Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

  1. #1
    Senior Member Peter Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    375
    Post Thanks / Like

    "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    You know me as a Leica M8 shooter. At the moment my "other" camera is a Panny G1, and occasionally an E-510. These cameras are really only at their best up to ISO 400, with 800 usable but significantly worse than the M8's ISO 640. I've been seriously thinking getting a more current DSLR for low light, telephoto and macro.

    I had my eye on the Pentax K5. But I have concerns about autofocus accuracy in tungsten light. And with a 31/1.8 lens, I'd lose 2/3 stop from my 'Lux ASPH, which would mean that with the K5's good ISO 3200 vs. the M8's 640 (really 800), I'd only gain 1+1/3 stops.

    I've heard similar, though less frequent complaints about the Nikon D7000's autofocus, and it would give me the same net gain of 1+1/3 stops with the Nikkor 35/1.8.

    I don't own any Nikkor or Pentax lenses, so that's not part of the equation. I have several Olympus OM lenses.

    I find myself "Lost in Specs" and thinking in circles. So I ask those of you who have faced a similar decision and have experience with the K5 and/or D7000: How did you come to your decision?

    Yes, I know that the Nikon D700 and Canon 5D would give me the high-ISO edge I'm looking for, and take relatively affordable 50/1.4 lenses. But both are bigger and heavier than I would want to carry around, and I probably wouldn't.

    I'm almost wondering if I should bag the whole idea, and stick with what I've got. Or pick up a used E-30, which has a much better viewfinder than the E-510.

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Klein View Post
    You know me as a Leica M8 shooter. At the moment my "other" camera is a Panny G1, and occasionally an E-510. These cameras are really only at their best up to ISO 400, with 800 usable but significantly worse than the M8's ISO 640. I've been seriously thinking getting a more current DSLR for low light, telephoto and macro.

    I had my eye on the Pentax K5. But I have concerns about autofocus accuracy in tungsten light. And with a 31/1.8 lens, I'd lose 2/3 stop from my 'Lux ASPH, which would mean that with the K5's good ISO 3200 vs. the M8's 640 (really 800), I'd only gain 1+1/3 stops.

    I've heard similar, though less frequent complaints about the Nikon D7000's autofocus, and it would give me the same net gain of 1+1/3 stops with the Nikkor 35/1.8.

    I don't own any Nikkor or Pentax lenses, so that's not part of the equation. I have several Olympus OM lenses.

    I find myself "Lost in Specs" and thinking in circles. So I ask those of you who have faced a similar decision and have experience with the K5 and/or D7000: How did you come to your decision?

    Yes, I know that the Nikon D700 and Canon 5D would give me the high-ISO edge I'm looking for, and take relatively affordable 50/1.4 lenses. But both are bigger and heavier than I would want to carry around, and I probably wouldn't.

    I'm almost wondering if I should bag the whole idea, and stick with what I've got. Or pick up a used E-30, which has a much better viewfinder than the E-510.

    Thoughts?
    Hi Peter
    Give up immediately
    You will go round in an interminable circle of 'not quite good enough' problems Just like I have. I didn't have problems with the AF on the K5, but there was little point in putting the lovely Pentax limiteds on if they have to compete with the Leica (which they don't) partly because they aren't as good, and partly because I could manual focus the Leica faster (and quieter) than the screw pentanes, and the zooms are either big or 'okay'.

    I think you'll fine the same problem with whatever you try (i.e. APS/c and Light lenses = mediocre quality). At least the Olympus lenses are pretty nice. If you're really finding the viewfinder in the E510 a problem then why not find a used E-30 as you say? If you aren't, in your position I think I'd get an E620 secondhand - lovely camera. Then wait and see what happens in the world of m4/3 with the advent of the new 'pro' lenses and improved EVFs - they really are getting quite good.

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    501
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Jono's right. The K5 is great with the limited's, but it ain't a Leica with Leitz lenses. Also he's correct about the zooms. I'm also with him on m4/3ds I've just picked up, new in the UK, a GF2 with 14mm and panny leather case for Ģ299. God I look retro with it
    I don't want to sound like I agree with everything Jono says, so I'll disagree about the focusing on the pentanes, not that I know, because I don't have a Leica and it's decades since I used one. But I can't agree with everything, out of principle you'll understand
    David

  4. #4
    Workshop Member glenerrolrd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Jupiter FL/Atlanta GA
    Posts
    2,279
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    This is a problem many Leica M users have fought for quite some time. Jono s summary mirrors my experience. One of the biggest frustrations with the Leica M is its ability to work the edges of available light without sacrificing its extraordinary IQ . While you can certainly see major improvements in managing noise with the newest Raw developers ...you still give up DR and color saturation. Using 1250 and exposing for the shadows is using 640 ..whats the point? So maybe a DSLR could help ?

    The best results I could come up with were with the Nikon D7000 and the zeiss ZF glass. Take each area where a DSLR could outperform a Leica M . Flash ....the D7000 was near perfect for event ,party photography even with a 16-85 nikkor . Fill flash using the pop up and small diffuser just nails the exposure up to 12-15 Ft . Sports ...16mps is enough and with a 70-200/2.8 VR2 you have a 100-300 equivalent zoom ..add a grip and you have a very good setup . This is not a small package unless you compare it to a D3S . High ISO ...none of the APS C sensors match the D3S but getting excellent results at 1600 and decent results at 3200 is the 1 1/2 EV improvement you are seeking.

    I used the Zeiss 35/2 and the 85/1.4 lenses on the D7000 and I thought that was a sweet combination. I also have the 28/2 which I didn t test but might be better depending on your preferences for FOV. The Nikkor 35/1.8 is an excellent lens but not even close to the 35/2 zeiss . The 24/35/50/85 1.4 G primes are all better than we give them credit for but they are designed for a D3s/x body ...too big for the d7000 .

    The issues as Jono outlined really come into play when you start looking thru groups of your images .. then IQ starts to influence your selects . The shots with the 35/1.8 and the D7000 don t hold up next to the M8/M9 and a summicron. The more I try to create the “its just as good as my Leica look” the more futile it becomes.

    But the Zeiss glass is really excellent if you can give up the AF .

  5. #5
    Senior Member Per Ofverbeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Peter
    Give up immediately
    You will go round in an interminable circle of 'not quite good enough' problems.....
    Indeed! After getting my M9, I just donīt want to use my Nikon gear, nor the Panasonic G1 (not even with adapted Leica glass). The results just arenīt up to Leica IQ, and they just leave me regretting I didnīt use the Leica after all....

    So, Iīm just starting to sell off all my non-Leica gear. There will be a few situations that an AF dSLR might have handled better, but I canīt schlep all that weight around just for that.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Czech Republic and Austria
    Posts
    305
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    In my experience, the only combination (outside of MF) that equals the IQ of the M9 and Leica lenses is a high-end Canon body (say 5dMkII or 1DMkIV) with Leica R lenses used via adapters. You lose portability but gain access to longer lenses (plus some great Canon AF glass). When I say "equals" I mean it - for instance the second version of the Elmarit-R 19mm becomes a really fantastic 24mm equivalent lens on the 1D MkIV body - it really, really is good.... But in the end, these combinations are significantly bigger and heavier than the M9.

  7. #7
    Senior Member dude163's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Brunswick , Canada
    Posts
    1,111
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    What you should do is grab a KX , cheap and usable ISO 6400 ( it goes to 12800)

    here is a shot in the dark at 6400 with a Super MC Takumar 50/1.4 , I know its not Leica quality , but it came out quite nice.

    As for focusing, I find my Canon L series lens I had was fantastic, everything else not so much


  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    It is interesting how important high ISO seems for some people and then for others (including me) not really an issue.
    Maybe because I like shallow DOF for many subjects so shooting wide open is not an issue for me.
    Using the M9 I try to not use ISO 640 or max.1000 whenever I use it, and if you have a fast lens in the 28-50mm range I believe you are fine with 640 ISO for many subjects.
    Even with the S2 where lenses max. aparture is 2.5 I feel not too too limited.

    The Leica M lenses have the big big advantage that they are allready very good wide open.

    There are some subjects where I see one needs the high ISO performance of a D3s (like indoor sports in dim light maybe or also for long glass) but how often do you really need it?
    In theory I have the D700 for high ISO and fast actio, in real life I use the M9 and S2 90% or more.

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidL View Post
    I don't want to sound like I agree with everything Jono says, so I'll disagree about the focusing on the pentanes, not that I know, because I don't have a Leica and it's decades since I used one. But I can't agree with everything, out of principle you'll understand
    David
    You shouldn't agree with anything that someone who can't spell says!
    pentanes indeed!

    Just this guy you know

  10. #10
    Senior Member Peter Klein's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    375
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Jono: Pentaquixotes?

    Seriously, thanks to everyone for your insights. I just had an interesting related experience. A couple of weeks ago, I shot an evening wedding reception with my M8 and 35/1.4 ASPH v.1. I was the "friend of the family" who was asked to bring my camera. They also hired a pro who shot with a D700 and 24-70/2.8 Sigma zoom.

    Today I saw the pro's pictures. My M8 was not at as much of a disadvantage as I thought. In fact, in many respects I prefer the M8 rendering. A zoom is nice at an event, and a max aperture of f/2.8 gives more DOF. But the Leica just has more detail, and since I'm reasonably good at shooting at 1/15 and 1/30, I did fine. The pro preferred not to go above ISO 3200. So her f/2.8 at 3200 was really even, shutter-speed wise, with my f/1.4 at ISO 640 (really 800).

    The only thing I really envied was her ability to use subtle fill flash in broad daylight Which I could do, but the flash I have that could do it is so big and heavy that it's ridiculous to use on a Leica.

    All this was quite an eye-opener, as I had expected the pro's D700 pictures to blow mine out of the water. Perhaps if she'd been using f/1.4 prime lenses she would have had more of an advantage?

    Anyway, if the D700 didn't blow the M8 out of the water, I suspect a K5 or D7000 wouldn't either. There are valid reasons to use any of those wunderbricks, but they are not quite the low-light panaceae(*) I thought they might be.

    --Peter

    *I assume that's the plural of "panacea." Jono can correct me if I'm "misteaken."

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Peter-isnt it nice to find out that one has allready all one needs?

    The other thing is that -IMO- one can also influence some things in a direction that one makes the things work (for example if you shoot with shallow DOF you can try to position yourself in relation to a group in a way that you might not need so much DOF, or if you shoot a portait the same idea), and maybe it is even ok to know that there are some few occasions where one has to accept a compromise but therefore for many occasions has some advantages.

    (However I am better i ntalking about this than doing it and therefore still keep much to much equipment for all kind of eventual situations...but I am working on it)

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Klein View Post
    Jono: Pentaquixotes?

    Anyway, if the D700 didn't blow the M8 out of the water, I suspect a K5 or D7000 wouldn't either. There are valid reasons to use any of those wunderbricks, but they are not quite the low-light panaceae(*) I thought they might be.

    --Peter

    *I assume that's the plural of "panacea." Jono can correct me if I'm "misteaken."
    I wouldn't dream of correcting anyone. Glass houses!
    When I do weddings I use both, but it's always the M9 shots which I prefer. However, safety lies in a dSLR with a flash!

    Just this guy you know

  13. #13
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,868
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Klein View Post
    Jono: Pentaquixotes?

    Seriously, thanks to everyone for your insights. I just had an interesting related experience. A couple of weeks ago, I shot an evening wedding reception with my M8 and 35/1.4 ASPH v.1. I was the "friend of the family" who was asked to bring my camera. They also hired a pro who shot with a D700 and 24-70/2.8 Sigma zoom.

    Today I saw the pro's pictures. My M8 was not at as much of a disadvantage as I thought. In fact, in many respects I prefer the M8 rendering. A zoom is nice at an event, and a max aperture of f/2.8 gives more DOF. But the Leica just has more detail, and since I'm reasonably good at shooting at 1/15 and 1/30, I did fine. The pro preferred not to go above ISO 3200. So her f/2.8 at 3200 was really even, shutter-speed wise, with my f/1.4 at ISO 640 (really 800).

    The only thing I really envied was her ability to use subtle fill flash in broad daylight Which I could do, but the flash I have that could do it is so big and heavy that it's ridiculous to use on a Leica.

    All this was quite an eye-opener, as I had expected the pro's D700 pictures to blow mine out of the water. Perhaps if she'd been using f/1.4 prime lenses she would have had more of an advantage?

    Anyway, if the D700 didn't blow the M8 out of the water, I suspect a K5 or D7000 wouldn't either. There are valid reasons to use any of those wunderbricks, but they are not quite the low-light panaceae(*) I thought they might be.

    --Peter

    *I assume that's the plural of "panacea." Jono can correct me if I'm "misteaken."
    Peter,

    it is all about shooting styles. The M8 (or M9) force you to do more thinking upfront, than any of the DSLRs with a bright standard zoom. If you are really used to a M camera, then all this thinking happens actually in the back of your head without noticing it happens. At least this is the case when I take a M camera.

    WRT standard zooms on DSLRs - I had (have) all of them from all different brands - my findings? I rarely got satisfying results from them, not because of IQ, this is most times pretty ok, but WRT creative images. Actually I am considering not again to buy a standard zoom for my next DSLR (whatever that might be). On my D700 I preferred instead to use the 2.8/70-200 as it gave me much more freedom for composition. This lens combined with a fast WA prime (1.4/24 or 1.4/35) would really do most of the tasks in my shoots.

    Coming back to Leica: I also noticed again and again that IQ was far superior to any DSLR lenses (even the Pro ones) and in most cases I also had not even the latest Leica M lens (e.g. 1.4/35 ASPH, or 1.4/75, or 1.0/50). But WRT IQ they all in general blow away the outcome of the most sophisticated DSLR and pro lens combination - at least IMHO.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Uppsala, Sweden
    Posts
    187
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    I have a similar situation. The M8 is my preferred camera to use, but sometimes I need the flexibility of a DSLR (AF/high ISO), as well as some special uses (tilt/shift, macro and longish lenses) that the M8 doesn't do very well. So I have a D700 with Nikkor 24 PC-E and a Sigma 50/1.4 for low-light (which is really nice!). Sometimes I need zoom and some weather sealing, so a 24-120/4 VR is useful, even if IQ isn't optimal (and the lens is heavy).

    I recently converted a Leica 35-70/4 to Nikon F and really like it (first time I like a zoom lens!), so I have sent a Leica 80-200/4 for conversion as well. I also converted a Zuiko 24/2.8 for low light use, since it is fairly flare proof (which the Nikkor 24 isn't). I sometimes shoot company kick-off events, including the following all-night party, and here the D700 with Sigma 50/1.4 (and Zuiko 24/2.8) really shines. It handles most lighting situations very well and the high ISO capabilities are astonishing with a 1.4 lens.

    On a side note I just got a tilt-adapter for my old Hasselblad S-Planar 120/5.6 T* for macro work on the Nikon D700. Haven't had time to test it properly yet, though. I also converted a Summicron-R 90/2 to Nikon. The Leica R lenses produce very nice files with the D700.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Czech Republic and Austria
    Posts
    305
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    The Leica R lenses produce very nice files with any camera body Can't someone convert a Canon 5DMkII body to a Leica-R bayonet, with aperture coupling / ROM chip decoding and a nice split image focusing screen? I'd place an order in a heartbeat...(ok, dream on.. instead we'll get yet another APS-C body with ridiculous megapixel count and inferior lenses...).

  16. #16
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: "Other camera": D7000, K5, ???

    Quote Originally Posted by baudolino View Post
    (ok, dream on.. instead we'll get yet another APS-C body with ridiculous megapixel count and inferior lenses...).


    I don't believe there's a problem with the megapixel count . . . but I'm right with you over the inferior lenses (sigh)

    Just this guy you know

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •