jonoslack
Active member
Well, maybe not - but it certainly impresses me with it's even handedness and intelligence :clap::clap:
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
K5 versus the GH2
- Thread starter Amin
- Start date
m3photo
New member
OT Weather Sealing
Excuse me for jumping away from the subject for a moment. I've always been intrigued by Nikon's policy (?) of not confirming the extent of protection in their bodies against the elements. Is the D700 as safe from rain showers as, say the K-5? If so, what would their equivalent lens be to the Pentax WR 18-135?
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Re: OT Weather Sealing
I remember the brochure for the F6, where they showed photos of the camera covered with dust next to a photo of a scene with rain pouring down. But try to find out what lenses that you can drench it with, and you have to do the research yourself.
As far as i remember, some of the non-pro Nikkors have a rubber seal at the mount, but if that means that the rest of the lens is sealed, I don't know. There's only one way to find out I guess, and I'm not going to try
There is none. This is one of the strange things about Nikon. They don't say what lenses are weather resistant, but most of the pro grade lenses are. The pro lenses obviously don't have the reach of the 18-135.
I remember the brochure for the F6, where they showed photos of the camera covered with dust next to a photo of a scene with rain pouring down. But try to find out what lenses that you can drench it with, and you have to do the research yourself.
As far as i remember, some of the non-pro Nikkors have a rubber seal at the mount, but if that means that the rest of the lens is sealed, I don't know. There's only one way to find out I guess, and I'm not going to try
jonoslack
Active member
Re: OT Weather Sealing
The difference is that if it says it's weather sealed and water gets in, they should repair it free of charge.
Nikon lenses are probably sealed - but there's no guarantee.
Actually, I don't know how good pentax would be, but Olympus were excellent about fixing any kind of water in any of their kit.
Hi JorgenThere is none. This is one of the strange things about Nikon. They don't say what lenses are weather resistant, but most of the pro grade lenses are. The pro lenses obviously don't have the reach of the 18-135.
I remember the brochure for the F6, where they showed photos of the camera covered with dust next to a photo of a scene with rain pouring down. But try to find out what lenses that you can drench it with, and you have to do the research yourself.
As far as i remember, some of the non-pro Nikkors have a rubber seal at the mount, but if that means that the rest of the lens is sealed, I don't know. There's only one way to find out I guess, and I'm not going to try
The difference is that if it says it's weather sealed and water gets in, they should repair it free of charge.
Nikon lenses are probably sealed - but there's no guarantee.
Actually, I don't know how good pentax would be, but Olympus were excellent about fixing any kind of water in any of their kit.
A.Sattler
New member
Hi Jono,
Thank you for the reply.
I've read of other "undesirable characteristics" in Nikon files, but nothing of a yellow cast. So, I was curious.
Do you think it is a characteristic of the sensor or the processing? I also wonder, since they are using the same sensor in the D7000 as is in the K5, if some of the previous issues might be resolved and how much of a difference there is in terms of performance and image quality/feel between the two.
I've never really considered Nikon before and I'm just trying to get a feel for what they offer.
No free lunch is right! I've certainly come to that realization. Pentax seems to offer much of what I want. But the issues regarding lenses, QC, and software support(compared to Canon/Nikon) have caused me to hesitate.
It's interesting about the unconfirmed weather sealing. I've always heard that they were, but never bothered to verify it.
Thanks again Jono, and have a good day to everyone.
Adam
Thank you for the reply.
I've read of other "undesirable characteristics" in Nikon files, but nothing of a yellow cast. So, I was curious.
Do you think it is a characteristic of the sensor or the processing? I also wonder, since they are using the same sensor in the D7000 as is in the K5, if some of the previous issues might be resolved and how much of a difference there is in terms of performance and image quality/feel between the two.
I've never really considered Nikon before and I'm just trying to get a feel for what they offer.
No free lunch is right! I've certainly come to that realization. Pentax seems to offer much of what I want. But the issues regarding lenses, QC, and software support(compared to Canon/Nikon) have caused me to hesitate.
It's interesting about the unconfirmed weather sealing. I've always heard that they were, but never bothered to verify it.
Thanks again Jono, and have a good day to everyone.
Adam
jonoslack
Active member
Hi Adam
I don't think it's the sensor, as it seems to carry through from one generation to another.
I think it's a side effect of the fact that they maximise their colour for flattering skin tones . . . and the nasty evening light is an unfortunate side product, but this is only a guess. I haven't wrangled with it since the D700, but I found it impossible to deal with in PP.
But lot's of people have no issues.
all the best
JMaher
New member
Adam,
I shot Nikon cameras for many years and have seen (and hated) the same yellow cast that was mentioned. It was evident on a D2H, D40 and D700 from my personal experience. I have no idea why it is there but it is unmistakeable. Great cameras with very good support but all cameras have their plus and minuses. I borrowed a D7000 when I was thinking about the K5 and did not find it to suit my needs.
Jim
I shot Nikon cameras for many years and have seen (and hated) the same yellow cast that was mentioned. It was evident on a D2H, D40 and D700 from my personal experience. I have no idea why it is there but it is unmistakeable. Great cameras with very good support but all cameras have their plus and minuses. I borrowed a D7000 when I was thinking about the K5 and did not find it to suit my needs.
Jim
Even if there is no weather sealed lens comparable to the 18-135 I have to say that to me most Nikon lenses seem at least as solid as their Pentax counterparts.
The 24-70 for example I would trust muc more than a 16-50 Pentax. And while the Penax 50-135 is great the 70-200/2.8 feels at least as solid.
Overall I would rate weather sealing equal.
The 24-70 for example I would trust muc more than a 16-50 Pentax. And while the Penax 50-135 is great the 70-200/2.8 feels at least as solid.
Overall I would rate weather sealing equal.
Amin
Active member
I'll just chime in on the other side here and state that I was never troubled by a yellow cast when shooting with Nikon D5000 or D700. It may be my lack of observational skills, but I like to think it was related to my choice of RAW processors (Capture NX2 and Lightroom). I'm usually sensitive to yellow or green casts.
A.Sattler
New member
Hello everyone,
Thank you for the input. I'll be going this weekend to take a closer look at the D7000. I'm pretty curious to see what the files look like.
Jim,
Would you mind sharing what you didn't like about the D7000? Especially in relation to the K5? There are quite a few similarities between the two.
And finally, if you can find good copies, how DO the Pentax lenses stack up to other manufacturers?
Thanks again.
Adam
Thank you for the input. I'll be going this weekend to take a closer look at the D7000. I'm pretty curious to see what the files look like.
Jim,
Would you mind sharing what you didn't like about the D7000? Especially in relation to the K5? There are quite a few similarities between the two.
And finally, if you can find good copies, how DO the Pentax lenses stack up to other manufacturers?
Thanks again.
Adam
jonoslack
Active member
Hi Amin
Not the processor - I was using Capture NX2 Lightroom and Aperture, and it was universal - I only found it really troublesome when doing landscape in nice evening light, at which point it looked like yellow paint had been sploshed about. . . . . .but then I do quite a lot of landscape in nice evening light!
Generally I think it was kind to skin tones (which, I suspect is the reason for it). It was certainly a landscape issue though, and it was certainly there with the D700.
Of course, it could be mass hysteria, but I really don't think so!
Adam,
If I compare the 50-135 to the 70-200VRII -> both seem very good, however the Nikon to be slightly sharpner and more contrast/pop IMO.
The 16-50 I ad was not up to the Nikon 24-70/2.8 - I needed to stop down the 16-50 to get good sharpness, the 24-70 is fine even wideopen.
Comparing the 70/2.4 lim to the Nikon 105 they are both fine, while the Nikon gives you more room to play with shallow DOF.
Overall I would say the Pentax lim primes seem very good, with nice color (the da ones a little cooler than the fa ones), and nice smooth bokeh.
But then they are on the slow side compared to Nikon primes.
If you like small size, nice metal "retro" built and are not a "shallow DOF fan" the Pentax limited are great IMO (except maybe the 15 wich needs to be stopped down for sharp corners)
On the other side for the speed I find the Pentax lenses pretty expensive.
Nikon offers a much wider range of lenses.
Regarding the chance to aget a good zoom I have had better success with Nikon more consistent quality.
For me the K5 and lenses is about small size and "filmlike IQ"
JMaher
New member
Adam,
The 7000 is a very nice camera. However (in my opinion) it has too much of the feel of a consumer body rather than a body like the 700 or D3 where everything is laid out with all controls to hand instead of menus. It's the same reason I didn't like the D90 even though it produced very nice files for its day. The Pentax is more like picking up a D700 or my old D2H only in a smaller package.
Outside of the subjective feel, the files I took with it were good but not as good as those from a D700 and seemed to be lacking in dynamic range compared to the K5 files (even though they share the same sensor). The K5 files seemed to have a richer feel to them. Add to all that the water resistance of the K5 and the allure of the small primes.
All in all the D7000 is a great camera but the K5 felt better in hand. All very subjective.
Jim
The 7000 is a very nice camera. However (in my opinion) it has too much of the feel of a consumer body rather than a body like the 700 or D3 where everything is laid out with all controls to hand instead of menus. It's the same reason I didn't like the D90 even though it produced very nice files for its day. The Pentax is more like picking up a D700 or my old D2H only in a smaller package.
Outside of the subjective feel, the files I took with it were good but not as good as those from a D700 and seemed to be lacking in dynamic range compared to the K5 files (even though they share the same sensor). The K5 files seemed to have a richer feel to them. Add to all that the water resistance of the K5 and the allure of the small primes.
All in all the D7000 is a great camera but the K5 felt better in hand. All very subjective.
Jim
Maybe this will show why I am having trouble making my mind up ...
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=309781#post309781
Lee
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=309781#post309781
Lee
Lee....I can see why you are having trouble making up your mind.....but nobody said it HAS to be one or the other.
R
A.Sattler
New member
t_streng & Jim,
Thank you for the input. I was able to get some "hands on" time with the Nikon yesterday. Didn't get to shoot with it, will try to do that and a head to head comparison with the K5 in a week or so. At first impression the D7000 seems more comfortable in my hand than the K5 did and I think I like the simpler layout better.
The Nikkor primes didn't seem to be too big either. They were the GX series, I believe.
I don't think I'll be able to compare them to the Pentax primes though. The store here only has the 50 & 55mm.
Thanks again, and I hope everyone has a nice Easter.
Adam
Thank you for the input. I was able to get some "hands on" time with the Nikon yesterday. Didn't get to shoot with it, will try to do that and a head to head comparison with the K5 in a week or so. At first impression the D7000 seems more comfortable in my hand than the K5 did and I think I like the simpler layout better.
The Nikkor primes didn't seem to be too big either. They were the GX series, I believe.
I don't think I'll be able to compare them to the Pentax primes though. The store here only has the 50 & 55mm.
Thanks again, and I hope everyone has a nice Easter.
Adam
This thread was an interesting read from someone who owns neither the K-5 nor a micro-four-thirds camera... yet. I am considering the Panasonic GF1 and 20mm lens for only one reason -- size. The K-5 is miles ahead in terms of ergonomics, IQ, build quality, accessories, lenses etc. I don't think that should be much of a surprise given the form factors and how long Pentax has been ploughing this furrow.
The m43 advantage of portability is lost with their zooms, which are too slow for my purposes in any case. Unfortunately that leaves only the two pancakes with only average optics. For excellence we have the Nokton and the Macro-Elmarit... but then we are neck-and-neck with the size of a K-5 setup. The diminishing returns of reduced size is a rule that cannot be broken.
The m43 advantage of portability is lost with their zooms, which are too slow for my purposes in any case. Unfortunately that leaves only the two pancakes with only average optics. For excellence we have the Nokton and the Macro-Elmarit... but then we are neck-and-neck with the size of a K-5 setup. The diminishing returns of reduced size is a rule that cannot be broken.
Here's where I would disagree....the 20/1.7 is optically probably one of the finest lens in that focal length and form factor ever made. The Panasonic 7-14 is a world class ultra-wide.
I agree that the zooms are slow, but the Panasonic 14-45 and 45-200 are grossly underrated in their performance. That four lens kit weighs less that a single Canon zoom and fits in a shoulder bag.
I am saying this from the perspective of owning a K-5 (which I love) and a m4/3's system of bodies and lenses.
Everything has its place and I think there is a place in every photographers kit for small form factor cameras.
R
No, we don't disagree. It can be both "one of the finest lens in that focal length and form factor " and an average optic in the larger scheme of things. In fact the two go hand in hand, because it is impossible to make an excellent lens in that size and maximum aperture without charging maybe a grand. Instead Panasonic compromised on 3.3% distortion, 1.5px CA, significant vignetting and soft corners, betting on the automatic software correction to firm things up. But that by definition distorts the original optical image -- which is why the results lose a little "life".
Panasonic/Olympus are caught by the inherent limitations of m43. They have to push focal lengths smaller and apertures wider to make up for a smaller sensor. Physics is physics. The 20/1.7 is only equivalent to 40/3.4 on FF. Or, more appropriately for this comparison, on APS-C it works out to something slightly wider and slower than the FA 31 Limited... but look at how much that costs!
The zooms actually have significantly better IQ, since they are not trying to grab so much light.
We agree again! That's why I am looking at what is possible in m43. But if the lens isn't small and light there is no point -- and this rules out most of the system.
No doubt I will end up with the Vario 20/1.7 and live with the compromises. I would have preferred it to be an f/2 with more resolution. Likewise the Nokton is way too big. I would wish for something a stop slower and half the size.
But numbers sell and apparently the m43 vendors are playing that game.