I'm having an awful time deciding between Canon and Pentax

So I wrote out this brilliantly long series of questions to ask you concerning whether to get a canon or a pentax camera, specifically the Canon 60D vs the Pentax k-5. However, when I pressed post, I lost it all apparently because it never submitted, so you guys get the really cute Reader's Digest Version the second time around because I suffer form something commonly known as "lazy" syndrome.

-
http://bit.ly/nbCeIL
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk5/2
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos60d/2
http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-vs-Pentax_K-5
http://camerasize.com/compare/#100,123
-

So, from what I can see from these excellent reviews and assessments is that, basically, the K-5 wipes the floor with everything but Auto-focus and the amount of lenses; how accurate is this laymen's assessment of the two cameras?

Additionally, my shooting will be all over the place, I'll be shooting everything from some macro to landscape and everything in-between including dusty old churches with horrid lighting (People love pictures of baptisms and the like, plus it's good practice for whenever a wedding happens and I want to shoot). Based on this, I'll need a camera that can shoot everything , and well.

Lens-wise, I won't have much money for lenses, in fact I will probably not be able to expand past a kit lens + one other lens for a long time (couple months) since it takes that long to save up spare money as the money always ends up magically disappearing at the end of the month... I'd blame the dog but I think my siblings eat more. With that in mind, however, what lens would you recommend? I've heard excellent things about the Sigma 70-300 DG APO lens in terms of telephoto performance, image clarity and (most importantly) price. A lens that's only about $180 from Amazon is very appealing compared to some lenses that are over $400. (I honestly can't quite justify a lens that's half the price of my body quite yet)

I'm also interested in such misc. items such as UV/ND/GND filters. I'm almost certain I'll need a ND filter at some point, do you have any brands you would recommend? Flashes are another thing that I'm sure I'll eventually need in churches and the like, however considering the K-5's impressive ability to under expose without looking like something the dog dragged in I'm not terribly worried in that respect and so an external flash would be a low priority purchase. The 60D I'm a little more unsure of, especially how it performs as regards to pulling up the shadows and midtones in RAW to brighten the image from under-exposure up to usable lightness.

To recap (the tl;dr):

1. Cons and Pros of the K-5 vs 60D, did I get them right?
2. For an all-around DSLR which would you recommend and why?

3. What particular lens do you think I would be best served by getting if I could only get one lens + the kit lens?

4. Flash/Filters of all sorts. Any recommendations? (These are pretty low priority to me as of right now)

Thanks for reading and sorry for the very long "short" version! I just had a lot of clarification questions to ask.

Regards,
-Thang1thang2

(I copied and pasted this, let's see if it runs through this time...)

In good hands with both cameras wonderful pictures can be shot. I don't think any shot in the future will be lost because you have the wrong camera.
The Sigma 17-70 is available for both.

For me the SR, combined with being able to use old lenses, including this shake reduction, would make the difference, but other considerations are well possible and valid.

Yes, both will take excellent images.

Only a few things to mention. The canon likely has a better flash system if shooting weddings, but you'll be paying more, and for a plastic body. You won't be able to adjust for BF/FF with any lenses.

The K-5 is probably the most configurable apsc dslr out there and can be bought new with USA warranty for as low as $829 for body. A screamin' deal in comparison.

Best wishes.

--
At any given moment, there is a sort of all pervading orthodoxy, a general tacit
agreement not to discuss large and uncomfortable facts… Anyone who
challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising
effectiveness. - George Orwell

“It's not a matter of whether the war is not real, or if it is, Victory is not possible. The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. … The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects and its object is not the victory over [the purported enemy], but to keep the very structure of society intact.” George Orwell, 1984

1. I own Pentax lenses, so it would be a non brainer for me... prizes are more or less the same, Canon has a wider used market and an AF engine that is always better reviewed than Pentax one, on the other side Pentax let you shoot in any condition (weather sealing) and has the best IQ on market, actually. And with in body IS any old lens gets a new life, even if short good lenses from the past do not show their best anylonger on this actual sensors.

2. Lenses: DA 18 55 is referred to be a very good kit lens, DA 55 300 is the perfect matching for it: compact, lightweigth, good IQ, marginally dark, it has anything needed to work on film bodies too, and at some length / aperture vignetting is marginal...

Me for myself i decided for an F 24-50 instead of the 18 - 55 'cause i do shot film too and that's a good compromise. Still saving money for the DA 55 300...

3 Miscellaneuos: filters are useless in general, except a polarizer. A bigger one is more expensive but with a step down ring you'll be able to use it on any lens. A decent tripod makes much more use and widens your shooting possibilities. Don't be shy, i had one as a present ad it is a cheap one... worthless most of the times, spend those 150 € once in a while to get a strong firm one and you'll be ok forever...

thang1thang2 said:

So, from what I can see from these excellent reviews and assessments is that, basically, the K-5 wipes the floor with everything but Auto-focus and the amount of lenses; how accurate is this laymen's assessment of the two cameras?

Click to expand...

That's a pretty fair assessment, although the K-5 AF isn't bad.

thang1thang2 said:

Additionally, my shooting will be all over the place, I'll be shooting everything from some macro to landscape and everything in-between including dusty old churches with horrid lighting (People love pictures of baptisms and the like, plus it's good practice for whenever a wedding happens and I want to shoot). Based on this, I'll need a camera that can shoot everything , and well.

Click to expand...

The raw DR of the 60D is about 11.1/2 stops; the K-5 is about 14 stops. 2.1/2 stops gives you a much better chance of catching the scene you want, especially in dimmer light.

thang1thang2 said:

Lens-wise, I won't have much money for lenses, in fact I will probably not be able to expand past a kit lens + one other lens for a long time (couple months) since it takes that long to save up spare money as the money always ends up magically disappearing at the end of the month...

Click to expand...

So while there are more lenses available for Canon you can't buy them. As long as you are looking at Sigma lenses it doesn't make a difference anway. Note, though, that if you want stabilisation you'll likely pay extra on Canon-fit lenses (if stabilisation is even available on the FL you want) while with Pentax you get SR on every lens included in the price of the body.

thang1thang2 said:

I'm also interested in such misc. items such as UV/ND/GND filters. I'm almost certain I'll need a ND filter at some point,

Click to expand...

Filters can be expensive in the bigger sizes. It's worth looking at the size that different lenses take - if you can standardise on filter size you can save some money.

Looking ahead, if you move to small prime lenses a lot of the Pentax DA/DFA series take 49mm filters, which are much cheaper than bigger sizes.

--
---

Gerry


First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne

i´ve read like you say that the auto focus is way better on Canon than on Pentax. I have only experienced Pentax K5 out of the two and have lotsa lenses, but have had no problems with the auto focus for my use. But I think if it´s for pro use the Canon is the better choice due to the auto focus, cause you cannot afford to loose any at a wedding etc. If that´s not important to you then I would choose the Pentax K5 due to size etc, in my own case I have not regretted my choice, but it all comes down to personal preferences, so only you can know what will satisfy you

--
Feel free to visit my gallery http://mediaman.dk

I am not a fan of the Canon look, so the choice is easy for me.

I have also been able to accumulate a bunch of really great glass. (small primes)

If I may make a suggestion, look at the K30. I have the K 01 and the focus peaking is fantastic to have. The K30 is a DSLR similar to he K5 but has this feature as well. Low light shooting and MF are a lot easier and more accurate as a result.
--
Variance is Evil!

Here's my take for what it's worth. You invest in lenses, not bodies. You are looking at pretty high end bodies, and then have no money left for lenses. it's like buying a Porshe but not being able to afford the insurance for it.

In a few years, both these camera's will both be old anyway. Seeing as this is your first dslr, why don't you start with a cheaper body, like the new k-30 or a k-r or a rebel, and buy another lens, or two, with the difference? learn on a cheaper, beginner model, as I think both these bodies are a bit overkill for your first dslr, and you are likely not to get the feature set out of them you paid extra for. Learn, invest in lenses, then go all in. Priorities. I'd rather a cheaper body and a great lens that a great body and a kit lens (most of the time).

agree with other posters - both are excellent cameras. I have the K-5 kit, and added a 35mm f/2 right away for low light (indoors and street).

Suggest you purchase a kit (either) and use for a while to determine your priority needs for another lens (also agree that it's easier to find used Canon gear at reasonalbe prices, but then, you don't get Pentax IQ...) Wouldn't be too concerned about ND filters unless you are shooting in bright light wide open at shorter FLs...

I know how it feels to have concerns due to limited budget, but for a first DSLR (or maybe first 16MP sensor), you probably can't go wrong either way.

On their technical merits, the Pentax is a better camera in just about every measurable way. Any review site will explain exactly why in great detail.

In practical use, with a kit lens I don't think it matters. Lenses matter. The biggest difference, Canon has many more lenses. Especially zooms. Pentax has the finest prime lenses. It seems to me that most K-5 owners are experienced perfectionists.

But on the other hand aren't most people best served by accurate, fast autofocus and really good zoom lenses? Canon sells a lot of cameras for a reason. Their 55-250 IS lens is pretty great for not much money. You can find a 70-200 f/4 L for around $500 used.

chiane said:

I'd rather a cheaper body and a great lens that a great body and a kit lens (most of the time).

Click to expand...

That's always been my approach. I only have the lowly K-r and K200D, but I have all 5 DA Limited lenses and an FA50. And since I got these lenses several years ago when they were much cheaper, my lenses have gained value whereas the bodies only get less valuable over time. I'll pick up a K-5 or K30 one of these days, but I'm never going to spend more than $1,000 (U.S.) on a body unless my financial situation improves, especially since we only get a couple of years out of them before they're obsolete. On the other hand, (hopefully) I'll be using most of my lenses a decade from now.

--
http://www.pixelstatic.com

Pentax bodies are different. Since the K2000, build quality and AF took a big leap forward at the bottom of the line. Major settings are easy to get to and the overall operations of the cameras feel like that of a more expensive model.

Variance is Evil!

You can compare cameras/features/benefits 'til your blue in the face. Just go to your local camera shop and hold the cameras you are comparing, choose one that is the most comfortable in your hands and buy it...

--
Neil
http://thewarmland.com

JoeDaBassPlayer said:

Pentax bodies are different. Since the K2000, build quality and AF took a big leap forward at the bottom of the line. Major settings are easy to get to and the overall operations of the cameras feel like that of a more expensive model.

Click to expand...

I agree about the AF......huge improvement. But as far as build quality.....I have a *istDL and a K-r and the DL is built with the same stainless steel chassis as the K-r. It "feels" just as solid as the K-r (if not more so) and I have had no issues relating to the body or any of the buttons/dials whatsoever.

Also, while setting access is improved with the K-r over the DL, you still have to scroll through on the screen (albeit a bigger one) to change them. I do like having so many setting choices on ONE screen though......that is definitely faster than the ones buried in the DL (but still not like having dedicated buttons or two dials).

Framer said:

You can compare cameras/features/benefits 'til your blue in the face. Just go to your local camera shop and hold the cameras you are comparing, choose one that is the most comfortable in your hands and buy it...

--
Neil
http://thewarmland.com

Click to expand...

Yeah, because your local camera shop is sure to have Pentax dslr floor to ceiling to try. I live in the third largest city in the US and would have to drive 3 hours to find someone selling Pentax. I've owned a Pentax and been a follower for two years, and have never seen another Pentax camera in a store or in the wild since then. I have a K-r and am still wondering what a k-5 looks like in the flesh.

Canon has some nice glass, but most of it weighs more than I am willing to carry on a hike. The Pentax K5 is smaller and the lens selection weighs less. So for me, Pentax had the better lens selection.

So last year I bought a K-5 with the kit lens and the Sigma 70-300 APO to get started. Of all the lenses I now have, the Sigma 70-300 APO is the only one I have been disappointed in. I liked the 1:2 "macro". It produces pretty good shots. However, shooting more distant objects were just soft. The other Pentax forum site has a lens review section that you might find helpful in deciding which lenses you want.

My recommendation to you would be to look at the K-30 with either the Sigma/Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, Pentax 55-300 and a Raynox 150 to play with macro. If you later decide you like Macro, you could get the Tamron 90. (Pretty much all macro lens are very good lenses, but the Tamron is the cheapest).

The kit lens is pretty good (at least if you can shoot at f/8). But since you plan on shooting in churches, etc, I would want a little faster lens. The Pentax 16-50/2.8 is an OK lens, but not for the price they are now charging. Again look on the other forum for a comparison between the Pentax, Sigma and Tamron 16/17-50 lenses.

It would be nice if the AF points on the K5 were smaller, but overall, the AF on the K5 works fine for me. However, if you are concerned about AF on the K5, the K30 is supposed to the better AF. I believe the IQ of the K5 will only be a little bit better than the K30. Both the K5 and the K30 will be better than the 60D.

If you plan on shooting a bit of everything, then I would certainly plan on a tripod too. It will give you much better indoor/portraits. And you can think about trying your hand at CIF pictures. Since you can't get cheap, light and sturdy tripod. I would get a heavy beast and just use it at home or in the backyard.

I am not a big fan of the Pentax flash system. However, I think you probably will want one before too long. The K5 does very good without a flash. However, off-camera or bounced flash can really make a difference in you photos. If you are willing to go the route of a manual flash you can pick up something like the yn-560 for under $70. Of course, you would also want an umbrella stand and wireless controller (e.g. cactus v5).

In general, I agree with the others that you probably only need CPL filters. Maybe a ND filter if you shoot waterfalls, etc in bright light. However, learning the filter lesson is something you have to learn yourself. In any case, don't buy any filters until you have a few lenses so you know what sizes of filters you will need.

Lastly, don't forget that you can use old MF lenses with the K5/K30. For example, you might find a relative who is willing to give you their old kit from the 80s. If you are lucky it might even have a 50/1.4-1.7 for portraits or a 50 macro. More likely it will have something like a 80-200 zoom, 135 prime and of course the 50/2 and some crappy filters. Since it is going to take you a long time to build up your kit, having some old MF lenses will give you something else to learn/experiment with.

PS. Always shoot raw with any DSLR. You will be much happier with the results. I would start out with the free versions of raw development software. But be sure to try a trail version of something like LightRoom with Topaz Denoise.

I think that the current price of the K-5 really makes it worth getting over a cheaper body. The IQ of this camera is so good, that one could be very happy using this camera until it falls apart, maybe in 10 years. The k-30 has a smaller buffer and untested ergonomics. I think that I would stick with the k-5. It is really a joy to use.

If you are not one to upgrade every time a new model comes out, I think investing in a K-5 will be money well spent. Of course it takes good glass to get 16mp's of detail, which is only really important for big prints or things like fine art landscape.

I am a Canon shooter (5DII and 20D) who is considering buying into a Pentax system. Reason: small, pro body APS-C with great weather sealing and excellent IQ. Looks like a fabulous hiking/traveling setup, especially here in Alaska with the inclement weather. This looks to me like a great time to get into a K5 as the price is dropping and it's an opportunity to pick one up while they are still new and under warranty.

Unfortunately, it means buying into a new set of lenses, which it looks like Pentax just jacked prices on. Anyways, I plan on buying the 18-135 or a few of the small primes (which seem to be Pentax's specialty) and calling it a day. Unless I really enjoy shooting the K5, (or not) and then I guess I'd sell one of the systems.

Only downsides to the K5 I can see at this point compared to the D7000 or 7D is lagging AF (not a big deal to me as I am a nature/landscape shooter with increasing interest in portraits) and lack of tethering, and of course, investing in new lenses. Anyone know if there is a workaround for the later?

Oops, I meant a workaround for tethering, not the lenses. EF mount lenses cannot be used on the Pentax system, as far as I know.

chiane said:

Framer said:

You can compare cameras/features/benefits 'til your blue in the face. Just go to your local camera shop and hold the cameras you are comparing, choose one that is the most comfortable in your hands and buy it...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

chiane said:

Yeah, because your local camera shop is sure to have Pentax dslr floor to ceiling to try. I live in the third largest city in the US and would have to drive 3 hours to find someone selling Pentax. I've owned a Pentax and been a follower for two years, and have never seen another Pentax camera in a store or in the wild since then. I have a K-r and am still wondering what a k-5 looks like in the flesh.

Click to expand...

What's your point, maybe you just live in the wrong city?

Three of my local camera shops have Pentax DSLR's and lenses available in-store. All three of these stores (Kerrisdale Cameras, Broadway Camera and London Drugs) are within a ten minute walk of my front door and I live in a small city in western Canada of roughly 130,000 people. There are a LOT more camera stores within a 30 minute drive that carry a great selection of Pentax gear.

By the way, what do you mean by "follower"? Is that a Facebook thing?

You haven't seen a Pentax "in the wild"? Why do you are? Why are you looking at someones equipment, what purpose does that serve? Your camera isn't a fashion accessory, that said, maybe it is and that's fine I suppose. :| (Kind of strange if you ask me...)

--
Neil
http://thewarmland.com