iolair
No longer a newbie, moving up!
I've just changed from Canon to Pentax, and from what some people have said so far, this decision seems to upset some other Canon users quite a bit. There really does seem to be an element in the photography society that believes that only Canon or Nikon are worthwhile.
I was moderately invested in Canon compatible items - to the tune of two bodies (40D and 50D), two EF and two EF-S lenses, and a few accessories (flash triggers, batteries, CF cards). I've also got a number of other items (M42 lenses that I'd been using adapted, the rest of my lighting setup, filters) that would follow me to a new system.
I had the following issues with my current kit that meant I felt the need to change:
- very disappointing high ISO performance giving poor quality results on many indoor shots.
- slightly disappointing rendering of colours and dark details, even working from RAW files
- only single card slots; after a scare with a corrupted card shooting a wedding, I'd decided I wanted any future body to be able to write to two cards at once.
- lack of weatherproofing, meaning under extreme conditions I'd have to quit shooting
- three of my four Canon lenses were in need of an upgrade anyway (50mm f/1.8 has a busy, ugly bokeh. 10-22mm I'd barely used since buying a fisheye on my travel camera (a Pentax Q7) which is far more fun. 80-210mm was a cheapy that was not good enough quality for saleable shots). The extent of the lens drawbacks was such that I was hiring lenses as needed for weddings ... not too bad as I don't (yet) do many. (My fourth canon-mount lens, a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.0, I was very happy with).
The 7D mk ii looked like it would address three of my four body-related issues; it's weatherproofed, has dual card slots, and ISO 6400 (the limit of where I think I'd need) is pretty decent. However, it appeared no better than earlier models in terms of dynamic range and to an extent colours. It's also very pricey - partly because it's new, and partly because there's a premium for 10 fps shooting, lightning-fast autofocus and high-end video features that I simply don't need. The full-frame image quality and high ISO performance looked better, but the 5D mk iii is out of my price range, and the 6D lacks dual card slots. I'd also still need to change my two EF-S lenses.
I loved the look of the Sony A7, and it felt great to handle ... but *very* expensive lenses, and lack of dual card slots wrote it off. The battery life also sounds pretty dire.
Nikon in theory ticked all the boxes, though prices are high like Canon's (though I would have paid, if it had been the best option) - but, more significantly, I just found the button layout and menus pretty counter-intuitive. While it may just be that some relearning time is required, it felt like any change to settings is unnecessarily long-winded, and delayed the experience of getting on with making images.
Pentax however - great value, incredibly intuitive menus (for my tastes, anyway), good button layout, weather-sealed from mid-range up, dual card slots in the latest K-3, and the same great Sony sensors as found in Sony and Nikon's APS-C cameras. Autofocus is okay - not as good as the best that Nikon and especially Canon have to offer, but I'm not shooting action/sports, so more than adequate for my purposes.
I went into a local shop last weekend to handle a K-3 - however, they didn't have a demonstrator in, and I was disappointed with the feel of the K5-IIs. The switches felt too stiff, the camera didn't feel right in my hand, and somehow the plastic/finish of it just felt rather cheap. Fortunately when, this weekend just gone, I returned and tried a K-3, the experience was different; the camera fit in my hand perfectly, and its ergonomics feel light-years ahead of the K5-IIs and even much nicer than my familiar Canons.
So, I'm a new owner of a Pentax K-3, and my Canon kit is now sat on eBay. I got the kit lens - primarily so I have a weather-resistant option when needed, and it's cheap to buy in the kit. I've also ordered a Pentax-mount copy of the Sigma 17-70mm that I've been so happy with on my Canons. I'll add a couple more good lenses as my Canon stuff sells. I can't comment too much on the K-3's image quality yet, as I've only shot with the kit lens so far, but the body is an absolute joy to use.
I was moderately invested in Canon compatible items - to the tune of two bodies (40D and 50D), two EF and two EF-S lenses, and a few accessories (flash triggers, batteries, CF cards). I've also got a number of other items (M42 lenses that I'd been using adapted, the rest of my lighting setup, filters) that would follow me to a new system.
I had the following issues with my current kit that meant I felt the need to change:
- very disappointing high ISO performance giving poor quality results on many indoor shots.
- slightly disappointing rendering of colours and dark details, even working from RAW files
- only single card slots; after a scare with a corrupted card shooting a wedding, I'd decided I wanted any future body to be able to write to two cards at once.
- lack of weatherproofing, meaning under extreme conditions I'd have to quit shooting
- three of my four Canon lenses were in need of an upgrade anyway (50mm f/1.8 has a busy, ugly bokeh. 10-22mm I'd barely used since buying a fisheye on my travel camera (a Pentax Q7) which is far more fun. 80-210mm was a cheapy that was not good enough quality for saleable shots). The extent of the lens drawbacks was such that I was hiring lenses as needed for weddings ... not too bad as I don't (yet) do many. (My fourth canon-mount lens, a Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.0, I was very happy with).
The 7D mk ii looked like it would address three of my four body-related issues; it's weatherproofed, has dual card slots, and ISO 6400 (the limit of where I think I'd need) is pretty decent. However, it appeared no better than earlier models in terms of dynamic range and to an extent colours. It's also very pricey - partly because it's new, and partly because there's a premium for 10 fps shooting, lightning-fast autofocus and high-end video features that I simply don't need. The full-frame image quality and high ISO performance looked better, but the 5D mk iii is out of my price range, and the 6D lacks dual card slots. I'd also still need to change my two EF-S lenses.
I loved the look of the Sony A7, and it felt great to handle ... but *very* expensive lenses, and lack of dual card slots wrote it off. The battery life also sounds pretty dire.
Nikon in theory ticked all the boxes, though prices are high like Canon's (though I would have paid, if it had been the best option) - but, more significantly, I just found the button layout and menus pretty counter-intuitive. While it may just be that some relearning time is required, it felt like any change to settings is unnecessarily long-winded, and delayed the experience of getting on with making images.
Pentax however - great value, incredibly intuitive menus (for my tastes, anyway), good button layout, weather-sealed from mid-range up, dual card slots in the latest K-3, and the same great Sony sensors as found in Sony and Nikon's APS-C cameras. Autofocus is okay - not as good as the best that Nikon and especially Canon have to offer, but I'm not shooting action/sports, so more than adequate for my purposes.
I went into a local shop last weekend to handle a K-3 - however, they didn't have a demonstrator in, and I was disappointed with the feel of the K5-IIs. The switches felt too stiff, the camera didn't feel right in my hand, and somehow the plastic/finish of it just felt rather cheap. Fortunately when, this weekend just gone, I returned and tried a K-3, the experience was different; the camera fit in my hand perfectly, and its ergonomics feel light-years ahead of the K5-IIs and even much nicer than my familiar Canons.
So, I'm a new owner of a Pentax K-3, and my Canon kit is now sat on eBay. I got the kit lens - primarily so I have a weather-resistant option when needed, and it's cheap to buy in the kit. I've also ordered a Pentax-mount copy of the Sigma 17-70mm that I've been so happy with on my Canons. I'll add a couple more good lenses as my Canon stuff sells. I can't comment too much on the K-3's image quality yet, as I've only shot with the kit lens so far, but the body is an absolute joy to use.