The advantages of the D7100 compared to K5II I see here:
1: The AF points are pinhead that the K5 are against barn doors.
2: The AF-C is significantly! better, it is very sensitive to changes in distance
3: The flash system is top, no matter what I've done so far, the images were always super exposed.
Now a few things:
1: SD card slot for 2 tickets
2: The internal flash can be set to M
3: The battery is fully charged after about 2 hours.
4: I'm looking for a compact with hotshoe (a lightning I have anyway) at Nikon no problem.
Now for the negative part of the D7100 compared to K5II
1: Superimposed in viewfinder relatively little appears, for example, the ISO speed will be displayed from the buffer level when shooting. Also, exposure compensation does not appear clear to me.
2: The little buffer is full after 6-7 shots, after it comes with a 45MB / s card every second on.
3: With the Nikon I would not really want to take pictures in the rain. The battery cover and the SD card slot are not really sealed.
Topic Objective:
One leading the way, I never had limited or lenses with the Pentax *.
In my 18-55, 17-70 and 55-300 of me jiggling tube is very noticed. Even when switched off the camera, it pushes the tube upward, but he did not even have to be extended. For an optical device I found the already fierce.
The Nikkor I've ever, are there clearly better in terms of quality. In addition, the focus ring does not rotate during focusing, however, always possible to intervene manually (a manual intervention has a higher priority than the AF). The silent focusing is also very pleasant.
The cost of the bill:
I have replaced the following Pentax / Sigma lenses to Nikon / Sigma:
1: Sigma 10-20mm -> has not been replaced, was a gimmick.
2: Sigma 17-70mm -> Nikkor 16-85mm
3: Sigma 70-200mm -> Sigma 70-200mm
4: Pentax 55-300mm -> Nikkor 70-300mm
6: Pentax 35mm -> 35mm Nikkor
7: Sigma 105mm Macro -> Nikkor 105mm Micro
8: Metz 52AF-1 -> Nikon SB 700
I got about 2800 euros for my Pentax equipment. For the Nikon equipment, I have paid about 4,000 euros. Here, however, I must say that I have bought all Nikon lenses (up to 70-300) new. Had I bought everything needed (as I have done it with Pentax!), It would have been 500-600 euros cheaper. All in all, keep costs down, especially if you buy used.
What else struck me:
I was on a horse tournament to take pictures with the K5 or K5II order, it said: Aja ne Pentax, with the Nikon that's quite different. It says: Oh ne Nikon, even the brand new, I may see. Want to try my 80-400 etc.
Had I frankly to the extent not expected
Somehow true the slogan: I AM NIKON I I'm part of a big family
It seems to me also so that to Pentax users somehow myself stressing. In Nikon range no word on the AF is wasted (except perhaps in the D7000). Any defocused lens or the like, no one needs to be justified. In short, there is hardly a thread closed and Popcorn there is no need also.
I have not regretted the change of system.
Greeting smartie
