[Class A]

The same lens was used for the test, but we can try a different lens (say a 77mm or a D-FA 100mm) if it'll make you feel more comfortable with the results.

I'd recommend that.
Of course, it is not about making me more comfortable; it is about creating information for forum users/visitors that can be relied upon.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that the new Pentax APS-C camera, if one should be released anytime soon, will be a "direct upgrade" over the K-30, and not something that makes compromises in areas such as video and processing speed.

The K-3 will not be an upgrade of the K-30. It will be a new flagship.

I don't think the K-5 II makes any compromises, as it is just an update not a new model (hence the "II" designation). One can argue that the K-5 should have been as good as the K-5 II already but I do not think one can fault the K-5 II for not being a K-3.

---

Last edited by Class A; 10-31-2012 at 11:13 PM.

[Adam]

What I mean by "direct upgrade" is that it's better in all respects- not just certain areas. For example, by that definition, the K-5 is a direct upgrade over the K-7, the K-r over the K-x, etc.

I don't think the K-5 II makes any compromises, as it is just an update not a new model (hence the "II" designation). One can argue that the K-5 should have been as good as the K-5 II already but I do not think one can fault the K-5 II for not being a K-3.

All I'm saying is that Pentax had better move fast before Canon revamps the 7D and Nikon the D7000 if they plan on attracting any new customers in this market segment. My hopes in Ricoh are high nevertheless- I'm sure they'll do a good job once they get around to doing it.

[sherwood]

Differences in low iso pics are obvious and, I'd say, what I was expecting ; but I'm surprised with the differences between the 2 competitors in high iso shots (moiré - test charts).
A very interesting review. Thanks a lot.

[christiansen]

Dear Adam, i greatly enjoyed your K-30 review. This one is more like a presentation of a product. Skipping this aspect, pls note there are a few spelling errors in the review (i don't bash your hard work, i simply had had higher expectations from this review):
- in background, it should be written approach. As a couple of users said, the same battery from K-5 is NOT compatibile with K-5 ii. Have you checked it for yourself ? (if i'm not mistaking, on dpreview forums was this info).
- in general use, you state that the shutter is rated for 100,00 actuations, a tenth of what should be. Otherwise, 10,000 actuations is very low for a DSLR camera.
- in test charts, it should be written apertures.
As a non-user of a DSLR & a wannabe, who i have only heard of Nikon in this world of inter-changeable lens, i find the K5-ii to be very appealing, since i will use it for pictures. For videos, are video cameras which can record Full HD for longer periods of time than 20-30min, the actual limit on current DSLRs. As for weather resistant, i guess is NOT such a big hype to tout - the possibilities of shooting outdoors & get caught in the rain are quite small. Besides the fact that when it rains one can get only rain drops in bokeh style pictures - i guess. This, added with the fact that the impervious body is not at all well protected when one uses a non-WR glass on it, means this feature is mostly for marketing purposes. If one reads the web, one gets tales of Nikon DSLRs used at -10Celsius or in mild rain, so this is not the discovery of the wheel. I would also note that the in-body shake reduction system is not the next best thing, as what other users say. (same forum mentioned earlier, i suppose). Perhaps the approach of having the compensation system in the lens instead of the body has its advantages. This is a company decision which probably won't change ever, but it doesn't mean it should be used as a heavy marketing tool. Perhaps the competition takes good technical decisions also, besides having a good PR machine. My 0.02$.
In summary, instead of Nikon D7000 which pours oil into the sensor +35mm f1.8, one can buy a K30 + 18.105WR lens or K5-II +18.55WR lens. At least this latter two options are not prone to same problems.
Also you can add to your battery of tests one that should includ a dark, cold room -something resoning to a cave, that is.
As for me, i wish you would have tested the K5-II also against K-30, a product released this year. I understand the need of comparation with K-5 in order to sort things out for current Pentax users, but in the same time you should have thought at prospect buyers, and at an even rare kind, a Pentax future buyer. As is now the case, from what i've read here in there, K-5 II is a better option than K-30, but the latter comes in blue, which takes great shots, since the person in front of the camera is mesmerized.
As for the rest of unsatisfied with what Pentax added to this body, and since you -plural- are connasseurs, you're the next step after the pixel-peeper kind, you're the technology-peeper. It's good to have you around, but pls don't be too vocal. Pentax as an entity knows it's way & although is not sharing its vision with us than in the form of finite products, the company will continue to exist until it doesn't, if you get my drift. Pentax has an advantage of being the underdog - this gives the company the opportunity to act as it pleases, since it won't catch the first two players per volume of units sold, thus not competing only for the sake of competition; or putting it in other words, to release on an annual base new products just to have a busy product line, where one cannot distinguish one product from the other & the company itself would be having difficulties in promoting the right message to the customer. Pentax approach (sic!) has the user in the center of the universe, instead of profit. At least this is how i see things.
I would end this writing saying i disagree with your conclusion, that a 2-year old K5 is better than the new K5-ii. Only from the technological point of view, if product X is created now & product Y was created 2 years ago, plus X is slightly better than Y but in no case worst, then X should be the obvious choice, recte K5-ii. Since you would benefit also from the additional warranty, for example, which in the case of K5 is gone - just saying.

[vladm11]

Here is my first shot with Pentax K5 IIs. I've tried worst conditions: low light and moving black dog. Low light focus is much better then my K7. For me its a great upgrade.

[Anvh]

We think that the next step for Pentax is to add more focus points and implement a more powerful motor (perhaps one that is brushless)

Would love to know the source that the motor inside the K5 mkII does have brushes.
If it really does it would mean the brushes wear out over time so that you need to replace them.

[jorgenp73]

I appreciate the updated review but I miss a comment or two about B&W conversion. The reason is that Nikon D800E has started to get a B&W following due to its exposure range. It should be identical to D800 (or close enough according to DxOMark) but there is something there attracting it to the B&W crowd. What about the Pentax K-5 family?

[JohnBee]

Would love to know the source that the motor inside the K5 mkII does have brushes.
If it really does it would mean the brushes wear out over time so that you need to replace them.

Given the duty cycle, I'm thinking that would likely never happen within the lifetime of the camera.

[Anvh]

Given the duty cycle, I'm thinking that would likely never happen within the lifetime of the camera.

I still have and use the K10D and i'm sure there are a few that use film bodies with AF which are even older and some also use ist digital series.
So yeah i'm curious.

[JohnBee]

I still have and use the K10D and i'm sure there are a few that use film bodies with AF which are even older and some also use ist digital series.
So yeah i'm curious.

Since brushed motors are designed on a continuous cycle vs the intermittent use of a focusing system, I'm thinking the lifecycle of those motors will far exceed anything we'd ever see or use.

[AlwaysAl]

Well, I broke down and bought the K5IIs. Have had a K20 for a few years and until recently didn't quite see that value in upgrading. The K20 was a wonderful upgrade from my *ist D. More recently, especially when out with those persons shooting their newer canons at the nikonians, noticed the images from the K20 seemed a little less vibrant compared to the others...too much PhotoShop required!

Debated the II versus the IIs and decided on the IIs.

Lots of apprehension as you can imagine and not to downplay the value of the discussion in the forums, actually working with it on your own terms is the true test for me. Well today with a few minutes between work activities to play, tried to dispel some of the worst things I had heard about the new series -- focus sharpness, graininess at high ISO and alienation of non Pentax lenses. Snapped on the Sigma 150-500 zoomed it to 500 and shot this tree about 35' out. The ISO was set to 51200 and the focus to automatic with the "Program" setting. Attached is the result. The image was shot in Adobe RAW, converted to a .jpeg in Photoshop and resized to email...no other enhancements.\

Here's the EXiF data courtesy of PhotoME

PhotoME version: 0.8ß2 (Build 891)

[Overview]
File name: C:\Users\Owner\Documents\_ART0036.DNG
File type: Adobe Digital Negative RAW
File size: 33,511.5KB
Creation date: 11/12/2012 07:57
Last modification: 11/12/2012 18:44
Make: PENTAX
Camera: PENTAX K-5 II s
Lens: Unknown (Lens Id: 8 15)
Software: K-5 II s Ver 1.00
Dimension: 4992 x 3284px(16.4 MP, 3:2)
Focal length: 500mm(equiv. 750mm)
Aperture: F9.5
Exposure time: 1/1500"
ISO speed rating: 51200/48°
Program: Program AE
Metering Mode: Pattern
White Balance: Auto
Focus Mode: AF-S
Image Stabilizer: stabilized
Noise Reduction: Off
Flash: Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode

[Image]
New subfile type: Reduced-resolution image data
Image width: 160px
Image height: 120px
Number of bits per component: 8, 8, 8
Compression scheme: uncompressed
Pixel scheme: RGB
Manufacturer: PENTAX
Image input equipment model: PENTAX K-5 II s
Image data location: 0x00019800
Orientation of image: 0° (top/left)
Number of components: 3
Number of rows per strip: 120rows
Bytes per compressed strip: 57600bytes
Image resolution in width direction: 300dpi
Image resolution in height direction: 300dpi
Image data arrangement: Chunky Format (Interleaved)
Unit of X and Y resolution: inch
Software: K-5 II s Ver 1.00
File change date and time: 2012-11-12 07:57:44
SubIFD Pointer: 0x000193CE, 0x00019548
Exif IFD Pointer: 0x020B9CA4
GPS IFD Pointer: 0x000197E0
DNG Version: 1.1.0.0
DNG Backward Version: 1.1.0.0
Unique Camera Model: PENTAX K-5 II s
Color Matrix 1: [0.9907,-0.4907,-0.0813], [-0.3496,0.9834,0.4287], [-0.0183,0.0383,0.7006]
Color Matrix 2: [0.8537,-0.2580,-0.1143], [-0.3995,1.2301,0.1881], [-0.1007,0.1765,0.6712]
Analog Balance: 1, 1, 1
As Shot Neutral: 0.4876190476, 1, 0.5481798715
Baseline Exposure: -0.546859741
Baseline Noise: 1
Baseline Sharpness: 1
Linear Response Limit: 1
DNG Private Data: 0x00000382
Calibration Illuminant 1: 17
Calibration Illuminant 2: 21

[Additional Image Data (1)]
New subfile type: Not set
Image width: 4992px
Image height: 3284px
Number of bits per component: 16
Compression scheme: uncompressed
Pixel scheme: CFA (Color Filter Matrix)
Image data location: 0x00027900
Number of components: 1
Number of rows per strip: 3284rows
Bytes per compressed strip: 32787456bytes
Image resolution in width direction: 300dpi
Image resolution in height direction: 300dpi
Image data arrangement: Chunky Format (Interleaved)
Unit of X and Y resolution: inch
CFA Repeat Pattern Dimension: Horizontal repeat pixel unit: 2, Vertical repeat pixel unit: 2
CFA Pattern 2: [Blue, Green], [Green, Red]
CFA Layout: Rectangular (or square) layout
Black Level Repeat Dim: Rows: 2
Cols: 2
Black Level: 0, 0, 0, 0
White Level: 15862
Default Scale: Horizontal: 1
Vertical: 1
Default Crop Origin: Horizontal: 22
Vertical: 10
Default Crop Size: Horizontal: 4928
Vertical: 3264
Bayer Green Split: 2000
Relative strength of the camera's anti-alias filter: 0

[Additional Image Data (2)]
New subfile type: Reduced-resolution image data
Image width: 4928px
Image height: 3264px
Number of bits per component: 8, 8, 8
Compression scheme: JPEG
Pixel scheme: YCbCr
Image data location: 0x01F6C500
Number of components: 3
Number of rows per strip: 3264rows
Bytes per compressed strip: 1362159bytes
Image resolution in width direction: 300dpi
Image resolution in height direction: 300dpi
Image data arrangement: Chunky Format (Interleaved)
Unit of X and Y resolution: inch
White point chromaticity: 0.313, 0.329
Chromaticities of primaries: [0.64,0.33,0.21], [0.71,0.15,0.06]
Color space transformation matrix coefficients: 0.299, 0.587, 0.114
Subsampling ratio of YtoC: YCbCr4:2:2
Y and C positioning: Co-Sited

[Camera]
Exposure time: 1/1500"
F number: F9.5
Exposure program: Normal program
ISO speed rating: 51200/48°
Exif version: 2.21
Date and time of original data generation: 2012-11-12 07:57:44
Date and time of digital data generation: 2012-11-12 07:57:44
Shutter speed: 10.55Tv (1/1500")
Aperture: 6.5Av (F9.5)
Exposure bias: ±0EV
Metering mode: Pattern
Flash: Flash did not fire, compulsory flash mode
Lens focal length: 500mm
Sensing method: One-chip color area sensor
Custom image processing: Normal process
Exposure mode: Auto exposure
White balance: Auto
Focal length in 35 mm film: 750mm
Scene capture type: Standard
Contrast: Normal
Saturation: Normal
Sharpness: Normal
Subject distance range: Distant view

[Manufacturer notes]
Pentax Version: 10.0.0
Pentax Model Group: Group 1 (DSLR series & Various Optio models)
Preview Image Size: 640 x 480
Preview Image Length: 36890bytes
Preview Image Start: 0x000087DE
Pentax Model: 0x12f71
Date: 2012-11-12
Time: 07:57:44
Quality: RAW
Flash Mode: Off, Did not fire; Internal
Focus Mode: AF-S
??? (000E): 65535, 0
Exposure Time: 1/1515.2"
F Number: F9.5
ISO: 51200/48°
??? (0016): 50
Metering Mode: Multi-segment
Auto Bracketing: 0 EV, No Extended Bracket
White Balance: Auto
Focal Length: 500mm
Saturation: Normal
Contrast: Normal
Sharpness: Normal
DSP Firmware Version: 1.00.00.00
CPU Firmware Version: 1.00.00.00
Effective LV: 8LV
Picture Mode: Program AE (Hyper-Program); 1/2EV steps
Drive Mode: Single-frame; No Timer; Shutter Button; Single Exposure
??? (0035): 12061, 7988
Color Space: Adobe RGB
Image Area Offset: x = 22px, y = 10px
RAW Image Size: width = 4928px, height = 3264px
??? (003D): 8192
Preview Image Borders: top = 28, bottom = 28, left = 0, right = 0
Lens ID: 8+15+0+0
Pentax Lens Type: DA or DA*
Lens Name(s) of the ID: Unknown (Lens Id: 8 15)
Camera Temperature: 21°C
AE Lock: On
Noise Reduction: Off
Flash Exposure Compensation: ±0
Image Tone: Portrait
Color Temperature: Not set
SR Result: stabilized
Shake Reduction (Setup): 151
Shutter Release Half Press Time: 4.25sec
SR Focal length: 356mm
Shutter Count: 36
??? (0060): 0, 0, 0, 0
??? (0062): 8
??? (0067): 1
??? (0068): 1, 0
Dynamic Range Expansion: Off
??? (006B): 0, 0, 11, 12
??? (006C): 0, 0
??? (006D): 0, 0
??? (006E): 0, 0
??? (006F): 0
??? (0070): 0, 0
??? (0071): 255, 4
AF Adjustment: ±0
??? (0073): 65535
??? (0074): 65535
??? (0076): 0, 0
??? (0077): 0, 0
??? (0078): 0, 0
??? (0079): 0, 0
??? (007A): 2, 0
??? (007D): 0, 0, 0
??? (007E): 15862
??? (007F): 65535
Black Point: [0, 0, 0, 0]
White Point: [16800, 8192, 8192, 14944]
Picture Mode 2: Program AE
Program Line: Normal
EV Steps: 1/2 EV steps
E-Dial In Program: Tv or Av
Aperture Ring Use: Permitted
Flash Options: Red-eye reduction
Metering Mode (2): Multi-segment
AF Point Mode: Auto
Focus Mode 2: AF-S
AF Point Selected 2: 0
Drive Mode 2: Single-frame
Exposure Bracket Step Size: 0.3
Bracket Shot Number: n/a
White Balance Set: Auto
Multiple Exposure Set: Off
??? (0205): 0
??? (0205): 0
??? (0205): 124
Pentax Model: 0x12f71
Manufacture Date?: 2012-10-13
Camera has been serviced?: Serviced bit not set (Value: 2?)
Production ID?: 2
Internal Serial Number?: 7047694
Number of Matrices: 18matrices
Matrix 1: [12512,-4352,32], [-1728,12832,-2912], [288,-3392,11296]
Matrix 2: [14015,-4582,-1241], [-2027,15021,-4802], [-141,-4627,12960]
Matrix 3: [14333,-4934,-1207], [-2592,15598,-4814], [-508,-3831,12531]
Matrix 4: [14397,-5065,-1140], [-2464,15713,-5057], [-845,-5311,14348]
Matrix 5: [16225,-6840,-1193], [-2446,17469,-6831], [-380,-2963,11535]
Matrix 6: [8831,-611,-28], [-1221,11035,-1622], [-146,-283,8621]
Matrix 7: [12940,-5515,767], [-1361,13305,-3752], [294,-4961,12859]
Matrix 8: [6766,2689,-1263], [-515,9159,-452], [1758,384,6050]
Matrix 9: [12512,-4352,32], [-1728,12832,-2912], [288,-3392,11296]
Matrix 10: [2783,5826,-417], [2784,5825,-417], [2784,5826,-418]
Matrix 11: [757,8809,-1374], [758,8808,-1374], [758,8809,-1375]
Matrix 12: [3380,5590,-778], [3380,5590,-778], [3380,5590,-778]
Matrix 13: [8450,-205,-53], [8450,-205,-53], [8450,-205,-53]
Matrix 14: [10174,-2662,680], [10174,-2662,680], [10174,-2662,680]
Matrix 15: [6946,-275,1521], [6946,-275,1521], [6946,-275,1521]
??? (0222): 8323
??? (0222): 8036
??? (0222): 8061
??? (0222): 8348
??? (0222): 8520
??? (0222): 8438
??? (0222): 7987
??? (0222): 7946
WB BA compensation: ±0
WB GM compensation: ±0
??? (0229): 4519585
??? (0231): 0, 0, 0, 0
D-Range Compensation: 4
??? (03FF): 1, 24754, 1, 0, 1, 218, 218, 0, 250, 21, 21, 514, 514, 518, 518


I was reasonably pleased with the results...far better than expected and a far cry from anything the K20 could have produced.

Comparing the cameras, I immediately liked the feel of the K5IIs. I was initially worried the reported "smaller size" may have not worked with my "mitts". The shutter "noise" is different in a pleasant way. The focus is so quick, with a silent focusing lens it is there before the K20 could have thought about it. A couple of times had to double check to see if it had focused as it seemed too quick to be right! Charging the battery for the first time was a bit unnerving...it was about five hours. It some of the literature it states a charge time of about 300 plus minute. With the optional battery grip, that's a day's worth of charging. Hopefully the recharge will be proportional to depletion. I like the fact the optional battery grip has the alternate holder for AA batteries. Probably will never need it but it's nice insurance when away from home for an extended day's shooting. Still nightmares of the *ist D eating batteries, especially with the CF micro drive cards!

In summary, the apprehension was unwarranted. The camera feels good, functions wonderfully and I am pleased with the initial results...it's hit on every deficit I believed existed with the K20 when compared to the nameless "others". Al

[Class A]

Did anyone notice the K-5 II vs K-5 IIs comparison using a model on the Japanese Pentax website?

Both appear to be (over-) sharpened and the K-5 II leaves absolutely nothing to be desired (DA* 55/1.4 @ f/7.1).

BTW, if you download the images, swap them left to right and then look at them cross-eyed, you can see the model in full 3D glory.

P.S.: Did anyone else notice the the nasty moiré in the f/5.6 cacti landscape shot? It appears, Adam managed to create moiré in a landscape shot, after all.

[imtheguy]

P.S.: Did anyone else notice the the nasty moiré in the f/5.6 cacti landscape shot? It appears, Adam managed to create moiré in a landscape shot, after all.

I am not sure how "nasty" it is but am glad I finally know what a Christmas cactus looks like. Just needs blinking lights.

Not having any cacti in Virginia I have looked but yet to find any hint of moire in my landscape and critter shots though.

[JohnBee]

P.S.: Did anyone else notice the the nasty moiré in the f/5.6 cacti landscape shot? It appears, Adam managed to create moiré in a landscape shot, after all.

Back in the day when I used to shoot a modified(hot-rod) S5 Pro, and learned the hard way how painful moire could be. I never shot cacti myself, but I definitely saw enough moire while shooting landscapes to vow never to go that route again.

That being said, things really seems worst at lower resolutions, and so I'm thinking I could live a D800E

[Anvh]

Since brushed motors are designed on a continuous cycle vs the intermittent use of a focusing system, I'm thinking the lifecycle of those motors will far exceed anything we'd ever see or use.

Good to know.