Pentax K5II/S or D7100

JJ!

JJ!

Messages
5,822
Edit My Images
No
I was just about to buy a K5II when I received an email from WEX about the D7100.

Got me wondering if I should wait, as the feature set looks very good. Saying that, one of the main reasons I chose the K5 over the D7000 was because of how it felt in my hand.

Not being any sort of pro, what would make the D7100 a better choice?

Also - never considered the K5II s as no idea how the filter affects photography!
 
Just been reading about the D7100 and it looks very much the same as the D7000 apart from the higher megapixel count and a few more focus points. Saying that the K-5II is very much like the original apart from better af in low light and a couple of minor niggles sorted. I only upgraded to the II because SRS were offering an extra £100 px so I got a brand new camera with 2 year warranty for not much more than what my K-5 was worth.

The Nikon is definitely faster on the AF front and has a lot more focus points, the K-5II has inbuilt IS and more weather resistance (better build imo after handling both original cameras) and is quite a bit cheaper (actually I think Pentax are selling them self too cheap for the spec and quality of the body) . Lens wise the Pentax has some outstanding glass now but the Nikon has more choice. Pentax now has a 560mm f5.6 (costs a bloody fortune) so the long glass argument has more or less been put to bed. Nikon certainly has more accessories available but not sure how that 24mp sensor will perform, I would have thought Sony's new 20mp would have been a better choice.

Anyway, a camera is a very personal thing and people do tend to defend their choice to the death :cuckoo: ... I prefer my K-5/II over the D7000 (although I do moan about the AF speed quite a bit) but I'm very much in the minority.

K-5IIs is very slightly sharper than the II, much the same as the Sony D800 and D800E.. I just couldn't see enough difference to warrant the extra cash.
 
I think I will stick with the K5 II - I did test the AF speed in store and to me it was damn quick. I do a lot of equestion photography and borrowed my friends K5 a couple of times and it handled the movement with ease - this was just with the basic 50-200 WR lens too.

Just need to choose the II or II S but have no idea what the filter does/doesn't do! Guess i should read in to this before I purchase.
 
As I understand it the filter is there to cut down on Moiré (do a google for a detailed explanation) which it does at the expense of sharpness (bit like a filter on the front of a lens). As I said, personally I could see hardly any difference and what I could see was only really noticeable when on a 100%+ crop.

If you crop aggressively then I could perhaps see it may be worthwhile but otherwise not
(purely a personal opinion though, others claim to see much more of a difference on the same shots I have looked at).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top