Why is an OM-D better than a Pentax K-5?

Started May 9, 2012 | Discussions thread
PerL Forum Pro • Posts: 14,012
Re: Why do birds suddenly appear...

szlevi wrote:

This is probably most hilariously idiotic comment of all... just why TF the grip should be put on? To make the Pentax look less pathetic?
Such an imbecile comment.

Because almost everyone says the handling improves a lot with a grip on the Oly. BTW I think you should learn to use a civil langauge.

PerL wrote:

hellocrowley wrote:

That's not really fair IMO. You should put the DA limited primes on that K5. For example the 1cm thick 40mm 2.8 or 70mm 2.4. It will be a lot thinner than the OMD + 45mm.

And put a grip on the Oly.

Thorgrem wrote:

I think it's because of the same reason 4/3's like the E-5 (or E-30, E-620) is not popular. A to small user base so it's overshadowed by Canon and Nikon. A to small users base is also a risk for people who do boy in to the system.

The K5 is a very nice camera but I would go for the m4/3's because it's the future and it's much, much smaller.

hellocrowley wrote:

Honestly, I was interested in the OM-D until I saw that thread. It got me interested in the K5 and I started doing research about it.

The K5 is indeed small and lightweight (compared to other DSLR), the pancake lenses are crazily small and sharp. Great high ISO and DR beats FF cameras. For under $2000 I can get a body with 3 very nice pancakes. I dont know why it's not more popular.

-- hide signature --

http://instagr.am/p/JvSMWFBYyl
(Now you cannot say I don't have a single pic! :P)

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Leo
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow