Thinking of a swap to Pentax...

<p>John, I think I remember that franchise- I almost got a job there in January. They were hiring, but weren't willing to properly compensate me, so I went somewhere else. They closed THAT store 4 weeks later... Go Figure.</p>

<p>As a owner of both Pentax and Nikon I would suggest staying with Nikon. My main issue with Pentax and the reason I use Nikon for all of my wedding photography is lens selection and availablity. Pentax produces some nice bodies but their lenses have only just begun to come up to speed and they still lack a 80-200 f2.8. The other factor regarding lenses is that Nikon has a long history with each of their available focal lengths while Pentax is still playing catch-up. </p>

<p>If you are a professional concerned about service, rentals, and lens availability then Canikon is the way to go. But I don't think the OP is one of those. For amateurs, Pentax gives the best bang for the buck.</p>

<p>I was considering moving to Nikon from Pentax (K10D) because I was frustrated with the unsure AF and AF errors. But so much would be lost (at the same price point) - in-body stabilization, weather-sealing, viewfinder..</p>

<p>Basically to match a K10D, you need a D200. And there's quite a price difference plus you lose stabilization. Of course the D200 has better compatibility with ancient lenses and has better AF, but it also costs more.</p>

<p>So I ended up going with a K20D, which (to my perception) has better AF and has the micro-AF adjust missing from the K10D.</p>

<p>I think at any price point, Pentax will give you the most features. But if the features you need (e.g. fast AF, availability of fast long zooms) aren't available, then go Canikon. Besides there is the Tamron 70-200/2.8 available for Pentax. Not SDM, but the 50-135/2.8 is out there.</p>

<p>Was just checking KEH.. a used D200 costs more than a new K20D! so either Nikon cameras are horrendously overvalued, Pentax cameras depreciate like there's no tomorrow (good for non-early adopters) or a combination of both.</p>

<p>I've been toying with getting a D200 so I can use all those old MF Nikon lenses with full functionality..</p>

<p>It sucks that Pentax didn't put an aperture-indexing cam on the K10D / K20D / K7 - how much could it cost not to use a crippled KAF2 mount?</p>

<p>Well, I think you are correct concerning the Nikon / Canon service for professionals. It seems to be more suited for that segment but, personally, I don't fit that segment, and if I happened to enter there, I would have to reconsider my entire system anyway.</p>

<p>I also considered the D200 but, as you noted, it is still quite expensive for that relatively old camera. Moreover, I feel the overall lens lens offering is quite expensive considering you don't get image stabilization with most of them. But I won't comment on Pentax optics before trying the lenses, of course ;).</p>

<p>"As a owner of both Pentax and Nikon I would suggest staying with Nikon. My main issue with Pentax and the reason I use Nikon for all of my wedding photography is lens selection and availablity. Pentax produces some nice bodies but their lenses have only just begun to come up to speed and they still lack a 80-200 f2.8. The other factor regarding lenses is that Nikon has a long history with each of their available focal lengths while Pentax is still playing catch-up."</p>

<p><strong>Pentax has had the SMC Pentax-FA* 80-200mm F2.8 ED [iF] but now most get the Pentax K-mount AF Sigma or Tamron 70-200 F2.8 lenses. There are 24 million lenses that fit the K-7 and many primes that are not available for Nikon like the 31mm F1.8 Limited that is one of the sharpest primes on the planet.</strong> <br>

<strong><img src="http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a21/jogiba/Pentax%20K-7/GripFrontViewRight.jpg" alt="" /> <br /> </strong> </p>

<p>Nikon does have a 35/1.8 which has a silent wave drive and is cheap..!</p>

<p>31mm F1.8 *drool*</p>

<p>Hello Ioritz, this is Marc from Barcelona (Catalunya). I have been a pentaxian all my life and I am delighted that someone from Nikon is thinking about Pentax. You have received advice from far more competent photographers than myself, so I will talk just about money. Have you though about buying your equipment in the internet?. Last year the US$ was so low that I did buy a K10D body + the handgrip + a spare battery + the kit lens(18-55mm) + a memory card (8Gb) in the U.S.A. for less than the price of the body alone in Spain (taxes + customs + s&h included). I want to buy the 55-300 this summer and it costs around 340 $ in Adorama.com (thats 245 € at the actual rate change) and 375 € in the average shop in Spain. Thats 130 € less!! You will have it in Spain for around 100 € less (taxes + customs + s&h included). It is something to think about. Imagine if you buy ALL of your equipment there. OK, its enough. Please feel free to email me to ask anything you want.</p>

<p>Hi, marc!<br>

I have been looking at prices over the internet around different webpages. Buying overseas has, in my opinion, two main "problems". When the goods arrive, it is quite uncertain if they will be stopped in the customs office. I once bought a lens from b&h and the shipment was incredibly slow due to that reason, and I had to pay around 40€ for a 120€ piece of equipment. It was still cheap comparing with the prices over here, but it gave me something to think about. Moreover, I don't know how the warranty works in such cases. If the equipment needs to be shipped back to its original country it could be quite expensive.</p>

<p>Nevertheless, I compared the prices from quite a lot of places, and after balancing their pros and cons, I finally bought the kit (k20d + 18-55 II + 55-300) from Pixmania Spain over the internet (they have a shop in Barcelona, by the way) for 970€ (shipment included). The Tamron 17-50 was bought from Amazon.fr, where it cost me 370€ (ship. incl.). It was a bit cheaper if I bought everything from amazon.com (even if it didn't include the 18-55 kit lens), but if customs stopped the package (quite likely, it being a moderately big pack) the economical advantage would have been gone, and the other cons (warranty, returning policy, etc.) would still be there. Curiously, it wasn't that much cheaper buying from e-bay (with which I have quite a lot of experience).</p>

<p>Hi again Ioritz!<br>

Best wishes on your new gear. When your economy gets back to normal levels consider buying the battery grip; it adds balance to the camera and makes it far more confortable to work with, wich will be handy working with the 55-300. By the way, tell us what do you think of that lens (wich I will try to buy shortly).</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Ok, I'll try it thoroughly... when it arrives! I think it will arrive in around 2-3 days at most, since it has already been received by the shipping company and it is a trustworthy company at least in Spain (SEUR).</p>

<p>I'll make you know my first impressions on the kit.</p>

<p>what's everyone's thoughts on the pentax 50-135 vs. the Tamron 70-200mm</p>

<p>does the 135 have enough range or is the 200mm overkill? Both lenses are about the same price, can't decide. thanks</p>

<p>Gary, do a search and you'll find many threads dealing with your conundrum. In the end it boils down to your needs, and only <strong>YOU</strong> can know if 135mm is long enough. And if you <em>do</em> need 200mm at the long end, know that it comes at the expense of weight and bulk.</p>

<p><img src="http://sky.geocities.jp/norynory4830/c06249822.JPG" alt="" width="708" height="471" /></p>

<p><img src="http://sky.geocities.jp/norynory4830/b06149148.JPG" alt="" width="708" height="471" /></p>

<p>Pentax 600mm F4 and 80-200mm F2.8 for sale on ebay.</p>

<p>"Nikon does have a 35/1.8 which has a silent wave drive and is cheap..!"<br>

What does that have to do with the Pentax 31mm 1.8 Limited ?<br>

<em>Popular Photography</em> in its March 2002 issue called the Pentax SMC-FA 31mm Limited one of the greatest prime lenses it had ever tested (the other two were the Voigtländer Heliar 50mm f/3.5 and the Nikon Nikkor 45mm f/2.8P Tessar-type.</p>

<p>In the context of this thread the Pentax 31 Limited is out of context because it costs $800. No doubt it's a great lens, but the price puts it out of consideration for a lot of people.</p>

<p>Was pointing out that Nikon (which the OP was coming from) has a cheap 35mm prime which is sealed and has a silent wave drive. Pentax has a more expensive 35/2 FA which is an old design and I think has been discontinued, its price has been climbing recently.</p>

<p>All these other lenses you show (600/4, 80-200/2.8) are discontinued and cost even more on the used market than they were new. They would be difficult to for pros because if you were a pro and had one of these and it broke... where would you get service or a replacement?</p>

 

<p>I agree with Orlando Pentax does not produce a fast telephoto zoom lens that most pros would feel comfortable carrying around in the field. Also Nikon equipment holds it's value better than Pentax equipment I should know I sold a lot of my Pentax gear and took a big hit.</p>

<p>If you can work with what Pentax has to offer then go for it, but look at it this way in terms of holding their value Pentax is the Volkswagen and Nikon is the BMW .</p>