Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 22, 2013, 3:57 PM   #1
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 263
Default Pentax K-30 vs Canon T4i

I know what I'm getting myself into with this question...I think. Hopefully no one will tear my head off.

From what I'm reading, I think the Pentax is a better camera. It's missing some features that would be nice to have like the touchscreen (or an articulating screen in general) but I could probably live without that as my current camera (Panasonic FZ47 superzoom) doesn't have those either.

One of my big concerns however is the lenses. Canon seems to have alot of options and alot that are decently priced. There are seemingly gems like the Canon 50mm f/1.8 EF II that can be had for like, 100 bucks. In addition to a nice range of other prime lenses, normal lenses, etc.

A rough search lead me to Pentax lenses that seemed significantly more expensive. I'm not a professional shooter...I'm trying to make it my hobby, not a career, or even a side business. So I don't see myself investing $400 in a single lens. I'd like to eventually acquire enough lenses that I can take the photos I want (some landscape/cityscape, portrait, and travel) and not have spent $5000 on camera and lenses.

I guess what I'm saying is, I think the Pentax is a better camera, even with the missing features and that the pricing seems better than the T4i but that I may never get the best out of it, or even what I want out of it because I won't want to drop $400 for a lens. Am I right in this, or are there decently priced lenses out there that I can use?
sumx4182 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 22, 2013, 6:44 PM   #2
Senior Member
hnikesch's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,825

Pentax k30 has image stabilization in the body so all lens are stabilized. The canon 50mm lens is not stabilized and I could not find a 50mm that was. You can get a 35mm f2.4 Pentax for about $160 but I believe the real value is in the Pentax zooms. The DAL 55-300 Pentax is about $240 where a stabilized Canon 70-300 is $490


...It is better to burn a roll of film than curse the darkness. Equip. K30, Q7, DA PLM 55-300, DA 18-135, DA 35 f2.4, DA 50 f1.8, SMC-M 28 f3.5, SMC M 50 f1.4, Canon P&S S100 w/CHDK Beta, Panasonic DMC-GM5, Flickr:

Last edited by hnikesch; Feb 22, 2013 at 9:31 PM.
hnikesch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 23, 2013, 11:48 AM   #3
Senior Member
shoturtle's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348

Well the 50mm 1.8 form canon is 100 dollars vs the 50 1.4 that is 320. But the 55-300 is a nice lens, but the canon EF-s 55-250 IS is also a good lens, that is stabilized. They are both good camera. Canon has way more lens option for all budgets in almost all different photography lens types. And for sports, canon has the better AF system and has the lenses line up that can work for that high demand for sports photography, but it is a super expenses they of photography.
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.

Last edited by shoturtle; Feb 23, 2013 at 11:51 AM.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2013, 2:41 PM   #4
Senior Member
mtngal's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,107

You can get some really nice lenses for not much if you are willing to learn how to manually focus. I still use a number of old lenses that were new in 1980. But it isn't for everyone, and it does take practice. It's really nice that I can take pictures in a museum with a 24mm f2.8 lens that wouldn't cost much and would be stabilized (even if it won't AF and I have to push a button to get the camera to set the shutter speed).
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2013, 7:42 PM   #5
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 263

Thanks for some of the advice. It's a tough decision to make! I think the Nikon d5200 is better than the Canon t4i but that seems like a closer race than either with the Pentax.

I know that you need decent glass to get exceptional pictures so having all the good, low price lens options is enticing. But throwing good light into a trash collector doesn't matter much does it? Not that they are terrible necessarily, but the Pentax seems to perform so much better. Am I wrong here? If I got both of the kit lenses and never bought another lens...would I be better off with the one of the Canikon cameras or the Pentax?

Also, am I wrong in thinking that the Pentax is that much better than the Canon or the Nikon. In the tests, it seems the noise control is so much better, the on-camera stabilization, the penta-prism, the sturdiness of the body, blah blah blah...It seems like everything is better for an equal or better price...except the ecosystem of quality, reasonable-priced lenses.

Last edited by sumx4182; Feb 25, 2013 at 7:53 PM.
sumx4182 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 25, 2013, 8:30 PM   #6
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Central Vermont
Posts: 1,890

Several years ago, when I moved up from a Panasonic superzoom (the FZ 30) to a Pentax DSLR, I bought the two kit lenses that were available at the time: the 18-55, and the 50-200. I used those two lenses for about 4 years before I bought my first "good" lens, and I was very happy with both those lenses. The optics of the Pentax kit lenses is quite good -- the only real sacrifice you make with those is that they are both f/5.6 at the long end. I think the sensor in the K30 is the same as the K5, and if I'm right about that it is a superb sensor, which means that in low light you can boost the ISO up to 1600 or even 3200 and still have useable images. That makes the kit lenses reasonably useable even in low light. Therefore the only serious drawback to the kit lenses is that it's very difficult to get a nice shallow depth of field when they are both zoomed out to the long end. Can you tolerate that? Although I wished for faster lenses (and I eventually bought several faster lenses), I was still quite happy with those 2 inexpensive kit lenses.

By the way, my general statements about Pentax kit lenses apply equally to Canon or Nikon kit lenses. One way the manufacturers are able to make inexpensive kit lenses is by making them slow at the long end. One more thing to think about: Pentax now makes its kit lenses weather sealed, and I do not believe either Canon or Nikon offer weather sealed kit lenses.

Good luck with your decision making process. All three manufacturers make excellent cameras, and I suspect any brand will serve you well.
mtnman is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:38 PM.