Pentax K10 or Canon 5D?

[jzzmusician]

Greetings,

This is my first post on this board after having stumbled across it the other day.  I have read lots and lots of posts and have decided that compared to the other boards I have visited, this one projects a voice of reason.

I need your help.

20 years ago I shot only medium format.  I had both Hasselblad and a Mamiya 6.  I loved both cameras.  Life happened and it has only been the past year that the bug has hit me again.  Actually, I've got it pretty bad.  I bought a point and shoot digital two years ago and June of last year bought one of the new Sony Alphas with two lenses.  I have not really been all that impressed with the image quality of the Alpha.  I'm the first to admit that a large part is probably me.  Being new to digital, I've found that a lot of what I did when shooting film doesn't apply.  And the digital darkroom, that's a whole new ball game.

I'm more of a purist photographer than a manipulative one, and of all the stuff I owned years ago, the Mamiya was my favorite.  I shot a ton of weddings with the 'blad, lots of portraits, but the Mamiya was with me each and every day.

Today I borrowed a friends Canon 1d Mark2n.  I loved the viewfinder and the focusing speed, and my test shots showed a quality and crispness I haven't been able to find with the Sony.  Boy, that thing is big.  But the quality is certainly there and I now more fully understand why Canon people are so passionate about their gear.  Happily for me, I don't need or want one of the big Canons.  They're just too big.

I will be shooting portraits, some landscapes, (although I have to admit that seeing so many wonderful landscape photos on this board makes me want to try more.  Some are so beautiful it hurts) and just a wee bit of close up work.  Ideally, I'd like a camera I can pack around in a small bag with three or four lenses.  I'd like a very wide, maybe a 15-18 (assuming full frame) a 35, maybe an 80 or 85, and a 135-150.  I am more interested in quality than convienience.  If a zoom has the quality, I'm okay with that.  If not, well, then I'm going to stick with primes.

I've read a lot about the Canon 5D and the Pentax K10.  I know the Pentax body doesn't quite compare with the 5D, but my understanding is that the lenses a wonderful.  

I like to do my own prints and rarely print larger than 13x19.

The Canon is obviously more expensive and of course their are rumors about an upgraded 5D.  The same is true with the Pentax.  If I bought the Canon now, I wouldn't be able to afford to sell it and get a new one, even if it is the next best thing.  The Pentax being so much cheaper would be much easier to do.  

I've gone on long enough.  Any ideas?

Thank you in advance, very much.

bob
aka jzzmusician

*edited for spelling

[tsjanik]

Bob:

I don't think anyone would suggest that the Pentax can compete with the 5D in overall image quality and Canon has considerably better lens offerings except when you want primes (the forthcoming DA* zooms notwithstanding); but, if you like primes, Pentax has better offerings.  If it were my choice (and I am an amateur), I'd go with lenses I want and  could use for years rather than basing a choice on a  digital body which is likely to be a short term purchase.

Good luck,

Tom

[John Camp]

Michael has reviews of both cameras on this forum; look at the first page under "product reviews."

A Pentax and a 5D are different cameras. The 5D's overall image quality may be a bit better, but not much; and the Pentax has some great stuff that the 5D does not, like weather-proofing. But the main advantage of the Pentax is that it's quite small, unobtrusive and handy, especially with the prime pancake lenses. I have the 21, 43 and 70, and the 70mm lens without the shade is about an inch and a half long; the others are smaller.   It has in-body image stabilization so it works with all lenses; I will say that the auto-focus seems notably slower than either Nikon's or Canon's.

On the other hand, if your nickname, jzzmusician, has anything to it, you should be aware that the Pentax only goes to ISO 1600, and there have been some weird striping problems in low light. The 5D, on the other hand, is one of the best low-light cameras in existence.

JC

[John Sheehy]

On the other hand, if your nickname, jzzmusician, has anything to it, you should be aware that the Pentax only goes to ISO 1600, and there have been some weird striping problems in low light.

In the production models?  I thought that this was mainly a pre-production problem.  What I have heard is tha the K10D has lower read noise at ISO 100 than any other DSLR, but it scales proportionately to ISO, so is (read-)noisier than Canons by the time it gets to ISO 400.

The 5D, on the other hand, is one of the best low-light cameras in existence.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=105779\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

That should be true if you use the whole image; IOW, you have the lens you need to fill the frame with your composition.  If you are shooting without enough reach and will need to crop, the 30D may do a better job with the same lens, as the crop may contain more pixels and both cameras have about the same noise at the pixel level.

[John Camp]

In the production models?  I thought that this was mainly a pre-production problem.  What I have heard is tha the K10D has lower read noise at ISO 100 than any other DSLR, but it scales proportionately to ISO, so is (read-)noisier than Canons by the time it gets to ISO 400.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=105797\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There's a long thread on this at Digital Photography Review with people posting samples of the odd striping effect at higher ISOs (I've never seen anythign quite like it, although I've been through about four striping controversies with different digital cameras that I've owned.) I haven't tried to look at it myself; maybe I will tonight. Although the striping effect exists, it's hard to tell if it's one of those things that a few noise fanatics promote for their own reasons, and that you really have to push hard to get, or if it's a real-world problem.

JC

[Christopher]

5D .

[SnapsMcfadden]

In the production models?  I thought that this was mainly a pre-production problem.  What I have heard is tha the K10D has lower read noise at ISO 100 than any other DSLR, but it scales proportionately to ISO, so is (read-)noisier than Canons by the time it gets to ISO 400.
That should be true if you use the whole image; IOW, you have the lens you need to fill the frame with your composition.  If you are shooting without enough reach and will need to crop, the 30D may do a better job with the same lens, as the crop may contain more pixels and both cameras have about the same noise at the pixel level.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=105797\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I just got a K10D about a month ago, awesome camera, the striping thing was apparently fixed with the Firmware update that you download from Pentax and load onto your SD card.  I've never had a problem with it yet, except for a dust thing right now.  Plus with the shake reduction, you can squeeze an extra stop or two of light in and still get some sweet low light, no flash shots.

[John Sheehy]

Although the striping effect exists, it's hard to tell if it's one of those things that a few noise fanatics promote for their own reasons, and that you really have to push hard to get, or if it's a real-world problem.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=105882\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The pre-production sample that I saw had bold colored dashes several pixels long that ran staggered through the image at an angle.