Moving away from A mount, thoughts and reasons.

[bfitzgerald]

As most know I've contemplated buying a non Sony DSLR for some time. Recently I made a choice that I was not going to (at least for the foreseeable future) continue building an A mount system. This isn't going to be short so I'll add it bit by bit. And as you have come to expect I won't be pulling any punches.

If I'm honest it was the SLT products that made my mind up and fairly quickly (as you might have worked out I'm not one to make quick choices) Not that I had a problem with SLT as a choice for those who want it. Rather the delayed A560 signalled to me that Sony are not as interested in traditional DSLR's at least in this price range. The A77 SLT talk also suggested that would not be an OVF model. In short the direction from Sony appeared at odds with what I want (OVF)

Prior to this I was becoming increasingly frustrated at some of Sony's attempt's in both entry and so called mid level bodies. My main grumbles were:

1: Downgrading the entry level OVF models..they're not even as good as the 2008 range (yeah I like bang per buck!)
2: To me a direct A100/5d replacement was not obvious in the Alpha line-up
3: Sony seemed to be deliberately crippling models more than I found acceptable. This was somewhat reversed with the more recent A580, however it did not address enough of my concerns for me to get this model.

There were also a number of other directions Sony were taking that I didn't like a lot either. The integration of SAM motors in some decent enough optics wise lenses, coupled with rather junky build quality (my own view) not the best move. In short with the noise of SAM it was IMO a complete waste of time for the end user.

Reduced functionality on lower end bodies using the higher end flashgun (ratio wireless) also ran against the grain.

Ergonomics were being played around with and in some cases for the worse (A550 didn't impress here)

Lack of support for previous models via firmware (easy stuff like lens release lock!) said to me that Sony really don't consider the needs of their users that much.

Personally I have felt for some time that the Alpha range was too geared to new users who might like xyz at the expense of what I call more traditional photographic features/requirements. The lack of any A700 update appearing (whilst I might well have not been in the market for it) also shakes the confidence a bit.

On the plus side I think the lens range is mostly decent enough for many users. As is the availability of some decent s/h Minolta lenses.

On balance and overall I would honestly say I was finding a lot less to like about Alpha than to like. When that situation arises it's obvious you have to start looking for something else. In part 2 I'll talk about how I eliminated makers from that choice.

[bfitzgerald]

Moving on to what I was looking for the following factors were important to me. I'll happily admit I am fussy and overly stubborn..but hey that's just me

1: Bang per buck. I want my pound of flesh for a good price.
2: After the A200 I would not even entertain a model that does not have MLU
3: My budget would have been around £600 ish with a bit of play if needed
4: I'm looking for the "least obviously crippled offering" from another maker.
5: I use wireless flash a lot, if it's not got wireless via onboard I'm not interested!

Of course I know that you get less when you pay less, but the playing field is not level and there are quite a few variations from other makers which might suit my needs better than others.

I'll go through why I ruled out the following offerings/makers.

Nikon:
I get on fairly well with Nikon with the models I have used before. I gave serious consideration to a D90 which I tried out and liked quite a lot (in the hand it was good and it's decently featured too) Anything below the D90 does not appeal..too stripped down and lacking the stuff I'm looking for (see list above) That instantly killed off the D3100 and D5000. D300 is too expensive for me so it was the D90 or nothing.

Pondering about the D90 the D7000 news came along. I'll be honest if I were in the market for spending that outlay I'd have given that a shot. What bothered me was not that the D90 is not decent..it's a bit old in some ways though still fairly capable. If the D7000 was the new D90, then that meant the D5000 will get a work over and be about in my future price range..and not really meet my needs (I'm betting here on the new model being a lot more D5000 than D90) Other issues such as in body motors lower end and metering restrictions for older lenses etc also concerned me (to a point)

I still think Nikon are appealing, but only if you're willing to outlay enough cash to get what you want. If you're bargain hunting you'll get decent enough models but nothing mind blowing. Hence Nikon got the chop off my list.

Canon:
Never been into Canon a lot but you cannot ignore them. I looked at priced on 50d's and they were pretty good. As for the 550d I think it's decent enough but overpriced for what you get, 500d better price but again some stuff won't go away wireless flash via onboard not there and the grips are not great. I'm also not blown away with Canon colours, some love them I'm rather less enthusiastic about them. 50d was about the only serious consideration I gave..in the end I just had to admit I never was a Canon user, and likely never really will be. I just don't warm much to their offerings (not saying they are bad, just not for me) The fact most people I know shoot Canon was actually a put off, not one to follow others nice to take a different path at times (might sound dumb I'm being frank though) So that was Canon out of it..

Olympus:
I used to be an Olympus shooter a long time ago. Always respected the OM range and they made some very nice lenses. Ergo wise always been a bit of an odd ball at times (I've a very odd handling bridge from 1991, nice but odd!) Digital wise I felt 4/3 was a serious mistake to make and that it would not last the distance. I think the future is too open to debate for their DSLR models. I didn't give any serious consideration to Olympus for a DSLR (4/3 is not for me)

Sony:
The only model I gave any consideration to was the A580. There were some decent enough deals on A450/550 models around but as I'd handled the A550 before I knew I didn't like it a whole lot handling wise and it was too basic and cut down over the previous A100/5d models. The A580 appealed in respect of some issues being address..MLU, DOF preview, Lens release lock etc. Unfortunately whilst this dealt with many of the major grumbles of the prior models..a few grrrr things are left. Shooting low light a lot I really don't want to have to deal with not seeing the ISO in the VF, and if it's not even there pressing the ISO button I'm just going to get annoyed! (yes it really is annoying at times) Also Sony seemed to think NEX users should get DMF and not Alpha ones (I like DMF quite a lot), AEL spot toggle..another minor but useful feature that didn't return. I'd previously said if Sony can't make a 2010 model that does everything a 2005 one did I wouldn't buy one. As they fell a bit short here I had to pass (yup stubborn out of principle!) Again not saying it's bad or not a good model..I just don't understand how a company cannot do some very simple stuff that is actually very useful (ISO is a critical part of exposure with digital)

[bfitzgerald]

Ok onto Pentax.
A few years ago I didn't pay a lot of attention to them. They had a decent K20d but not much below that to appeal to me. Things seemed a bit up in the air and Hoya appeared to be treading water a bit and not pushing things a lot. About 12 month ago they seemed to be moving along much better.

Regarding my "top needs" list Pentax does meet that and manages to even with their lower offerings. I would have to accept that with most of their lenses being APS-C based I'd have to keep some Minolta stuff to satisfy my film needs (which are occasional but still important) The lack of a FF body does not concern much at the moment (out of my price range and I suspect APS-C might be enough for me)

I looked at the K-r, K-7 and K-x. Being a low light shooter I had to let the idea of the K-7 go..appealing all round decent prices but the Samsung sensor it easily beaten with the newer Sony CMOS ones. So I scrubbed that off.

K-r was just out and a bit unknown bar it addressed some points that the K-x did not..seemed like a decent upgrade to the K-x if not spectacular. I tend not to go for "just out" models for a few reasons, price and unknown issues etc. So it was time to put the K-r on hold (and tag it as a "will do next year purchase) I looked at the K-x and it met 90% of my needs at a price that was very good. I was aware of some issues, mirror slap problems etc..so I managed to get a decent deal on the K-x from a Pentax pro dealer with a 2 year warranty (any slap problems and I'd be covered)

My concerns with Pentax were a smaller lens range (some nice offerings but limited choices for affordable primes etc) However once I accepted that I'd be unlikely to buy many of the limited lenses (I can think of one I want) I just factored in third party offerings and asked myself would that meet my needs? I'm not into longer focal lengths so I'm looking for a few primes and a bit of speed. That was fairly easy to cover. Some of the Pentax lenses are poorly priced (the 50mm f1.4 is frankly absurd UK wise right now) With tamron and sigma I think I can make enough of a system at a reasonable outlay to meet my needs.

Not only was the K-x a good deal, but it had most of what I was looking for. MLU, DOF preview, lots of customisation, decent jpeg engine, wireless flash etc. Hard to really say no. I'll talk about next what I like about that model and what I don't..

[bfitzgerald]

Onto the K-x directly and using that my thoughts are as follows.

The body is a bit smaller than the 5d and A200 so that takes a bit of getting used to. Though I have larger hands I find it pretty comfortable helped by a decent depth on the grip. I'm ok with smaller bodies (60 is smaller than my digital bodies) and I'm ok up to a film 7 size..above that and it falls into the "a bit big" for me. I've used a few big Canon's and I can say I wouldn't be that interested in them size wise and weight won't suit my style as well.

Layout and design are different to what I'm used to but fairly easy to pick it up. I've previously stated I didn't like Sony moving the on/off switch to the shutter..well the problem with that on the A550 is well known..the front dial is too close to it. On the K-x it's a rear dial only so the problem will never arise. The AEL button is maybe placed a bit far to the right hand side..it's ok where it is but could be better placed. The 4 buttons surrounding the centre on the back panel are a bit on the small side..but work fine I've not had any accidental presses. I prefer the AF to work directly off of the pad as in the 5d/A200..with the K-x to change AF point you press the central button and select it after that. It's ok but with the lack of AF illumination in the VF you'll be less likely to move off of the central point (yes it's an oversight and compromise, though not a deal breaker) You can pull back a bit from the VF and see on the back LCD what AF point you are on..obviously it's not as good as having the points lit in the VF.

Menus wise pressing the info brings up a nice batch of options you can quickly change. It's not as good as a real quick nav, but it beats a big menu dive as on some other makers/bodies. You can use the rear dial to change settings quickly without having to go into a separate menu for each.

The customisation in the camera is pretty extensive and has a lot of stuff that is just not on any A mount body at whatever price. Some items might be less useful..others are pretty handy. For me being able to set the Auto ISO limit (to whatever I want top end) is very good and something that annoyed me on the 5d/A200 not having any choice for that. The A200 topped out an ISO 400 for Auto ISO..which is ridiculous for a DSLR, 5d not as bad with ISO 800 but both needed IMO a user choice.

ISO being displayed in the VF permanently is also great...it should eliminate any mistakes I've made before shooting at inappropriate ISO settings.

Other nice bits are being able to set what settings are remembered (A200 suffered from not having a sticky memory esp flash exp comp) Being able to tune the LCD monitor, full control over jpeg NR including an "off" (well not off entirely but low NR that's for sure), there are extensive settings for image parameters and whilst some of the filters are a bit gimmicky (toy camera, fish eye etc) some are actually quite good (esp colour filters from b&w) Whilst the K-x does not have as much as higher end bodies menus wise, you get most of what the top end Pentax ones do. It does not feel like they deliberately cut things down. Very much a camera that rewards experimentation for new and more experienced users it would be easy to recommend it based on just those things.

In camera processing can be useful (raw development, and some editing) The highlight priority is also decent as well as 3 settings for shadows on jpegs, similar to DRO..unfortunately the DRO on the A200 was too basic and had very little effect on images. The K-x has a much more obvious difference and DRO doesn't help highlights..you can have some control on both here. I found the 5d better than the A200 in this regard though you were limited to a fixed ISO for both settings. You can't use ISO 100 on the k-x for highlight priority though (obviously native sensor starts at ISO 200)

I'll continue in the next part

[bfitzgerald]

Last part from me (I don't mind any comments!)
AF performance is snappy and compared to both the 5d and A200 it's notably better even in low light it's still fairly fast. It would be fair to say the 5d was never as good as it should have been AF wise (def compared to my film bodies it simply was not as good by some margin) The A200 added some more speed but struggles quite a bit in low light (maybe even more than the 5d) and accuracy was questionable at times. Better but not as good as it might have been. The K-x feels fast here and no complaints (so far)

Buffer size isn't big and it's really only giving you around the same as the 5d was but for 12mp instead of 6mp. I didn't get drawn to it on fps as it's not high on my list of needs, but it's def ok for short bursts in jpeg with a decent ish speed card likely satisfactory for the odd action shot.

VF size not much in it between the 5d/A200 and the K-x not very noticeable but you would notice the difference for 0.80x mag viewfinders and under. Never hurts to have a better VF in this class even if it's only by a small margin. Build wise it's better than the A200 more solid feeling but does not quite match the km5d in that area.

Metering tends to be a bit cautious as per usual Pentax probably a bit better than overexposure. You can adjust exp comp in half or third stop increments which can be useful. You also have a much bigger bracketing range on the K-x making the 0.7 =/- of many alphas seem pretty poor.

There are some other useful bits not found on Alphas such as trap in focus, sensitivity priority exposure mode and a ton of customisation menus covering quite a lot and probably more than most would ever need. The jpeg output from the Pentax absolutely tears the A200 apart at the seams (the A200 is a raw shooters camera IMO too much NR on jpegs ISO 400 and up) The 5d was not as bad in this regard but didn't offer any control over NR for jpegs.

Now onto some cons. There appears to be some "fiddling" with raw files at ISO 3200 and above. Looks mostly like colour noise being squashed and not the same as the mega NR the A700 was doing. But I am against any messing about with raw.

The green button is great (a custom button is very useful) and you can set it to what you want from a list. However you cannot use DOF preview and P shift at the same time. Pentax would be better off just putting a button in for DOF preview or allowing P shift without assigning it to the green button. However they do have hyper program (which allows you to move from P to A or S mode instantly) and hyper manual which at the press of a button gives you a metered exposure for M mode.

There is no lens release on/off..you can fire the shutter with nothing mounted at all

Lack of wired remote is another con though you can ebay a cheapo wireless one you won't have as much control.

No problems with AA batteries I have lots of them and power wise it would appear a bit better than the 5d for normal shooting and maybe not far from the A200 (depending on maker used). Using video or live view will drain them quicker of course.

So overall there isn't much to complain about really. My honest view is that it a natural progression from what the 5d was (or the potential it had) albeit in another mount. Had Sony had something along the lines of the K-x (overall spec and features/customisation etc) I think it would be an extremely popular model. Alas as they don't I think it's a good move for A mount users wanting a more photographer greared experience, without any obvious crippling of features (or not much) at a good price. Gets a solid thumbs up overall..no doubt the K-r addresses some of the weaker points meaning you have another body in the range to move up to (unlike Alpha where it's A560/A580 then a big jump to FF)

I def get a more Minolta feeling from the K-x (even though it's a Pentax) than I ever did holding and using a Sony body (the ones I tried)

[bakubo]

How is the AF accuracy at wide angle?

My KM 7D was horrible. At focal lengths from about 35mm on down it would usually focus at infinity (or past infinity if the lens allowed) even if the subject was 6 feet away. The images were completely OOF. The A100 often does the same thing, but occasionally gets it right. The A700 is a bit better than the A100, but still mostly gets the focus wrong. I have tried this with over half a dozen lenses: Sony, Minolta, Sigma, Tamron, and Tokina. Even the A700 and A100 get the focus wrong so often though that I never AF at wide angles with them. The only reliable way to get AF right with them is to zoom in a bit, AF, then zoom back to the wide angle focal length I want. Doesn't work when the subject is moving though or when you need to shoot very quickly. The only wide angle lens that all 3 cameras could AF is my 20 year old Sigma 24mm f2.8. I know the A700 has an f2.8 AF sensor, but, I think, the 7D and A100 do not. By the way, I always use the center AF sensor.

My Canon 300D and 30D didn't have problems with wide angle AF and my new 60D doesn't either.

[bfitzgerald]

I've had some problems with WA AF on the A200 and the 5d. More so the A200 which would sometimes just miss by a large margin, the 5d would also have some problems but not as often. I've noticed it a few times on film bodies as well..so I'm not sure if this is a longer running issue from years past.

With the 50mm f1.7 I've had quite a few AF problems on the A200, some on the 5d and very few on the 7, 60 and film 5 bodies. It's a bit of a lottery if you get focus correct, most obvious on the A200 which would sometimes apparently AF behind the point where you were aiming. I've wondered if the A200 is covering a larger AF area esp central AF point as I've seen this on a number of lenses not just the 50mm and WA shot..the 5d is less prone to problems here. Even though the 5d isn't very fast for AF it seems more accurate esp in low light (far from amazing but def better than the A200)

So far the AF seems fine at WA on the K-x, but as ever only extended use will reveal flaws and more quirks. Though it appears to have less issues than some of my previous bodies. I'll have a better idea as I pick up some more lenses.

[bakubo]

With the 50mm f1.7 I've had quite a few AF problems on the A200, some on the 5d and very few on the 7, 60 and film 5 bodies. It's a bit of a lottery if you get focus correct, most obvious on the A200 which would sometimes apparently AF behind the point where you were aiming. I've wondered if the A200 is covering a larger AF area esp central AF point as I've seen this on a number of lenses not just the 50mm and WA shot..the 5d is less prone to problems here. Even though the 5d isn't very fast for AF it seems more accurate esp in low light (far from amazing but def better than the A200)

My 50mm f1.7 focuses okay on my A700. Even with rather narrow dof when shooting at f1.7 the focus looks good.

[bakubo]

How is the flash?

My 7D, A100, and A700 don't like flash much, I guess. Simple fill-flash is always a doggie-doo shoot -- you never know what you will get. No matter what you get though you can reshoot and then get something completely different on that next shot. Sometimes it will work okay and other times you get a photo that is several stops underexposed. I think the matrix metering, also when not using flash, is just sort of screwy sometimes and can get hopelessly confused.

For some reason when using the Canon 300D, 30D, and 60D with fill-flash it just works, at least in the shots I have taken. I don't use fill-flash often, but when I do I haven't had any weird results.

I hope the A55 and A580 have fixed the wide angle AF problems and flash problems. That would be a very nice advance in Sony tech. I must be in the minority though since I am more impressed by good QC and getting the basics working right than doodads such as jpeg sweep panoramas, etc. If the basics are done well then I am fine with adding on bells & whistles.

[Greg Beetham]

I don't have any issues to speak of with the Minolta legacy flash, TTL, ADI, Bounce flash, with focus area select ('local' on the A700) and multi segment metering. with the KM5D, A100 and A700 at all really; on the whole I'd have too say they are all very reliable.
Except for M mode not being true M mode that is; it's supposed to have a fixed and/or regulated fractional output regardles of subject reflectivity and distance, ISO, f-stop, angle of coverage etc. proving not to be the case, in WL mode anyway; the TTL system takes over and 'fixes' potential exposure mistakes, to save you from yourself.
So I don't have any major issues with the flash system being unreliable; I fixed the hotshoe problem with my A700 myself (shouldn't have had to), and now it seem quite ok.
I've never been able to understand why the system is apparently so different on some cameras when it should all be the same.
Greg

ps. I was going to say also; interesting posts Barry. Also I know you are a tad disanchanted with Sony's direction for the last couple of years but I think abandoning the A-mount just now is a little premature given Sony's slow pace in dealing with issues, some of which are self inflicted. I think another six months would be necessary at least to decide which way the mop flops with Sony...for sure. In any case given that we've got some reasonably good A-mount glass to hand the A580 gives us some cause for hope for more traditional DSLR users (even if it's got video and a compromised OVF, AND a stupid ON/OFF switch). The SLT's can take good/very good images but they of no use too me, I require a camera that takes photos of what actually is there, I can't be bothering with a camera that on occasion may invent stuff that doesn't exist, besides the things use batteries like there's no tomorrow.

[bfitzgerald]

On the flash I've had some issues but have worked around most. I have found that ADI does not seem to auto switch to TTL for non D lenses and you get different results with both settings which is a bit odd at times. So I pretty much always have both bodies set to TTL (chances are I won't be using a D lens anyway)

5d has the annoying "WA bounce overexposure" bug which never got a fix (and should have!) Funny thing is the film 7 seems to underexpose on bounce flash (the 60 does not) A few quirks there and I expect to find some with Pentax too. I agree Canon is consistent with flash least the bodies I have tried.

Greg whilst I did buy another brand I have not sold a single item I have with my A mount stuff. I was tempted to offload a few but I'll be very selective with what I get for K mount..that means less but likely better lenses that will force me to save up a bit for I did get quite a lot of Minolta bits and lenses etc for pretty decent prices (nothing exotic lens wise but some good old classics there) So I have my options open if Sony decide to keep making OVF bodies I will of course consider that in the future. I have some doubts on that one but we shall see.

At this stage I cannot honestly say I have any interest at all in SLT or EVF models. Not knocking the A55 for who it's aimed at I'm sure they like it. I'm an OVF shooter and will remain so as long as possible. Not a brand thing if Pentax did something EVF wise I'd ignore that too.

[Greg Beetham]

I think that's the key too most of the flash problems, to (D) or not to (D). I've found the KM5D's flash to be quite reliable using my lenses whatever I do to it, no wild unders or overs, but like you say Barry it can have a tendancy to overexpose slightly now and then, I think that probably comes under the heading of know your camera and the circumstances etc.
Greg

[bakubo]

I think that's the key too most of the flash problems, to (D) or not to (D).

I am pretty sure my Sony 18-250mm is a D lens. When I get a chance I will try to research it.

[bfitzgerald]

I'm updating this as I've got my remote for the K-x (via ebay hong kong seller) small unit cost was tiny I think less than £4 delivered!
Some observations..

I'd prefer a wired remote socket however I note the following on the Kx
You can set the camera up to either AF or not when the remote is pressed
You have a setting for bulb shooting one press to start one press to stop or hold it down and release when desired (useful though I have a lock on my A mount release which can achieve the same thing)
There are two options for release instant or 3 sec delay.

The 3 sec delay DOES activate MLU so you have 2 sec MLU with the normal non remote or 3 sec MLU with it.
So with this I'd say the lack of wired remote is not much of an issue (I had anticipated no MLU on the remote)

Looking at the A700 remote fiasco somebody was "clearly thinking" about the end user here! Bravo..small touches that add up to deliver a more satisfying end user experience