Is there anything inherently wrong with pentax dlsr and can they keep up with the big 2 N&c?

[anthony_wright]

<p>Hello all die hard nikon fan here ( in to deep if I didn't ;) was just looking at some pentax dslrs and saw the prices and said wow. they look pretty cool. I know the on going struggle is nikon-vs-canon- but was just wondering about the build qual and iq of pentax. do they even hold a flame to the big two or is pentax just like a speciality item has anyone ever shot pentax and how were your results</p>

<p>thanks</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>For me it comes down to system component availability. I know lots of people who use other systems besides Nikon and Canon, and they do some excellent work. All I would say is I think your answer comes from the fact you asked the question, but it's all about achieving your photographic and artistic vision, or having a system that can help you make money.</p>

[Matthew Brennan]

<p><strong>"just looking at some pentax dslrs and saw the prices and said wow" </strong><br />I believe as a general rule with very few exceptions that you pay for what you get.</p>

<p><strong>"they look pretty cool"</strong> <br />maybe so, but they must do more for you than that. I'd encouracge you to research the Pentax forum too....... I'm sure they (Pentax D-SLR's) work just fine.....</p>

<p> </p>

[andreas_manessinger]

A friend of mine uses a K20D and she struggles with two things: High-ISO noise is about where Nikon was with the D200 (which is not bad, but not fantastic either, and the general availability of lenses is poor. You can't just go into the next shop and expect them to have the lens you want.

 

Image quality gets much better if you use RAW (she does not), and I strongly suppose that DxO Optics Pro does a better job than Adobe Camera RAW for conversion.

 

My subjective impression is, that the camera has almost all of the features of a D200/D300, but it feels cheaper. It does not feel like a professional tool. In fact, compared to the D300, it feels a lot like a D70. But of course there is the big plus of in-body image stabilization!

 

Anyway. I wouldn't get one if I shot JPEG only. Their JPEG engine is sub-par. The RAW files are pretty OK and the K20D even has a better DxOmark than the D300. If the availability of lenses is OK for you, there should be no problem. Just don't take a D300 into your hands first. You'd be spoiled :)

[John Crowe]

<p>The reason many of us choose only between Canon and Nikon is their extensive choice of lenses. Period.</p>

<p>If you intend on limiting your lens selection then any of the manufacturers, who have the lenses that you want, are worthwhile looking at, but if you think there is the possibility of taking your hobby more seriously and wanting to "grow" your system then Nikon and Canon certainly provide the widest choice.</p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p>Was recently checking them out as well but for me the killer was their very high noise levels at 1600 and up.</p>

[photo5]

<p>Pentax is the only other manufacturer that has the same mount as their manual focus bodies (correct me if I'm wrong on this) however I don't know if any Pentax dSLR bodies will meter with an older K-mount lens. <br>

Pentax is a fantastic brand, they make superb lenses and the K1000 was about the best student camera ever made. We sold a ton of them back in the day. Their Spotmatic bodies were trend-setting in their day as well. <br>

They have been coming out with some nice new lenses, the DA series I believe. But yes, it's interesting now how it comes down to who can provide a better processing engine, which Nikon and Canon pretty much own the market on.</p>

[sfcole]

<p>Pentax cameras are slower. Having compared them with both Canon and Nikon, the Pentax focuses the slowest and has a slower RAW frame rate for comparable models.<br>

Personally I believe the fact that Pentax can take older lenses is just marketing. I'd guess VERY few people really want to use older lenses unless they have them. And any really desirable older ones are difficult to find.</p>

[musings]

<p>As a long-time user of Pentax SLR's and DSLR's (my current body is a K10), I find that the K10 and K20's are built like tanks and shoot very fine images. Some K10's have even been to outer space and back in an unpressurized environment -- that speaks volumes on the build quality. I haven't had trouble with high ISO images, but I do tweak in PS like most people to correct some of the noise. In all, I believe that the Pentax system is one of the better values out there. I haven't come across any situation where there wasn't a lens or accessory available to meet my requirements.</p>

<p>I don't play the Nikon vs. Canon vs. Pentax game, but I know a lot of people do. I think they're all excellent brands and most DSLR choices should come down to priorities and needs vs. budget. Anyone who says a particular brand "sucks" has unresolved issues, IMO.</p>

<p>I recommend you check out the Pentax forum when you can and look at some of the images the users post on their portfolio pages.</p>

[sfcole]

<p>What k10s have been to outer space? Were they really subjected to exposed outer space? Or just in a protective camera bag in a shuttle? People use this argument to show how tough Hasselblads are--because they went to the mood--but I doubt they were subject to anything worse that a typical wedding. Probably a hike here in Oregon with extreme temperatures and dust is worse.</p>

<p>Most of the lens tests on Photozone seem to indicate that even the best Pentax lenses suffer from a higher degree of CA than those of Canon or Nikon. BTW, I have a Pentax DSLR.</p>

[musings]

<p>In an unpressurized box (with some foam padding for shock absorption on the parachute return to earth). Here's the link with more details. <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/31970-pentax-k10d-space.html" target="_blank">http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/31970-pentax-k10d-space.html</a></p>

[shaloot]

<p>or check out this link:<br>

<a href="http://blog.flickr.net/en/2008/07/28/pentax-k10d-in-space/">http://blog.flickr.net/en/2008/07/28/pentax-k10d-in-space/</a><br>

or this:<br>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/arena5/sets/72157606119049987/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/arena5/sets/72157606119049987/</a><br>

ok so it's not "outer space' but still up there!</p>

 

[shots worth sharing]

<p>"<em>I believe the fact that Pentax can take older lenses is just marketing. I'd guess VERY few people really want to use older lenses unless they have them. And any really desirable older ones are difficult to find."</em><br>

You're quite wrong on that score, Scott! Unless you really need AF, the older lenses are really terrific--the more so because, with a smaller than FF sensor, you get more of the center sweet-spot. The ability to get high quality lenses at very reasonable cost without sacrificing Shake Reduction is a <em>very</em> real advantage.</p>

[jptreen]

<p>Pentax user here...sure, AF is slower but it's pretty accurate. The main problem is the AI on the servo AF, which doesn't get it right as much as it should.</p>

<p>On the other hand - weather sealing is beautiful...and at the price point it's the only camera that offers it. Here it is in the snow...<br>

<img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3417/3252977408_8cc57018fb.jpg?v=0" alt="" width="500" height="334" /></p>

<p>I've used this shot before to exemplify it.</p>

<p>Sure, we're down on lens availability, but it's getting better and the system works fine enough for my needs. We've also got the DA limited prime lenses, small sharp beautiful all-metal primes, that no-one else has got. FA Limited primes too, fast beautiful all-metal primes. At the same time, those tokina 16-50 and 50-135 f/2.8 lenses available in your mounts are in Pentax mount as weatherproof DA* lenses. I've handled and shot a bit with a D3, and it feels really sharp and has very good high ISO performance, but that is not everything - people shot great photos in the old days at ISO400 and we can still do that today, and if anything the Pentax performs slightly *better* than comparitave Nikons at low-ISO. It's a real system that can produce great stuff, but the photos are, as ever, all in the mind rather than in the camera.</p>

[jptreen]

<p>on the manual lenses thing, I have a Katz Eyez split prism installed in my K10D and I use manual focus lenses with it - some of them I bought after the camera, some before. The camera meters fine with any 'A' series lens or newer. Older lenses will meter, it's just a different process (you press a button, the camera stops down, takes a reading, opens back up, and you get the program line...not ideal, but it does work)</p>

<p>Anyway, Pentax really don't market it that much anyway, any Pentax user knows Pentax marketing is completely terrible, for instance, they forgot to say that the K20D had better AF than the K10D...you'd think they'd play that one big wouldn't you...</p>

[deaner66]

<p>Look, this thread gets way over done even in the Pentax forums. Bottom line, if you need 10fps or 6400ISO then you need to spend the big bucks and get a Canikon.</p>

<p>Pentax will never compete in that arm flexing world. If you are one of those types who absolutely needs to have the latest gear with the biggest numbers--and pay for those things--you will never be satisfied with Pentax. Period.<br>

But if value for your money is important to you, you simply can't beat Pentax. That is undeniable.</p>

<p>Many of the posts above are ill-informed. For instance, some of you question the build of the K10D and K20D. Utter nonsense. My K10D can take pictures in driving rain that would send all but the pro grade Canikons inside. Especially with the newer DA* weather sealed lenses. For a Pentaxian, no worries. One of my favorite shots of late was of a guy in London taking shots in the snow storm they got a month or two ago. One of his shots was of his K10D almost completely covered in snow. Again, no worries.</p>

<p>Yes, Pentax doesn't focus as quick, or have a FF sensor as Canikon does, but that misses the whole point.</p>

<p>As far as the lens issue, some of you got some of it right and most of it wrong. True, those huge lenses you might see on the side of a sporting event are hard to find for a Pentaxian. Pentax has no new 400, 500, 600mm monsters. And Pentax may not have every nick and corner covered as Canikon might have. But quality? Please.</p>

<p>One of my best lenses id the DA* 50-135mm 2.8 zoom. Designed for the APS-C sensor, it is the equivalent to the 70-200 lenses for Canikon. The difference? About a $1000. As far as IQ, no difference. Again we fall back to value for your money.</p>

<p>I don't have the K20D, so I can't speak for it, but my K10D takes fabulous JPEGS if I want. Maybe what some of you are speaking of is JPEGs straight out of the box. True. JPEGs for the K10D need some tweaking, which is a very minor point, because after any adjustments, your done.</p>

<p>And finally, someone mentioned that the using the older Pentax lenses is a marketing trick to sell cameras. Believe what you want, but you might want to do a little more research on the old manual focus SMC and Takumar lenses. Very few lenses were as fine as these old lenses. And they can be had on Ebay for a song. There are millions--literally--of these lenses available and their IQ rivals almost anything being built today.</p>

<p>There is a reason why there are so many M42 and K-Mount lens adapters for Canikon still for sale.</p>

<p>Bottom line, if money is no object, go for Canikon. But if you want to stretch your dollar, in the photography world, Pentax cannot be beat.</p>

 

[deaner66]

<p>John, thanks for posting that shot. That's exactly what I was talking about. Fabulous!</p>

[paul_noble]

<p>I have a Pentax K10D. My brother has a Nikon D200. I have used both.</p>

<p>The "feel" of both is very similar. Both feel like you could drive nails with them. My K10D is weather sealed, which the D200 is not.</p>

<p>The ability to use ANY PENTAX 35mm LENS EVER MADE is not just marketing hype. It really does work, and it meters (within the limits of the lens) with all of them. My brother can not even MOUNT the lenses from his Nikon F onto his D200. I have a Super Takumar 50mm, f/1.4 from my Spotmatic (1967) that works beautifully, with an inexpensive adapter, in aperture priority mode. In addition, that lens is stabilized, because the stabilization is in the body, not the lens.</p>

<p>It is true that finding Pentax gear at your local camera store can be a challenge, but that does not really reflect on the quality of the gear, but rather the market share of the big two. The recent bankruptcy filing of Ritz Cameras revealed that they owed Nikon $25M, so I suspect that Nikon and Canon are much more able to extend large amounts of trade credit to stores than Pentax can. IOW, N & C will deliver product to camera stores on consignment. However, online retailers like B & H and Adorama carry quite a few lenses for Pentax. N & C have enormously higher advertising budgets that does Pentax. Seeing Gil Grissom using a Nikon camera every week on CSI doesn't hurt, either.</p>

<p>The K10D uses the same sensor as the D200. So, the noise coming off the sensor should be the same. Pentax has chosen not to implement extremely high levels of noise suppression in their firmware, which, at least in part contributes to the perception of excessive noise at high-ISO. Their attitude seems to be that, if you want more noise suppression, you can do it in post processing. You may or may not agree with that.</p>

<p>As for autofocus, I agree, Pentax needs to work on low-light AF. In good light, my K10D seems to focus as fast as my brother's D200. Last year, I attended his daughter's wedding. My brother was told by his wife, in no uncertain terms that, as father of the bride, he was not going to spend all his time behind his camera. He asked me to use it for him. I was using a Nikon 18-200VR lens. This wedding was on the beach in St. Petersburg, FL, at 4:00pm on a sunny day. Several times, the camera did some serious hunting, going from extreme close focus to infinity and back, before finally achieving focus lock. I do wish that Pentax would include a focus-assist lamp, like the D200 has. How much could that cost? OTOH, I find the AF speed to be good enough for the type of shooting I do. It may not be fast enough for others.</p>

<p>Both cameras can produce excellent results. Both have their advantages and disadvantages. While the D200 has come down in price quite a bit since the D300 came out, it is still more expensive than the Pentax. When introduced, the K10D has a list price of, I think $1299, with the kit lens. The D200, when new, was over $2000, so I would hope that it had some better features than the Pentax. As far as I can see, however, most of the additional features of the D200 are ones that I don't need and don't wish to pay for. For example, three frames per second is plenty for me, although I do understand that some people need/want a higher frame rate.</p>

<p>I know that neither the K10D or the D200 are the most current models, but they are the only two that I have first-hand knowledge of.</p>

<p>Paul Noble</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>The comment above about this thing getting way overdone is right. That said, I've got to admit, I'm an advocate of Pentax equipment ever since I stumbled into it accidentally some years ago. I think they build great products that are worth the money and, the cameras hold their value well.</p>

<p>Every two days someone somewhere seems to associate Pentax with "consumers" and other brands with "professionals." Guys, we all know that's a load of bunk. A hammer is a hammer; the camera is a tool. If you've got well made tools that work, rock on.</p>

<p>I did want to address two of the points that came up, though, because I've seen them repeatedly; sometimes from people who have other brands and may not be familiar with Pentax beyond a printed ad or magazine review.</p>

<p>1. ". . . however I don't know if any Pentax dSLR bodies will meter with an older K-mount lens. " This comes up a bit. I wonder if another company hasn't touted their capability to meter through manual lenses a great deal, misleading people to believe that a Pentax couldn't do it or something. I don't know why people think this, but it's false. It can not only meter through a manual lens, but meter through it in a variety of patterns, and apply that information to other computations in a variety of ways. </p>

<p>Even with my "consumer" K200D, I do this every day. All one has to do is use the "custom settings" menu to adjust the functions from factory-preset auto-everythings to what works well with manual lenses. In the Pentax forum, we went over some of the setting changes <a href="../pentax-camera-forum/00SUOg">here.</a> Also, a shameless plug for a rundown of that same list on my blog, <a href="http://www.agxphoto.info/agxphotoinfo/AgXphotoinfo_PhotoBlog_March_2009/Entries/2009/3/2_Setting_the_K200D_for_Preferred_Manual_Operation.html">here.</a></p>

<p>2. Lens choice. I'm astonished that anyone thinks other companies have a greater lens availability. Pentax has many, many more lenses that will fit on its cameras than it gets credit for. Like, since about 1958's worth of lenses. I know that people knock used lenses as "not professional" sometimes, but glass is glass. Quite frankly, a used 55mm Takumar I picked up recently is a smooth-moving lens in great shape. It's probably as old as I am, maybe even older. I seem to remember another brand's autofucs lens sounding like an industrial trash compactor back when I used it. Add in "third party" M42 lenses, and you cannot swing a dead cat on the used market without scoring a good lens somewhere. In fact, if you shop used, you may need to keep an eye out for sellers who "impersonate" Pentax equipment in the headlines of their online ads to lure people in. A common ploy is to use the words "Pentax" "mount" in the ads, only to find out the lens at hand is any old third party lens with an M42 mount.</p>

<p>Pentax equipment is built like a tank. I'm confident that I could write for awhile about the durability and general-purpose toughness of the Pentax cameras I've used. Dropped 'em, crashed 'em, taken them apart; they're good equipment. Sometimes we get into "social clubbing" about the things we possess, but if the camera is working for you, it works well enough.</p>

<p>"Pentax is the Leica of Japan!" "Any Pentax Lens Ever Made!" J.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=3736516">Matthew Brennan</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub2.gif" alt="" title="Subscriber" /> <img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" title="Frequent poster" /> </a> , Mar 07, 2009; 02:46 a.m.<br>

<strong>"just looking at some pentax dslrs and saw the prices and said wow" </strong> <br /> I believe as a general rule with very few exceptions that you pay for what you get.</p>

</blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p><strong>"they look pretty cool"</strong> <br /> maybe so, but they must do more for you than that. I'd encouracge you to research the Pentax forum too....... I'm sure they (Pentax D-SLR's) work just fine.....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I would say price relation to quality is a purely american ideal.</p>

<p>If I put too equal products on shelf I bet you the one that cost more would get more interest.</p>

<p>Second I encourage you to look at DXO sensor database, while Pentax and Nikon have used the same sensors in quite a few cameras, the Pentax models all score higher.</p>

<p>Third, build of Pentax blows away Nikon and Canon based on price. You get a solid camera starting from $600. The Canon rebel is a toy. It feels, and looks cheap. There is absolutely no one with an ounce of self respect that could argue that and not feel like a fool. Pentax weather seals it's cameras at $600, Nikon at $1700, Canon not till $4000. And yes, the sealing is the same quality if not better. The K10D/K20D are actually splash proof, and only the Olympus E-3 is sealed as well.</p>

<p>Pentax doesn't build 1D/D3X level cameras. It stops at the D300/50D level. And this gives it more room to add features without either holding back or charging a premium so you have to buy the next level camera.</p>

<p>I should note one thing, Pentax is an innovative company responsible for many first in the SLR and photography business. It also produced a full featured medium format system with 67 and 645 SLRs that you will see in the photo credits of many national geographics and fashion mags. Pentax isn't some fringe camera company that got lucky with a few nice cmaeras over it's LONG history.</p>

<p>The difference in quality to between the best 35mm sized sensor or film, and Pentax 645/67 gear is staggering. So if you wanted the best image quality you'd have been hard pressed to tell me that Nikon or Canon were better than the professional Pentax medium format system in the days of film. In digital, well the rest of this post coverrs that.</p>

<p>The bottom line is Nikon is a great company, I can find few flaws with them. I also shoot nikon, and the Nikon "mystique" is hard to come passup. But Pentax produces a completely different product line with different strengths, and different lens options. I shoot my Pentax gear 90% of the time, and really the only thing I don't prefer it (Pentax digital, pentax film is another story) is sports and high speed flash photography. And for high speed flash photography, my Pentax film DSLR actually is as good as any nikon or canon. So for me personally, sports and high speed (manual) flash photography are the only two weakspots in the system.</p>

<p>Oh, if one wants to say lens choices, fair enough, but my Pentax system is comprised of ultra compact, high quality zooms, and ultra compact primes with exceptional opticts and build while as nice as Nikons system is it simply doesn't have a lineup like what I have in my bag. So yes, nikon has more lenses but Pentax has what I need, and Pentax allows EVERY LENS I EVER OWNED, including my 35mm Tilt and Shift to be image stabilized. Send me an email when nikon builds a stabilized tilt and shift!</p>

<p>So the answer is Pentax builds a high quality product with absolutely no final image compromises, for less than the competition. The cameras typically function as well as the person shooting them, and in the end the limiting factor isn't the name on the front of the camera, but the photography behind it. Even a button pushing monkey with a Nikon D3X isn't going to out shoot a skilled photographer with a much cheaper camera.</p>

[michael_kuhne]

<p>The noise issue- Pentax has had a policy in the last few models for minimal noise reduction at higher ISO, in order to prevent loss of sharpness and detail. In the K20D and K200D, however, there are user controls to apply more degrees of noise reduction if desired. The matter is left more in the hands of the user, including the use of noise reduction software. With other brands there is substantial noise reduction applied at higher ISO, even if switched off.</p>

<p>The AF issue- The better Canon and Nikon models feature AF that is faster than Pentax models. This and higher fps burst rate makes them better choices for fast action shooting. Pentax has been given credit by testers for good accuracy, and also may find focus in low light where some other competing models may not.</p>

<p>The lens issue- Pentax does not offer the super long, super expensive telephoto lenses as Canon and Nikon have, if that is one's interest. But there are even some of these available, such as the fine Sigma 500mm f/4.5 APO EX. Pentax also offers some unique and desirable lenses of their own design, and their modestly-priced kit lenses are of a better quality build than that of Nikon or Canon. Also, any of their lenses, old or new, can be used with the in-camera shake reduction system.</p>

<p>The JPEG quality issue- nothing like comparing identical inages shot in identical conditions. Just go to the imaging resource website, then compare sample images, and bring up any two cameras. Select the same sample image, click on it twice for maximum blowup, and you'll see that the Pentax models do quite well against competitors models for JPEG image sharpness. Like the woman in sunlight (though the lighing is slightly different, you can still determine quality), or the new indoor at 100 (or other) ISO. </p>

[ken_yee]

<p>Anthony:<br>

I think we should ask you what you plan to do with your camera? What do you take pictures most of and how do you use it? What lenses do you plan to get? Is low-light flash photography important to you?<br>

As an instructor said at a recent studio workshop (mostly Canon users who were ribbing the Nikon users pretty well and ignored the sole Pentax user :-), today's DSLRs *all* produce images we could only dream of 5yrs ago. Focus on taking good pictures instead of arguing about cameras.<br>

And just to correct something Andreas mentioned, the K20D's JPEG engine is *not* subpar. The K10D's was a bit, but this is minutia you as a layman will probably not notice...it's only mentioned in reviews where they pixel peep. I bought a K10D despite this and ran JPEG for about 3 months wondering what in the world they were talking about, before I moved on to RAW after seeing how much more dynamic range and detail it had (that statement about RAW applies to *all* DSLRs). I'm now on the K20D and besides the dynamic range, I don't find JPEGs an issue either and will run up to ISO1100 without worrying about noise (about the range you can reasonably expect an APS-C sensor to produce clean images in any system).<br>

So again, what do you want to do with your camera and how big is your wallet? There are specific areas that Canon/Nikon do better in. E.g., Nikon's flash system is still the best. Canon still has the best $6-7K 600mm+ fast superzoom lenses for sports and best AF tracking in the 1DmkIII (the D300/D700 are getting closer than anyone else has). They both have $2K+ full frame bodies that have awesome high-iso performance, if you're a pro wedding photog. Pentax's weathersealing is great for landscapes. Those are the main strengths of the 3 systems IMHO. Note that I did *not* say one system can't do anything another can...each one can, but it's no different than saying you'd rather be in a car crash in a Mercedes vs. a Toyota...they both have 4* crash ratings but if you've ever looked underneath.. Each system has strengths/weaknesses, so that's why you shop and compare to see what meets *your* needs...</p>

 

[bobcossar]

<p><strong>No. Yes.</strong></p>

[john_shriver]

<p>The Pentax DLSRs with real pentaprisms (not the cheaper porroprism models) are noted for having large viewfinders that work well for manual focusing, especially if you get a replacement screen with a focusing aid. You can get a really good viewfinder of a quality that's only available on the most expensive Canon and Nikon models, if at all. The Canon Digital Rebel line has nasty little "tunnel vision" viewfinders.<br>

Pentax is suffering from dis-economies of scale compared to Canon and Nikon, and they don't have any other highly profitable lines of business to cross-subsidize them. Canon is a huge diversified company, and Nikon has their semiconductor fabrication machine business, which is great when the economy isn't in the tank.</p>

 

[mountainvisions]

<p>Actually, Pentax in the US only sells cameras, scopes, binocs and medical instruments.</p>

<p>Worldwide Pentax also sells printers, scanners, industrial surveying devices. I see your point, Pentax is a lot smaller than Canon, but Pentax is a lot more diverse than you would think!</p>

<p>Oh and Pentax SMC coating is used on eye glasses. Actually Frames Direct claims they prefer the Pentax SMC AR coating to all other brands!</p>

<p>So Pentax does make money off more than just camera sales.</p>