Advise please: should I switch from Pentax to Nikon?

[Szymon Gackowski]

Hi guys

My old camera has some problems with electronic parts (quite old, so it's totally understandable) and I'm thinking of buying a new camera. But here's the dilemma.

I'm currently using Pentax K10D and I'm considering: should I stay with Pentax or change to Nikon.
Here's some background:
I own a lot of equipment for Pentax, especially lenses and some other stuff (release chords, pilots, converters allowing me to attach M42 lenses to Pentax body etc...). The most valuable thing is almost newly bought (I bought it just 2 weeks before my camera started to crash) Tamron 90 f2.8 Macro lens. I also have Pentax 18-55 lens and Sigma 70-300. This Tamron is quite important to me - if I would change to Nikon I definitely would buy the same or similar lens.

So, I'm considering staying with Pentax and buying K-5 body (for about $1500 here) or switching to Nikon - here I consider buying d5100 or d7000.
Nikon is obviously cheaper, but I would have to sell my old lenses and buy new ones. There are also some pros of Pentax that Nikon does not have - for example better color depth or tonal range, and especially sealed magnesium casing.

What type of photos I do?
Mainly - nature photos, macro and landscapes. I'm quite active person, I travel a lot in various places (water, mud, dust...) and it is important to me that I can rely on my camera and can shoot even in rain.
I also take some portraits, sometimes astrophotography... Generally speaking - I do a lot of things, I don't close myself to one branch of photography.

Here are some comparisons between K-5 and Nikons:
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-D5100-vs-Pentax_K-5
http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon_D7000-vs-Pentax_K-5

What you guys would recommend? And please - tell why. I don't want answers like "Nikon is better, you should switch".

[ptremb3043]

changing brands can be kind of an expensive proposition. If your pleased w/ the results you get from the Pentax than by all means stay w/ that. I have an acquaintance that also has a Pentax kit using older lenses and loves it. If you do decide to change brands, do an e-bay search for ended auctions to get an approximation of what your lenses might be worth to know how much you could recoup towards the new lenses you will have to get to fit what ever kit you decide to go with. Than look to see what the prices of used/new lenses are adding to a new body minus the amount you could get back from selling your lenses and this is the total outlay. So in short if it would cost say $1500 for a new Pentax body than you may incur $1500 for a new Nikon body + the cost of replacement lenses to match your current lineup and you only want NEW lenses than count on maybe another $1000 conservatively if not more (based on not knowing what used Pentax lenses bring you may be able to brake even if buying all used lenses). If you are going to go Nikon than you have the advantage of almost all but the early lenses fit any camera. The only thing you need to remember is the d5100 will only autofocus with lenses designated AF-S where the autofocus motor is built into the lens. other than that it becomes a manual focus. If you decide on the d7000 you can use both AF-S and AF lenses as the body has the older style autofocus drive motor built in.

[Phillydog1958]

Originally Posted by ptremb3043

changing brands can be kind of an expensive proposition. If your pleased w/ the results you get from the Pentax than by all means stay w/ that. I have an acquaintance that also has a Pentax kit using older lenses and loves it. If you do decide to change brands, do an e-bay search for ended auctions to get an approximation of what your lenses might be worth to know how much you could recoup towards the new lenses you will have to get to fit what ever kit you decide to go with. Than look to see what the prices of used/new lenses are adding to a new body minus the amount you could get back from selling your lenses and this is the total outlay. If you are going to go Nikon than you have the advantage of almost all but the early lenses fit any camera. The only thing you need to remember is the d5100 will only autofocus with lenses designated AF-S where the autofocus motor is built into the lens. other than that it becomes a manual focus. If you decide on the d7000 you can use both AF-S and AF lenses as the body has the older style autofocus drive motor built in.

I agree with everything posted above. Pentax is a great brand. If you're happy with Pentax performance, stay with it. If you decide to switch to Nikon, I'd suggest you consider the D7000 due to the weather proofing and the partial metal body. It's a sturdy camera. You mentioned that you often out in the field shooting in rugged, wet and muddy conditions.

[i speak in math]

Originally Posted by Szymon Gackowski

Hi guys

My old camera has some problems with electronic parts (quite old, so it's totally understandable) and I'm thinking of buying a new camera. But here's the dilemma.

I'm currently using Pentax K10D and I'm considering: should I stay with Pentax or change to Nikon.
Here's some background:
I own a lot of equipment for Pentax, especially lenses and some other stuff (release chords, pilots, converters allowing me to attach M42 lenses to Pentax body etc...). The most valuable thing is almost newly bought (I bought it just 2 weeks before my camera started to crash) Tamron 90 f2.8 Macro lens. I also have Pentax 18-55 lens and Sigma 70-300. This Tamron is quite important to me - if I would change to Nikon I definitely would buy the same or similar lens.

So, I'm considering staying with Pentax and buying K-5 body (for about $1500 here) or switching to Nikon - here I consider buying d5100 or d7000.
Nikon is obviously cheaper, but I would have to sell my old lenses and buy new ones. There are also some pros of Pentax that Nikon does not have - for example better color depth or tonal range, and especially sealed magnesium casing.

What type of photos I do?
Mainly - nature photos, macro and landscapes. I'm quite active person, I travel a lot in various places (water, mud, dust...) and it is important to me that I can rely on my camera and can shoot even in rain.
I also take some portraits, sometimes astrophotography... Generally speaking - I do a lot of things, I don't close myself to one branch of photography.

Here are some comparisons between K-5 and Nikons:
Nikon D5100 vs Pentax K-5
Nikon D7000 vs Pentax K-5

What you guys would recommend? And please - tell why. I don't want answers like "Nikon is better, you should switch".

I just picked up the K-5 to supplement my older k20d. It is quite an amazing difference. The autofocus is a lot faster. But what blows my mind is the high ISO quality. I am pretty comfortable with this thing shooting at 12,800 ISO. Coming from a max of around 1600-2000 ISO on my K20d, thats a pretty impressive jump. Ergonomically, its very comfortable, but I can see wanting a grip in the future; its a little short and my pinky finger isn't sure what to do. I've got a photoshoot today, so I'll let you know how well it worked in the field later.

If you do switch, maybe you can sell me some of your old stuff.

[Niresangwa]

The advice above about switching platforms is good advice, I"m sure you already realise that you'll have to replace it all over again. Yo probably also know that as a brand Pentax is cheaper than it's Canikon counterparts for a similar quality in regard to glass etc. So to t to a comparable stable of gear, it's going to be a decent amount of money, for what basically amounts to a 'matter of taste ad preference'. I'm not advocating blind fanboi allegiance, but it is what it is.

As far as the k5 goes, I've used it since it's release last fall, and now shoot with two of them. I had previously used a pair of k20's and a k10.

I fell in love with it immediately, and as great and as sturdy as the k10 and k20 were, this blows them out of the water. The quality of the build, improved AF and as ISIM said, the great low-light capabilities is well documented.. over all, it's just an amazing piece of equipment. I had been contemplating switching brands last year, but those thoughts were immediately dispelled with the arrival of this body.

Where are you located that you can only find the body for $1500? When I picked up my second about a month ago, it was just over $1000.

I don't know that are many who will argue against the strength of this system as far as how durable it is, and it seems to be a niche that Pentax is actively cultivating. Just remember that even though the body is weather-sealed, you need to make sure your lens is too...

[inkista]

I'm with everyone else: if Pentax is making you happy, there's no reason to move, especially with legacy glass.

The only really critical question to ask yourself is whether or not you desperately long to move to full frame, and whether you want to pony up the (quite considerable) amount of additional cash that would require.

And if you *do*, I'd actually recommend considering Canon, rather than Nikon, for the simple fact that any manual-focus K lenses and your M42s can be easily adapted for use on the Canon mount. They cannot for Nikon. So you could salvage some of your glass that way. Obviously, no DA lenses can be used on full-frame (image circle won't cover the sensor), and any lenses without aperture rings couldn't be used (no way to control the aperture), so this may not be saving you much.

And unless landscape is the majority of what you shoot, and you have a lot of discretionary income, this path is probably Very Not Worth It. (The increase in IQ between my 5Dii and 50D is smaller than most people assume). And you'd be better off with a Pentax 645D, anyway.

[Szymon Gackowski]

Thanks! I am now sure that I should stay with Pentax I don't know why I had doubts in the first place

Originally Posted by i speak in math

I just picked up the K-5 to supplement my older k20d. It is quite an amazing difference. The autofocus is a lot faster. But what blows my mind is the high ISO quality. I am pretty comfortable with this thing shooting at 12,800 ISO. Coming from a max of around 1600-2000 ISO on my K20d, thats a pretty impressive jump.

And how about noise at such high ISO? On my old K10 noise level at ISO 1600 or even 800 was so high, that photos were usually unusable. What is your experience in that matter regarding K-5?

[i speak in math]

Originally Posted by Szymon Gackowski

Thanks! I am now sure that I should stay with Pentax I don't know why I had doubts in the first place




And how about noise at such high ISO? On my old K10 noise level at ISO 1600 or even 800 was so high, that photos were usually unusable. What is your experience in that matter regarding K-5?

ISO 12,800; its black and white because there were 2 different color light sources and it looked weird, not to hide any noise. Anyway, this is from the raw, only used the default ACR noise reduction (25 chroma, 0 color), nothing special done.



I do feel like there are some inconsistencies in the auto focus. I can't tell if its front focussing or back focusing but it isn't nailing the auto focus like my K20d. It is much faster, but maybe not as accurate.

[Szymon Gackowski]

Thanks. It looks like it is still less noisy than K10 @ ISO 1600. Amazing.

Regarding focus, My K10D is usually backfocusing. So I hope it will be at least a little bit better in K5