[GabrielFFontes]

What is the practical side to shoot in such condition? No light, no photography.

0EV + 6400ISO + 1.4 lens = 1/40 shutter speed
Flash photography also?

[VisualDarkness]

Or those birders with long slow telephotos chasing small birds in shady undergrowth. Etc

I can sign that after my month, with a slow lens with a TC, chasing small birds in foliage. The sheer darkness often kills the AF totally while the possibility of getting a good shot still is around.

[westmill]

It seems to me that sensativity has improved greatly. I had a time in a church while doing a wedding when the k5 simply would not focus on a particular shot. The K5 2 would obviously not have strugled. It is obviously a big improvement. Possibly even more importantly it should not misfocus under ambient light conditions. However... as far as accuracy goes though... It still retains the huge sensors so its simply not possable for it to be accurate in a precission sort of way. I just think its such a shame it was not implemented in the original K5.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well the winner is that you do gain speed in working.

Situations where I find my self shooting in:

sportsfields, but probably others will find it the same: 1/400th, iso6400 and f4 on the DA*300mm. (I don't have my EV calculator on this laptop). The K-5 slows down in AF-speed a lot, where the othe K-5 with Sigma 70-200 has more light to work with and is a little faster but still slow.

And on another occasion, alomost no light to name off, but I had to take images for this charity game:

settings with DA*300mm: f4 1/400th and iso 20.000

So I would wonder what the gain was in real life and not in a dark room.

[ogl]

0EV + 6400ISO + 1.4 lens = 1/40 shutter speed
Flash photography also?

As for me, ISO1600 is acceptable with big reservation. ISO6400 and 1.4 (I know only DA55/1.4 and FA50/1.4 with such aperture) + 1/40 = using SR and unacceptable IQ. Sigma 30/1.4 - I don't think that it's good lens.

That's why I don't see any advantage....

[GabrielFFontes]

As for me, ISO1600 is acceptable with big reservation. ISO6400 and 1.4 (I know only DA55/1.4 and FA50/1.4 with such aperture) + 1/40 = using SR and unacceptable IQ. Sigma 30/1.4 - I don't think that it's good lens.

That's why I don't see any advantage....

Wow, really? With a K-5?
1600 ISO with a tiny touch of Topaz Denoise is perfectly clean! No kidding, it looks like ISO 200 or something like that!
You must be printing only billboards! hahaha

[ogl]

This was performed in an area with at most 0EV (the Pentax spot meter doesn't go any lower). The K-5 couldn't focus at all on any part of the scene, while the K-5 IIs locked on every time. Note that we were focusing on the floor, not the bed.

Pentax K-5 vs K-5 II / IIs low light autofocus test - YouTube

Headphones may be needed

Did the same with K200D + FA24*/2- from semi-dark corridor to dark room - f4.5, ISO200, 1.6 s.
Close to your test condition. No AF light.
AF works. No any problem to lock.

The owners of K200D or K20D - you can make the same...

[JinDesu]

As for me, ISO1600 is acceptable with big reservation. ISO6400 and 1.4 (I know only DA55/1.4 and FA50/1.4 with such aperture) + 1/40 = using SR and unacceptable IQ. Sigma 30/1.4 - I don't think that it's good lens.

That's why I don't see any advantage....

Then you have a pretty low limit for ISO. I've used ISO 6400 without issues on my k-x. I know people use up to ISO 10,000 on the k-5 and still come out with fantastic shots.

[ogl]

Wow, really? With a K-5?
1600 ISO with a tiny touch of Topaz Denoise is perfectly clean! No kidding, it looks like ISO 200 or something like that!
You must be printing only billboards! hahaha

K-5 is noisier camera at low ISO than K200D. And I never use denoise software, it kills the picture.
I don't care about noise at all. But above ISO1600 - K-5 is unacceptable for me.

[bwDraco]

K-5 is noisier camera at low ISO than K200D. And I never use denoise software, it kills the picture.
I don't care about noise at all. But above ISO1600 - K-5 is unacceptable for me.

This just isn't true. The K-5 has very low read noise, much lower than the K200D. The DxOMark score of 82 and tested dynamic range of 14 stops cannot be explained otherwise.

--DragonLord

[VisualDarkness]

Also you don't have to go that long back in time to find DSLR's that had ISO400 that is comparable to the K-5 at ISO1600.

[RBellavance]

Also you don't have to go that long back in time to find DSLR's that had ISO400 that is comparable to the K-5 at ISO1600.

I must be easy to please, as I find my K-7 acceptable at ISO1600 most of the time... I guess I'll be in heaven with a K-5 II

[bwDraco]

I confidently use my K-5 at ISO 6400...

--DragonLord

[ogl]

This just isn't true. The K-5 has very low read noise, much lower than the K200D. The DxOMark score of 82 and tested dynamic range of 14 stops cannot be explained otherwise.

--DragonLord

MUCH LOWER?


The shadow noise is important for DR of DSLR.
SNR18% - is ratio signal/noise for average gray scale (18%). Almost clear shadows.
DR of K-5 is better if we use SNR18%. If we really shoot in bad condition - SNR18% is useless. We should look at data of 50-100%.

Let's have a look at K-5 and K200D at full SNR - it's very interesting:

gray scale at ISO100.
30%: K-5 - 39.8 dB, K200D - 39.1 dB
40%: K-5 - 40.9 dB, K200D - 40.3 dB
50%: K-5 - 41.7 dB, K200D - 41.2 dB
60%: K-5 - 42.4 dB, K200D - 42 dB
70%: K-5 - 42.9 dB, K200D - 42.6 dB
80%: K-5 - 43.3 dB, K200D - 43.1 dB
90%: K-5 - 43.7 dB, K200D - 43.6 dB
100%: K-5 - 44 dB, K200D - 44 dB

We can see that the difference in shadows are almost negligible. Not higher than 1%.

But very interesting results for higher ISO...

IS800
90%: K-5 - 35.6 dB, K200D - 36.1 dB
100%: K-5 - 36.1 dB, K200D - 36.5 dB
(and K200D is a bit better at ISO800 in shadows at all points)

ISO1600
90%: K-5 - 33.1 dB, K200D - 33.4 dB
100%: K-5 - 33.5 dB, K200D - 33.9 dB


K-5 is better at ISO80 with 3% better result. K200D has no ISO80.
But...at ISO100-400 - almost no any serious difference. K-5 is a bit better.
at ISO800-1600 are the same situation, but K200D is a bit better.

[Winder]

I confidently use my K-5 at ISO 6400...

--DragonLord

For web use I can clean up 6400 just fine, but for a decent sized print it will definitely show. At 6400 I am converting to B&W and using the grain as part of the "mood" of the image.