K20D vs K5

Arpe · 10-18-2010, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by Blue

My poor old K200d can't even get out of bed in the mornings and my K0d his drinking more than usual.

And your piano has been drinking? Heavily?

**Ex Finn.** · 10-18-2010, 04:49 PM

jeff knight
The second shot is awesome, perfect for a Halloween poster or a garage door projection.
You could make some serious money with that.

Blue · 10-18-2010, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by Arpe

And your piano has been drinking? Heavily?

typo, that should be K20d. I don't have a piano.

ozlizard · 10-18-2010, 07:39 PM

The K5 is twice the price of my K20, but are the images twice as good? For my work the end result and how I capture my images will be no different.

dgaies · 10-18-2010, 07:49 PM

Originally posted by ozlizard

The K5 is twice the price of my K20, but are the images twice as good? For my work the end result and how I capture my images will be no different.

That's like asking does the FA31 make images that are twice as good as the FA35 because it's twice as expensive? Or asking if the FA*85 is twice as good as the FA*77?

kittykat46 · 10-18-2010, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by dgaies

That's like asking does the FA31 make images that are twice as good as the FA35 because it's twice as expensive? Or asking if the FA*85 is twice as good as the FA*77?

I've been in restaurants where the food cost easily 3x for what looked suspiciously similar. Somewhat tastier and better prepared, but not that big a difference. The service, the ambience and general dining experience were very different of course.

Was it worth the money ? Its all in the eye of the beholder...

FullertonImages · 10-18-2010, 09:47 PM

Originally posted by ozlizard

The K5 is twice the price of my K20, but are the images twice as good? For my work the end result and how I capture my images will be no different.

That's like someone who has an F-150, and only needs the capabilities of an F-150 saying that there's no point of F-350's existing, that it's dumb that they cost so much more than an F-150, and that they aren't worth it. But for someone who needs the extra towing capacity and a heavier duty suspension, then yes, it is worth it.

Just because you don't need the extra capabilities of the K-5 doesn't mean that other people don't. And to answer your first question, depending on what sort of shooting you do, the images are potentially twice as good.

You're also comparing something 3 years old to something brand new. What you should be comparing, if you want ot make such a comparison is MSRP when they were each new. And even that wouldn't be fair because the K-7/5 body is technically a new line. It's like saying a 2010 WRX is worth twice as much as a 2003 WRX, is it twice as good? Nope, not really. Just newer...

Arpe · 10-19-2010, 12:28 AM

Originally posted by Blue

typo, that should be K20d. I don't have a piano.

Sorry for the Tom Waits song reference that wasn't picked up on OR deliberately ignored

tcdk · 10-19-2010, 12:50 AM

Originally posted by FullertonImages

I'm not saying that the K-5 isn't much better than the K20d. It's much, much better. In many, many ways. I'm just saying that this image doesn't highlight any of them, and it's flat out wrong to say that this image shows the K-5's superiority over another camera. This image pretty much just shows photographer skill, and that's it.

Agreed. Nothing there, that I haven't done with my K20D.

(Not that I can do it everytime, but that isn't about the camera)

falconeye · 10-19-2010, 03:04 AM

Originally posted by jeff knight

I take portraits for money, and often my models do pay the bills.

That's great!
And of course, in this case my argument reverts

Originally posted by jeff knight

Background shot with Pentax 12-24,
model photographed with Volna-9 no retouch. The 2 images superimposed.

That's a great portrait, very artistic! Congratulations.
Of course, artistic value and resolution are completely independent. As you show so well.

Originally posted by jeff knight

I am big falconeye fan! You and your site have helped me so many times. I hope this divergence of very subjective views doesn't make you hate me.

Thanks for the kind words. We have no divergence and even if it wouldn't make me disrespect you

Esp. as you appear to be a more talented photographer than me

**Rondec** · 10-19-2010, 04:09 AM

Putting a value on something is difficult. It is probably wise not to buy every new camera that comes along, better to skip a generation or two and save a little bit in between. At the same time, from what I have seen, the K5 is a major step up from both the K20 and K7. Could it be better? Sure. But, there are some things that it can do that no other Pentax camera (and no other APS-C camera) can do. That's pretty impressive in my book.

JohnBee · 10-19-2010, 07:05 AM

Originally posted by jeff knight

These are BAD model shots at actual pixels. I would even call them ugly. I don't know a single model who wouldn't be horrified to see every pore in their face captured with such brutal detail. If they were portraits of wrinkled old men, or rock cliffs, or something, I would be properly awed, but these? Ugh...poor girl.

That's why god created the retouch artist

PS. These are exactly what is needed for high-end output.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: K20D, Battery Grip, NEW K20D battery, cable remote (Worldwide)	Albert Siegel	Sold Items	6	09-23-2010 08:02 AM
In Canada: Summer Rebates for K20d or K20d plus lens	Pentaxtic	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	07-17-2009 11:34 AM
Magic Lantern Guides: Pentax K20D and MasterWorks: Jumpstart Guide for the K20D.	Reportage	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	02-12-2009 10:24 PM

10-18-2010, 04:41 PM	#76
Arpe Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,452	Originally posted by Blue My poor old K200d can't even get out of bed in the mornings and my K0d his drinking more than usual. And your piano has been drinking? Heavily?

10-18-2010, 04:49 PM	#77
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	jeff knight The second shot is awesome, perfect for a Halloween poster or a garage door projection. You could make some serious money with that.

10-18-2010, 06:49 PM	#78
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Arpe And your piano has been drinking? Heavily? typo, that should be K20d. I don't have a piano.

10-18-2010, 07:39 PM	#79
ozlizard Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Bridgetown West Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 903	The K5 is twice the price of my K20, but are the images twice as good? For my work the end result and how I capture my images will be no different.

10-18-2010, 07:49 PM	#80
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Originally posted by ozlizard The K5 is twice the price of my K20, but are the images twice as good? For my work the end result and how I capture my images will be no different. That's like asking does the FA31 make images that are twice as good as the FA35 because it's twice as expensive? Or asking if the FA85 is twice as good as the FA77?

10-18-2010, 08:26 PM	#81
kittykat46 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 923	Originally posted by dgaies That's like asking does the FA31 make images that are twice as good as the FA35 because it's twice as expensive? Or asking if the FA85 is twice as good as the FA77? I've been in restaurants where the food cost easily 3x for what looked suspiciously similar. Somewhat tastier and better prepared, but not that big a difference. The service, the ambience and general dining experience were very different of course. Was it worth the money ? Its all in the eye of the beholder...

10-18-2010, 09:47 PM	#82
FullertonImages Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 883	Originally posted by ozlizard The K5 is twice the price of my K20, but are the images twice as good? For my work the end result and how I capture my images will be no different. That's like someone who has an F-150, and only needs the capabilities of an F-150 saying that there's no point of F-350's existing, that it's dumb that they cost so much more than an F-150, and that they aren't worth it. But for someone who needs the extra towing capacity and a heavier duty suspension, then yes, it is worth it. Just because you don't need the extra capabilities of the K-5 doesn't mean that other people don't. And to answer your first question, depending on what sort of shooting you do, the images are potentially twice as good. You're also comparing something 3 years old to something brand new. What you should be comparing, if you want ot make such a comparison is MSRP when they were each new. And even that wouldn't be fair because the K-7/5 body is technically a new line. It's like saying a 2010 WRX is worth twice as much as a 2003 WRX, is it twice as good? Nope, not really. Just newer...

10-19-2010, 12:28 AM	#83
Arpe Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,452	Originally posted by Blue typo, that should be K20d. I don't have a piano. Sorry for the Tom Waits song reference that wasn't picked up on OR deliberately ignored

10-19-2010, 12:50 AM	#84
tcdk Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark Posts: 279	Originally posted by FullertonImages I'm not saying that the K-5 isn't much better than the K20d. It's much, much better. In many, many ways. I'm just saying that this image doesn't highlight any of them, and it's flat out wrong to say that this image shows the K-5's superiority over another camera. This image pretty much just shows photographer skill, and that's it. Agreed. Nothing there, that I haven't done with my K20D. (Not that I can do it everytime, but that isn't about the camera)

10-19-2010, 03:04 AM	#85
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by jeff knight I take portraits for money, and often my models do pay the bills. That's great! And of course, in this case my argument reverts Originally posted by jeff knight Background shot with Pentax 12-24, model photographed with Volna-9 no retouch. The 2 images superimposed. That's a great portrait, very artistic! Congratulations. Of course, artistic value and resolution are completely independent. As you show so well. Originally posted by jeff knight I am big falconeye fan! You and your site have helped me so many times. I hope this divergence of very subjective views doesn't make you hate me. Thanks for the kind words. We have no divergence and even if it wouldn't make me disrespect you Esp. as you appear to be a more talented photographer than me

10-19-2010, 04:09 AM	#86
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Putting a value on something is difficult. It is probably wise not to buy every new camera that comes along, better to skip a generation or two and save a little bit in between. At the same time, from what I have seen, the K5 is a major step up from both the K20 and K7. Could it be better? Sure. But, there are some things that it can do that no other Pentax camera (and no other APS-C camera) can do. That's pretty impressive in my book.

10-19-2010, 07:05 AM	#87
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by jeff knight These are BAD model shots at actual pixels. I would even call them ugly. I don't know a single model who wouldn't be horrified to see every pore in their face captured with such brutal detail. If they were portraits of wrinkled old men, or rock cliffs, or something, I would be properly awed, but these? Ugh...poor girl. That's why god created the retouch artist PS. These are exactly what is needed for high-end output.