K-30 vs OM-D


helios

Link Posted 29/06/2013 - 15:35
JonSchick wrote:
I went from Pentax (K-7) to m43, had the OM-D for a year or so, and have now returned to Pentax (K-5). I'd seriously consider the K-5 at the prices you can pick them up from SRS.

The sensor in the OM-D is spectacular and I suspect based on very similar technology to the Pentax - both being Sony-sourced. The Pentax is a little better at higher ISOs, but I never thought the OM-D was lacking in that regard. Both have got great dynamic range.

Cheaper fast lenses were part of the reasoning for me too - in my case the Tamron 17-50 was a cheap no-brainer, as well as affordable weather sealed lenses. The 18-135 is better than you might think. Micro 43 lenses are very good - at least many of them are - but they're not cheap, especially the fast zooms of which only two are currently available.

I prefer the ergonomics of the Pentax, which feels more solid than the OM-D to me - sort of an Audi compared to an Alfa! And it's much easier to find your way around the camera and its menu system. Much as I thought it was a very capable camera, the OM-D had enough foibles (especially the horrendous menu system) that it sometimes got in the way of my photography. I don't regret moving back.

Cheers,

Jon

I agree with Jon's assessment. I too switched from a K-5 to the Oly OMD and although both are excellent cameras in their different ways I did miss the Pentax ergonomics and menu system so I recently got a K30 new at a bargain price and am currently using both systems.

I am not sure what sort of photography yolophoto does. Both Pentax and Olympus have AF limitations when shooting birds in flight and fast moving sports action but are equally capable for everything else.

The Olympus system is smaller and lighter and with the crop factor of x2 a 300mm lens is the equivalent of 600mm in 35 mm terms.

Pentax has the benefit of an enormous range of legacy glass but of course the M43 system can use many different brands with suitable adapters. Both systems benefit from image based sensors.

Ultimately it depends on personal preference. I respect my OMD but have greater affection for my Pentax.
Archie

SteveEveritt

Link Posted 29/06/2013 - 19:08
Pentax IS capable of shooting fast moving action!
You don't get much faster than this!!!!!

http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/llandowkartclub/9010475053/
link
My Flickr link

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" (John Lennon)

helios

Link Posted 29/06/2013 - 23:25
SteveEveritt wrote:
Pentax IS capable of shooting fast moving action!
You don't get much faster than this!!!!!

http://m.flickr.com/#/photos/llandowkartclub/9010475053/
link

Good pictures!

It is quite possible to take successful pictures of fast moving objects with both the Olympus OM-D and the recent Pentax DSLRs but most reviewers seem to agree that another make of DSLR has better AF tracking capabilities. The OP is considering changing systems and had expressed concerns about needing fast AF so this is a matter to consider.

I do not often try to photograph fast action so I am no expert in this area.
Archie

SteveEveritt

Link Posted 30/06/2013 - 10:17
Appreciated but rather than go to the expense of changing system, simply try harder and Pentax will produce the results you need and sometimes better. Better because the colours seem to be more accurate and not over saturated.
My Flickr link

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" (John Lennon)

giofi

Link Posted 30/06/2013 - 10:51
yolofoto wrote:
Anyone used both? I've been away from Pentax for a while and currently use an Olympus OM-D + Panasonic 14-45 and 45-150 lenses. IQ is okay but the lenses I have are so very slow. I would much prefer to use f2.8 zooms but those available from Panasonic are very costly and don't seem to come up used. But... I could afford to change my M4/3 kit for a new K-30 + used 16-50/2.8 + used 50-135/2.8.

At some point when funds allow, I'd probably upgrade to a K5II or future equivalent.

What do you think? Any thoughts or advice welcome.

I think that Pentax DSRLs and Olympus OM-D are not easily comparable, it depends on your selection criteria. For instance, how important is weight and portability to you? I personally do not see any big difference in build quality, the feel is certainly different as the shape is so different. Both have programmable dials that make use very natural. How about adding a K-30 and testing them in real life use for a while, and then decide?
Giorgio

Pentax Photo Gallery

giofi

Link Posted 30/06/2013 - 10:55
SteveEveritt wrote:
Appreciated but rather than go to the expense of changing system, simply try harder and Pentax will produce the results you need and sometimes better. Better because the colours seem to be more accurate and not over saturated.

Steve, I just read some of Benjamin Kanarek's posts on his blog, and he is not very happy with Pentax camera's AF accuracy.

Certainly you can live with it, but if all Pentax users would be more vocal on what needs to be improved, and this Forum in particular, I think chances would be higher that Pentax would address this....
Giorgio

Pentax Photo Gallery
Last Edited by giofi on 30/06/2013 - 10:56

johnriley

Link Posted 30/06/2013 - 15:26
The problem here Giorgio is that lots of us are actually quite happy. Quicker and more accurate can go on for ever, but I don't have any particular problem with Pentax AF.

Given that others will feel the same way, and some may well not, then it's not reasonable for any one source to be more vocal to Pentax.

Accuracy has never been suggested as a problem by anyone that I can recall, only speed.
Best regards, John

Algernon

Link Posted 30/06/2013 - 16:14
All cameras are quite useless at focusing accurately see....
http://www.slrgear.com/articles/focus/focus.htm

Live view is about the most accurate way. but it's
better to focus bracket or at least repeat the shot
a few times.

Most of the Pentax AF problems (apart from tracking) should have been
fixed with the K-5ii f/2.8 sensor, but you need lenses of f/2.8
and below for it to work.

I'd like to see if the Green Hex/Beep MF is any better, but
don't fancy buying a K-5ii just to see if it is.

'
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi
Last Edited by Algernon on 30/06/2013 - 16:22

giofi

Link Posted 30/06/2013 - 16:43
johnriley wrote:
The problem here Giorgio is that lots of us are actually quite happy. Quicker and more accurate can go on for ever, but I don't have any particular problem with Pentax AF.

Given that others will feel the same way, and some may well not, then it's not reasonable for any one source to be more vocal to Pentax.

Accuracy has never been suggested as a problem by anyone that I can recall, only speed.

Yes, you are very correct, my mistake..... I should have said speed, not accuracy.
Giorgio

Pentax Photo Gallery

yolofoto

Link Posted 01/07/2013 - 15:40
Thank you for all of the information and comments. Very helpful. I've decided to stick with the OM-D until I can get down to SRS and try the f2.8 zooms.

helios

Link Posted 01/07/2013 - 17:33
yolofoto wrote:
Thank you for all of the information and comments. Very helpful. I've decided to stick with the OM-D until I can get down to SRS and try the f2.8 zooms.

Good idea. Of course if there happens to be a K30/K5/K5II lying around you might be tempted to play with them too!
Archie

rparmar

Link Posted 02/07/2013 - 00:12
It seems your main complaint is that the kit zooms you have are slow. Well, so are all kit zooms. The solution is to pony up for the fast Olympus zooms or shoot primes. Moving to Pentax will not solve that particular problem. I generally shoot an MFT kit consisting of the 14/20/45. This is equivalent to 28/40/90, which is classic old-school FOV and works exceedingly well. It was also quite inexpensive, and the lenses are very small and light.

Pentax can't match the ease of use of the EVF. I keep waiting for them to release a mirrorless camera without compromise, but they can't seem to do it.

OM-D also has the advantage in terms of ease of manual focus. Oh, if you find the focus square too large, you know you can reduce it?

Pentax has some excellent glass in the FA Limiteds. But maybe that's not of interest to you. Then again, Olympus are not slack on the lens front, and can mount practically any lens ever invented.

If you prize the small form factor of MFT then the Pentax system will seem enormous. The difference in IQ is negligible. Both camera systems have a great image pipeline.

Besides all this, Pentax has a long way to go with video.

Considering all this, moving from the OM-D to a K30 is a side-ways step at best. If you want a distinct step up, I would personally go for a Nikon D800.

But everyone has different needs. After four Pentax DSLRs I moved to MFT and haven't looked back. I now own five bodies: two Panasonic for superior video and three Olympus because I prefer the IBIS for stills. And the form factor and ergonomics. (That's one camera too many, I suppose!)

And I still shoot the best of my Pentax glass... just not on a Pentax camera.

(In fact my next film project will utilise two 50/1.2 lenses.)
Listen to my albums free on BandCamp. Or visit my main website for links to photography, etc.
Last Edited by rparmar on 02/07/2013 - 00:16

yolofoto

Link Posted 02/07/2013 - 00:49
Thank you for your advice rparmer, there's much there that I agree with.

Mind you, I'm not sure I'd go for a D800 even if I could afford it. Which I can' t
Last Edited by yolofoto on 02/07/2013 - 01:01

rparmar

Link Posted 02/07/2013 - 10:49
Oh, I cannot afford a D800 either. In fact, I cannot even afford the OM-D

The main point there was that one needs to jump up fairly significantly in sensor size from MFT to get a better image. Most of us don't need anything better than MFT/APS-C.
Listen to my albums free on BandCamp. Or visit my main website for links to photography, etc.

jamieallan

Link Posted 02/07/2013 - 19:40
Personally I think the title of the original post - K-30 vs OM-D - is a bit misleading simply through price differential if nothing else. A truer reflection would be two and a half K-30s vs one OM-D.
I used the Olympus E-system for 5 years with the E-410, E-600 and E-3. I decided I wanted a smaller, weather resistant camera than my E-3 which would also take advantage of the improved low light sensor technology now on offer - I had found I really couldn't use my E-3 above 800 iso. I wanted to stay with Olympus but just couldn't get to grips (literally) with the OM-D. I found the controls too small and I also do not like the electronic view finder - I find it harsh to my eye.
That's how I found myself looking at the K-30. In fact when I bought my K-30 the price differential was 3 times.
So I don't think the two are to be compared without looking at the whole picture and that surely includes cost.
Jamie
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.