nathan_meijer

<p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7245/7163795353_a995fb78a2.jpg" alt="" /><br>

Alone in the Desert - Sahara Desert near Merzouga, fuji x-pro1, iso200; f/5,6; 1/480</p>

<p>Some really great pictures! I particularly like Sanford's pink steps and Lex's interior detail.<br>

From a recent trip to Morocco: <br>

<img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7220/7163795431_5c7a0c2abc.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="333" /></p>

<p>I don't see it happening, and the main reason is the 10,000 max ISO. I have probably seen the same pictures as you, and I am not that impressed yet. The Nikon D4 goes to ISO204,800, even the Fuji x-pro1 goes to ISO25,600 - so then this max is a little lackluster to be honest. Yes, it's a huge upgrade from film.. but that's not the competition anymore!</p>

<p><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8025/7216448544_f4e49f4b1c.jpg" alt="" /><br /> Fujifilm x-pro1, 35mm @ f/2,0, iso200<br /> Was a flairtending contest yesterday in my town.</p>

<p>I had decided to sell my Nikon D7k with assortment of lenses; it was all simply too heavy to carry around with me all the time - I didn't go out to shoot anymore, only for specific things going on like the Occupy protests. While it was awesome to have it for things like that, I just wasn't using it enough.<br>

<br /> At first I wanted to go for the Fuji x-pro1: it looked like everything I really wanted.. fast primes, viewfinder and relatively small. But all the reviews complaining about both the manual and autofocus made me doubt. My biggest problem with the m4/3 system was that I wasn't aware of any fast primes, but then I discovered the 12mm f/2.0 and leica 24mm f/1.4 and the decision was rather easy to make. So I've ordered the OM-D with these 2 lenses. Maybe I'll even get the Nokton f/0.95 eventually.</p>

<p>Thanks for the knock on the head people, I'll stick to the D3000 for now and get either the K-5 or D7000 for myself as a graduation gift. As for the price, the D7000 is e890 and the K-5 e955, so that's really not that much of a difference. I'll also see how I like shooting with the ME just to get a feel for film. </p>

<p>Matt, you are right in saying that I really cannot compare the old Pentax lenses with the new consumer-grade Nikon lenses. However, a quick search on a website like Ebay shows me that it's very easy to get affordable (old and new) Pentax lenses, while it seems that it's quite difficult to get the same good deals on equivalent Nikon lenses. Now, it may very well be that I can't find them because there are simply so many Nikon lenses advertised - but it seems to me that the good lenses are still in a very high demand and may even have gone up in price. In other words: more people use Nikon, so there's a higher demand for older Nikon lenses thus the prices go up rather than down. Am I wrong in this?<br>

You are also right in saying that my current consumer-grade Nikon lenses will make lovely images on a D7000. The problem is that I simply can't afford one for 6 months.<br>

Robin, I am getting more and more frustrated with the D3000's low performance on ISOs higher than 400 and high noise on relatively long exposures. Both the K-5 and D7000 perform much better in these aspects, which are the main reasons for me to wanting to upgrade: I like shooting during the evening or night, and the D3000's lack in these two fields is becoming a nuisance. And then there are also the bells and whistles like the higher megapixel count and auto-bracketing of course.<br>

I can definitely see the merit in your point that how a camera feels reflects in your work. In Holland we have the term "hufterproof", loosely translated it means that something is constructed so well that being rough on it won't break it. I'm not saying I'm especially rough on my equipment, but having confidence in my equipment is something I do value.</p>

<p>I feel that I'm at a crossroads: I'm roughly equally invested in both systems and I have to make a choice somehow; if I buy more Nikon gear now, it would be silly to change. I must admit that I'm leaning towards Pentax but it is a difficult decision. </p>

<p>Personally I am invested in some Nikon gear, but recently found my dad's old Pentax ME with 28/2,8 and 50/1,7 lenses and a Braun flash. The ME still seems to work even though the batteries haven't been used for what must be 15 years. I've got the following Nikon gear myself:<br>

-D3000+18-55/3,5-5,6 VR (kitlens),<br>

-35/1,8DX,<br>

-50/1,8 (doesn't autofocus on the D3000) and<br>

-55-300/4,5-5,6DX<br>

I feel that I've outgrown the D3000 as a photographer and was looking around for a D7000 until I came across my dad's old stuff. Now I am considering selling the Nikon stuff and getting a Pentax K-5. From the reviews I've read it is roughly compareable to the D7000 in pretty much every way. The Pentax lenses' build quality is remarkable compared to the plastic Nikon stuff I've got, and it looks like most of the current Pentax lenses have that same sturdyness. Not to mention that the old metal Pentax lenses are very cheap on Ebay, compared to the Nikon ones seemingly still bearing a premium price. I will be moving to London for a few months coming September, as a student my funds are limited - I probably won't be able to afford the D7000 until I graduate in February 2012. On the other hand, I could probably get about 600 euros for the Nikon camera and glass and get the K-5 before I move to London.<br>

My considerations:<br>

-If I indeed move to Pentax, I don't have an extreme telephoto lens anymore (the 55-300) unless I bought one. For the rest I don't really lose any reach as the 28mm could take over the 35mm's job.<br>

-If I don't, I'll be "stuck" with the D3000 for a couple more months. I know, I know - a great photographer can take great pictures with even a disposeable camera, but seeing the shiny things within reach makes me want to shout... MY PRECIOUS. <br>

-If I move to Pentax, I also gain an extra camera: the Pentax ME. <br>

What does the photo.net community advise?</p>