a bit. I'll admit I haven't tested this yet, as I rarely find objectionable distortion in my shots. MMMmmm - might have to try it.

Edit: Did try it with the 21, and it does make a considerable difference.

 

[ChrisN]

That K-5 sounds like quite a camera Chris ... any sample images you can post here?

What's the fastest lens you can get for it that gives an equivalent 35mm field of view?

Keith - here's a few that aren't too atrocious, made with a Sigma 18-125 zoom.

_IGP0121 by Another Chris, on Flickr

_IGP0124 by Another Chris, on Flickr

There are much better examples available on PPG - the Pentax Photo Gallery, which allows you to filter by camera type, lens etc.

Actually the 35mm-equivalent is a bit of a sore point for those of us who love compact primes. That calls for 24mm - I have a 24/2.8 manual focus lens (that I bought from Kim Coxon several years ago). There is a FA 24/2 lens but that's not small. The best reference for the Pentax lenses is Bojidar Dimitrov's Pentax K-Mount Page - here's a link to the lenses page. For a compact lens close to 35mm-e I use the DA 21/3.2 Limited - it's as small as most rangefinder lenses of that focal length.