BigBen08 wrote:
The major reason for buying my Olympus E-620, 12-60, and 50-200 was the small body and lens size, in addition to the excellent lens quality. I've enjoyed this system very much, but it's time to upgrade the body. Of course there is the E-5, but it's much larger than the E-620 and very expensive. So now it's time to explore other options.
I'm attracted to the K-5 II for its excellent IQ and features. And it's only a hair or two larger than my E-620 (a small size dslr is important to me). I'm thinking the DA* 16-50 f2.8 and DA* 50-135 f2.8 might make a great combo. Compared to my Oly lenses, I'd give up some reach. But the 50-135 is smaller and lighter than my Oly 50-200, which is a benefit.
I intend to use this Pentax system as a general walk-about, event photography, museums, parades, and cityscapes (at night).
I have no experience with Pentax. Has anyone moved from Olympus 4/3 to Pentax?
Hello BigBen,
As a former Olympus E-3 user with the 12-60 SWD and 50-200mm SWD lenses, I went through a similar situation to yours and ultimately settled on a Pentax K-5. The toughest aspect of this choice was to give up the excellent 4/3 glass, but it was the right choice. I am very happy with the K-5 and the lenses I have since collected.
If you have done your research, you already know how good the K-5's sensor is and the same will hold true of the K-5 II. With good quality optics, the K-5 completely outclasses the E-5 when it comes to image quality. I also find the ergonomics of the K-5 better than the E-3, (same body as the E-5). The only feature you would likely miss is an articulating LCD screen. Otherwise, the K-5 has many the same advantages as the E-5, such as weatherproofing, excellent built quality, in body image stabilization, lots of control buttons and a very high degree of customization.
My recommendation is that if you settle on Pentax, do yourself a favour and invest in their SMC Limited series primes. Optically, they are excellent, very well built and portable. The E-3 with the excellent 12-60 SWD proved to be a very heavy platform, thereby negating the touted benefits of 4/3 providing a more compact system. A K-5 with the very good DA* 16-50 f2.8 has a similar weight and size to an E-5 with the 12-60 SWD. However, the K-5 with the Limited primes is actually a very compact and lightweight system compared to the E-5.
Now is the time to buy up one of the current K-5's at a bargain price. You will save a lot of money compared to the E-5 and that cash can be used to get you some decent Pentax glass. Olympus made some of the best glass out there and no doubt, you will want to get similar quality in a new system.
In order to maximize the IQ of the K-5, do yourself a favour and shoot RAW. IMHO, Pentax's JPG engine is not as good as Oly's. However, there is just tons of headroom and dynamic range in the K-5's raw files.
I would also suggest you look at the Olympus OMD EM-5. I own one as well and use it when I want something smaller and lighter than a DSLR. The EM-5 also outclasses the E-5 in image quality and there is now a good stable of excellent m4/3 glass for sale. If you are a JPG shooter, the EM-5 has an excellent JPG engine with Oly colors. That said, the K-5 still bests the EM-5 for IQ (RAW mode), but the differences are very small in practice. What the K-5 gets you is better high ISO performance, more headroom in the 14 bit RAW files, a real DSLR viewfinder and better autofocus tracking for moving subjects and finally, access to a world of legacy Pentax K mount glass.
If you move to micro 4/3 instead of Pentax, your legacy 4/3 Olympus glass can still be used, but with caveats. Using the adapter, yhe autofocus is painfully slow and sometimes inaccurate and the SWD lenses feel really unbalanced on m4/3 bodies and it negates the reason for getting into m4/3 which is to save on size and weight.
Ultimately, go and try out both cameras, see which one feels right. Either way, I think you would be happy with a K-5 or an OMD EM-5.
