[Steelski]

Lets see, I own a K20D and would like to upgrade because
Better AF
Better AF
Better AF
Better High ISO,
More resolution (more crop)
More FPS 2.8 vs 7
compressed DNG
No purple halo,
No banding
ISO 80
guaranteed to work at lower temp.
prime II (HDR, CA and distortion control)
Video
Video longer than 5 seconds
bigger screen with more dots,
100% viewfinder
improved SR function (auto straighten)
more profile presets (I like those)
programmable fx button
lock on mode dial. (big plus for me)
Better AF.

[filorp]

Lets see, I own a K20D and would like to upgrade because
Better AF
Better AF
Better AF
Better High ISO,
More resolution (more crop)
More FPS 2.8 vs 7
compressed DNG
No purple halo,
No banding
ISO 80
guaranteed to work at lower temp.
prime II (HDR, CA and distortion control)
Video
Video longer than 5 seconds
bigger screen with more dots,
100% viewfinder
improved SR function (auto straighten)
more profile presets (I like those)
programmable fx button
lock on mode dial. (big plus for me)
Better AF.

you should mention about better AF

[hague2010]

I love my K20D but I also have issues in low light situations but I am hoping that I can get my hands on a K5 in the near future.

[jsherman999]

Actually I already own a D700 FF and I will be selling it shortly.
I think the facts are subjective, however... it was a wedding gig that got me to upgrade to a FF in the first place as the K20D simply wasn't up to the task(worthless).

Now... with the K-5's advanced AF, ISO, FPS and other refinements, I will be able to keep my kit and replace my K20's for less than the cost of a single D700. And don't get me started on the cost of ownership of a FF camera(ouch).

I keep seeing people throwing FF solutions around as though they are the end-all to all camera needs, but I have yet to find anyone actually work out the most important detail of all... "cost of ownership"

Ex:

My current working kit value = $4700CA
A FF equivalent = $11000+

Which brings us to a very important issue.
What advantages are we truly looking at past the price point with a FF vs a camera like the K-5?

Answer: DOF and CROP values.

I'll let you be the judge of how much that's worth to you

.

John, you seem to be doing everything you can to talk yourself into selling your D700

My advice - unless it's becoming a very important a money factor, wait for some professional reviews for the k-5 before you do anything right now.

Over the years I've some to distrust the euphoria that accompanies a new purchase, and I see a lot of "I'm speechless!" and "stunning!" superlatives being thrown around - truthfully, I'd feel better if I saw some very pragmatic "here's what's *not* perfect about my k-5" posts right about now, because then I'd be able to decide if that factor was even important to me.

The AF-lock in low light is very important to the kind of shooting you need to do at a wedding - probably even more important than high-iso performance, and right now we really only have anecdotal accounts about how it 'seems' faster. Frank has said that the AF was improved over the K-7, but not by as much as the K-7 was improved over the K20D - and that worries me, because in my experience, the K-7 vs. K20D improvement was very minor, if it was even there.

(also - I was able to outfit my D700 very nicely for quite a bit less than $11,000 (!!) You may want to consider just selling some of those huge zooms and going more stealthy (& cheaper) with some nice primes, or 3rd-party zooms.)




.

---

Last edited by jsherman999; 10-17-2010 at 10:24 AM.

[Kguru]

Despite swearing not to, looks like I will be running a dual system after all.
K5 with the superb Ltd lenses and K20D with the other so-so lenses

[Kguru]

... I see a lot of "I'm speechless!" and "stunning!" superlatives being thrown around

I have been skeptical of these exclamations in the past too but this time I'm speechless myself, after seeing this pic in the other thread
Quite sure K20D can't achieve anywhere near that under the same studio settings.

[imgwideleft]http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital/slr/k-5/image/ex_02.jpg[/imgwideleft]

[Pentaxor]

I have been skeptical of these exclamations in the past too but this time I'm speechless myself, after seeing this pic in the other thread
Quite sure K20D can't achieve anywhere near that under the same studio settings.

[imgwideleft]http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital/slr/k-5/image/ex_02.jpg[/imgwideleft]

that is some mad serious work.

[jsherman999]

I have been skeptical of these exclamations in the past too but this time I'm speechless myself, after seeing this pic in the other thread
Quite sure K20D can't achieve anywhere near that under the same studio settings.

Hm - ISO 100... Have you not had the pleasure of viewing some of benjikan's studio work with the K20D?


.

[Kguru]

Hm - ISO 100... Have you not had the pleasure of viewing some of benjikan's studio work with the K20D?

With due respect to Benjikan, his K20D works were obviously stunning however did not strike me as much as that one

[CraneGuy1]

I love my K20D but I also have issues in low light situations but I am hoping that I can get my hands on a K5 in the near future.

I just ordered a K-5 and the D-BG4 grip today. I hope to experience what all of the fuss is about. My neighbor wants my K20. That's what I call perfect timing.

I can't wait to try my DA* lenses on it.

[Ash]

.

John, you seem to be doing everything you can to talk yourself into selling your D700

My advice - unless it's becoming a very important a money factor, wait for some professional reviews for the k-5 before you do anything right now.

Over the years I've some to distrust the euphoria that accompanies a new purchase, and I see a lot of "I'm speechless!" and "stunning!" superlatives being thrown around - truthfully, I'd feel better if I saw some very pragmatic "here's what's *not* perfect about my k-5" posts right about now, because then I'd be able to decide if that factor was even important to me.

The AF-lock in low light is very important to the kind of shooting you need to do at a wedding - probably even more important than high-iso performance, and right now we really only have anecdotal accounts about how it 'seems' faster. Frank has said that the AF was improved over the K-7, but not by as much as the K-7 was improved over the K20D - and that worries me, because in my experience, the K-7 vs. K20D improvement was very minor, if it was even there.

(also - I was able to outfit my D700 very nicely for quite a bit less than $11,000 (!!) You may want to consider just selling some of those huge zooms and going more stealthy (& cheaper) with some nice primes, or 3rd-party zooms.)




.

Whilst a more objective pragmatic approach, it's a little too pessimistic. A healthy skepticism does well for judgement, filtering out a lot of the emotions, but saying the K-7 had little if not no AF advancement over the K20D is quite inaccurate.

Of course if you want to compare the AF of the D700 with these newer Pentax dSLRs, then relatively speaking the speed and accuracy between successive models may be more menial. But there is still an absolute improvement in performance, and that *does* matter. Once the K-5 has its formal pro reviews, you may stil be skeptical and need to test it yourself.

Highly recommended in any case.

[jsherman999]

Whilst a more objective pragmatic approach, it's a little too pessimistic. A healthy skepticism does well for judgement, filtering out a lot of the emotions, but saying the K-7 had little if not no AF advancement over the K20D is quite inaccurate.

The problem is that this can be subjective. My trials with the k-7 showed little improvement in low-light af-lock, same micro-adjust hunting sequence, pretty much the same lock time with my 77ltd and da 35ltd. *But* - I'm using the word 'little', which is subjective.

Of course if you want to compare the AF of the D700 with these newer Pentax dSLRs, then relatively speaking the speed and accuracy between successive models may be more menial. But there is still an absolute improvement in performance, and that *does* matter. Once the K-5 has its formal pro reviews, you may stil be skeptical and need to test it yourself.

Highly recommended in any case.

What I really wish is that there can be an objective measure of AF-lock, kinda like a DxO score for AF. This is a point that doesn't get enough objective treatment, even in pro reviews sometimes.

It may very well be that I'll need to just take matters into my own hands and get a K-5 if I want to know for sure, right?

(and I really am not trying to harsh anyone's buzz, just trying to be careful with my $$ and at least pretend that I'm doing due diligence.)


.

[falconeye]

that is some mad serious work.

That's the quality I've been always asking for from a vendor portal or paid evangelist. I'm glad Pentax did it now. The call is still out for the 645D though ...

With due respect to Benjikan, his K20D works were obviously stunning however did not strike me as much as that one

Maybe. But I think he never showed us his work in full resolution. Unfortunately.

Back to the sample. Would that be ordinary studio work it wouldn't be that stunning. With proper lighting and sharpening, the K20D/K-7 can achieve the same.

However, this is ooc with a v0.20 firmware jpg engine and obviously no aggressive sharpening. With the DA*200 at f/5.6.

This 100% sample quality ooc and some other observation I made (which are too early to share) let me believe that the K-5 AA filter requires special attention.

DR, high ISO, AF, SR and AA are the big five questions demanding our attention.

[FullertonImages]

I have been skeptical of these exclamations in the past too but this time I'm speechless myself, after seeing this pic in the other thread
Quite sure K20D can't achieve anywhere near that under the same studio settings.

[imgwideleft]http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital/slr/k-5/image/ex_02.jpg[/imgwideleft]

Quite sure you're wrong. There's nothing exceptional about that photo (from a camera's perspective). Sure it's a nice shot. But a K20 under the same studio settings, would in fact, create the exact same image; or at least one with a very negligible difference. I've seen the K20d perform in the studio, and it does amazingly well at iso100 with controlled lighting. In fact it does amazingly well in many conditions. And that goes for the K10d, and obviously for the K-7 as well.

That's a great shot, but from the point of the camera itself, there is nothing special going on. Everything about that photo that stands out to me, has nothing to do with the camera. The lighting is nice, the pose is nice, the model is good looking. But that shot does nothing to show one camera's superiority over another. The lighting is beautiful and abundant, DR is controllable, AF, FPS and noise are all non-issues. The only thing that image requires of a camera, is the ability to render a very sharp image at iso100 with lots of light around; which has always been the strong point of all the recent Pentax DSLRs (except the K-x).

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.

[ozlizard]

The K5 is in no way an upgrade from my K20. give me a 645D or FF thanks.