Body construction K-5 compared with competition

Priyantha Bleeker · 10-22-2010, 03:34 AM

How do you guys(and girls

) compare the build quality of the K-5(should be the same as the K-7 I think ?) to that of the competition ?
Like a Nikon D300s or a Canon 7D ?

I've made a picture with the camera body's all together here:

click on the image for the high-res picture

Looking at the pictures I would say it is comparable but in real life ?
And looking at the K-5 pictures I can't see the mount, it is not attached...

Reportage · 10-22-2010, 03:42 AM

the body is one thing but what you should check is just how the parts are put together, who knows if a hard knock could dislodge a chip or mis-align something.

kittykat46 · 10-22-2010, 03:59 AM

Originally posted by Priyantha Bleeker

How do you guys(and girls

) compare the build quality of the K-5(should be the same as the K-7 I think ?) to that of the competition ?
Like a Nikon D300s or a Canon 7D ?

Looking at the pictures I would say it is comparable but in real life ?
And looking at the K-5 pictures I can't see the mount, it is not attached...

The K-7 has full metal front and bottom - built like a armoured tank...
The 7D is pretty solid as well, but the D7000 looks like "cost saving"

rawr · 10-22-2010, 05:21 AM

Build quality is not just the frame but the quality and durability of other elements of the body: - the LCDs, the switches and buttons, the seals, the weatherproofing, the doors, the exterior plastics etc - and how they are all put together.

At least the K-5 body and the D300s are relatively 'old and true' designs, closely based on previous bodies, and thus have a track record of user experiences one can look into. The D7000 and 7D are newer designs with less user history to assess build quality from.

For what it's worth, the D7000 and D300s are assembled in Thailand, the K-5 is assembled in Philippines, and the 7D is assembled in Japan.

I would rank them for body toughness:
K-5 D300s (tied)
D7000
7D

Priyantha Bleeker · 10-22-2010, 06:10 AM

Originally posted by rawr

Build quality is not just the frame but the quality and durability of other elements of the body: - the LCDs, the switches and buttons, the seals, the weatherproofing, the doors, the exterior plastics etc - and how they are all put together.

At least the K-5 body and the D300s are relatively 'old and true' designs, closely based on previous bodies, and thus have a track record of user experiences one can look into. The D7000 and 7D are newer designs with less user history to assess build quality from.

For what it's worth, the D7000 and D300s are assembled in Thailand, the K-5 is assembled in Philippines, and the 7D is assembled in Japan.

I would rank them for body toughness:
K-5 D300s (tied)
D7000
7D

So you think that the D7000 is better built than the 7D ?
I would think that the 7D, the K-5 and the D300(s) are all on par with each other but the D7000 a tad behind.

kales · 10-22-2010, 06:16 AM

lens mount of D700,K5 and 7D is definitely screwed to a plastic/resin base, but D300s mount looks like being mounted to the metal base. not 100% sure as there's no picture of D300s back.

So, it's D300s>K5=7D>>D7000

Conan · 10-22-2010, 06:47 AM

Originally posted by rawr

Build quality is not just the frame but the quality and durability of other elements of the body: - the LCDs, the switches and buttons, the seals, the weatherproofing, the doors, the exterior plastics etc - and how they are all put together.

At least the K-5 body and the D300s are relatively 'old and true' designs, closely based on previous bodies, and thus have a track record of user experiences one can look into. The D7000 and 7D are newer designs with less user history to assess build quality from.

For what it's worth, the D7000 and D300s are assembled in Thailand, the K-5 is assembled in Philippines, and the 7D is assembled in Japan.

I would rank them for body toughness:
K-5 D300s (tied)
D7000
7D

Your ranking is based on what? The 7D is definitely not a "newer design" in fact it was released on September 2009 and I'm sure it would be easy to find feedback on its build quality.

Conan · 10-22-2010, 06:51 AM

Originally posted by kales

lens mount of D700,K5 and 7D is definitely screwed to a plastic/resin base, but D300s mount looks like being mounted to the metal base. not 100% sure as there's no picture of D300s back.

So, it's D300s>K5=7D>>D7000

The 7D lens mount is directly on the Magnesium body:

Edvinas · 10-22-2010, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by kittykat46

The K-7 has full metal front and bottom - built like a armoured tank...
The 7D is pretty solid as well, but the D7000 looks like "cost saving"

K-7 is pictures without back cover which is plastic. Also, mount is screwed to plastic.

deadwolfbones · 10-22-2010, 10:20 AM

The K-7/K-5 have just as good build quality as my D700 and better ergonomics to boot.

RBellavance · 10-22-2010, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by Edvinas

K-7 is pictures without back cover which is plastic. Also, mount is screwed to plastic.

I recall reading somewhere that this was a feature, as in providing a breaking point which was relatively easy to repair and would hopefully prevent the (presumably metal) lens mount from breaking in case of impact. No idea if this really true, but it makes some sort of sense to me.

kalison · 10-22-2010, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by kales

lens mount of D700,K5 and 7D is definitely screwed to a plastic/resin base, but D300s mount looks like being mounted to the metal base. not 100% sure as there's no picture of D300s back.

So, it's D300s>K5=7D>>D7000

I think you meant the lens mount of the D7000 not the D700. The D300s has an almost identical body to the D700.

I think Nikon should have put a metal front and plastic back on the D7000

kalison · 10-22-2010, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by RBellavance

I recall reading somewhere that this was a feature, as in providing a breaking point which was relatively easy to repair and would hopefully prevent the (presumably metal) lens mount from breaking in case of impact. No idea if this really true, but it makes some sort of sense to me.

That actually makes sense to me as well. A bent mag body would be more expensive to replace than a plastic/composite mount.

bobmaxja · 10-22-2010, 12:08 PM

The reason they using magnesium is for weight consideration and wall thickness. A 3rd reason is that magnesium is a good heat dissipator, plastic is an insolator who is not very good for high end camera. a 4th reason is electric shielding , standard plastic is not
I am working with OEM all the time and I can mention that today with more than 10,000 different grade of plastic , you can beat metal almost anytime in strenght, toughness and cost.
But if you need a very thin, light and extra stiff case, magnesium is the way to go. When you look at the cut of the K-5, not a lot of space left because Pentax camera are selling this as a feature (smal size)

SpartanWarrior · 10-22-2010, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by Conan

The 7D lens mount is directly on the Magnesium body:

rawr rates the 7D last because he hates Canon that's it, but in reality it is pretty much as weather sealed as K-5
7D #1 Weather Sealing
try that with the D7000 and your screwed.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Landscape under construction	tigershiok	Post Your Photos!	6	07-28-2010 05:30 AM
Architecture Construction geometry	Blaze	Post Your Photos!	4	02-12-2010 06:35 AM
Urban Construction	pop4	Post Your Photos!	3	06-20-2009 05:01 PM
Construction site	alehel	Post Your Photos!	1	04-10-2009 06:03 AM
Some more construction....	Heinrich Lohmann	Post Your Photos!	12	04-10-2008 11:12 AM

10-22-2010, 03:34 AM	#1
Priyantha Bleeker Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 190	Body construction K-5 compared with competition How do you guys(and girls ) compare the build quality of the K-5(should be the same as the K-7 I think ?) to that of the competition ? Like a Nikon D300s or a Canon 7D ? I've made a picture with the camera body's all together here: click on the image for the high-res picture Looking at the pictures I would say it is comparable but in real life ? And looking at the K-5 pictures I can't see the mount, it is not attached...

10-22-2010, 03:42 AM	#2
Reportage Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 739	the body is one thing but what you should check is just how the parts are put together, who knows if a hard knock could dislodge a chip or mis-align something.

10-22-2010, 03:59 AM	#3
kittykat46 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 923	Originally posted by Priyantha Bleeker How do you guys(and girls ) compare the build quality of the K-5(should be the same as the K-7 I think ?) to that of the competition ? Like a Nikon D300s or a Canon 7D ? Looking at the pictures I would say it is comparable but in real life ? And looking at the K-5 pictures I can't see the mount, it is not attached... The K-7 has full metal front and bottom - built like a armoured tank... The 7D is pretty solid as well, but the D7000 looks like "cost saving"

10-22-2010, 05:21 AM	#4
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Build quality is not just the frame but the quality and durability of other elements of the body: - the LCDs, the switches and buttons, the seals, the weatherproofing, the doors, the exterior plastics etc - and how they are all put together. At least the K-5 body and the D300s are relatively 'old and true' designs, closely based on previous bodies, and thus have a track record of user experiences one can look into. The D7000 and 7D are newer designs with less user history to assess build quality from. For what it's worth, the D7000 and D300s are assembled in Thailand, the K-5 is assembled in Philippines, and the 7D is assembled in Japan. I would rank them for body toughness: K-5 D300s (tied) D7000 7D

10-22-2010, 06:10 AM	#5
Priyantha Bleeker Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Amsterdam Posts: 190 Original Poster	Originally posted by rawr Build quality is not just the frame but the quality and durability of other elements of the body: - the LCDs, the switches and buttons, the seals, the weatherproofing, the doors, the exterior plastics etc - and how they are all put together. At least the K-5 body and the D300s are relatively 'old and true' designs, closely based on previous bodies, and thus have a track record of user experiences one can look into. The D7000 and 7D are newer designs with less user history to assess build quality from. For what it's worth, the D7000 and D300s are assembled in Thailand, the K-5 is assembled in Philippines, and the 7D is assembled in Japan. I would rank them for body toughness: K-5 D300s (tied) D7000 7D So you think that the D7000 is better built than the 7D ? I would think that the 7D, the K-5 and the D300(s) are all on par with each other but the D7000 a tad behind.

10-22-2010, 06:16 AM	#6
kales Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Pluto Posts: 75	lens mount of D700,K5 and 7D is definitely screwed to a plastic/resin base, but D300s mount looks like being mounted to the metal base. not 100% sure as there's no picture of D300s back. So, it's D300s>K5=7D>>D7000

10-22-2010, 06:47 AM	#7
Conan Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Philippines Posts: 99	Originally posted by rawr Build quality is not just the frame but the quality and durability of other elements of the body: - the LCDs, the switches and buttons, the seals, the weatherproofing, the doors, the exterior plastics etc - and how they are all put together. At least the K-5 body and the D300s are relatively 'old and true' designs, closely based on previous bodies, and thus have a track record of user experiences one can look into. The D7000 and 7D are newer designs with less user history to assess build quality from. For what it's worth, the D7000 and D300s are assembled in Thailand, the K-5 is assembled in Philippines, and the 7D is assembled in Japan. I would rank them for body toughness: K-5 D300s (tied) D7000 7D Your ranking is based on what? The 7D is definitely not a "newer design" in fact it was released on September 2009 and I'm sure it would be easy to find feedback on its build quality.

10-22-2010, 06:51 AM	#8
Conan Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Philippines Posts: 99	Originally posted by kales lens mount of D700,K5 and 7D is definitely screwed to a plastic/resin base, but D300s mount looks like being mounted to the metal base. not 100% sure as there's no picture of D300s back. So, it's D300s>K5=7D>>D7000 The 7D lens mount is directly on the Magnesium body:

10-22-2010, 10:16 AM	#9
Edvinas Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kaunas Posts: 1,458	Originally posted by kittykat46 The K-7 has full metal front and bottom - built like a armoured tank... The 7D is pretty solid as well, but the D7000 looks like "cost saving" K-7 is pictures without back cover which is plastic. Also, mount is screwed to plastic.

10-22-2010, 10:20 AM	#10
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	The K-7/K-5 have just as good build quality as my D700 and better ergonomics to boot.

10-22-2010, 11:20 AM	#11
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by Edvinas K-7 is pictures without back cover which is plastic. Also, mount is screwed to plastic. I recall reading somewhere that this was a feature, as in providing a breaking point which was relatively easy to repair and would hopefully prevent the (presumably metal) lens mount from breaking in case of impact. No idea if this really true, but it makes some sort of sense to me.

10-22-2010, 11:46 AM	#12
kalison Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Utah Posts: 376	Originally posted by kales lens mount of D700,K5 and 7D is definitely screwed to a plastic/resin base, but D300s mount looks like being mounted to the metal base. not 100% sure as there's no picture of D300s back. So, it's D300s>K5=7D>>D7000 I think you meant the lens mount of the D7000 not the D700. The D300s has an almost identical body to the D700. I think Nikon should have put a metal front and plastic back on the D7000

10-22-2010, 11:51 AM	#13
kalison Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Utah Posts: 376	Originally posted by RBellavance I recall reading somewhere that this was a feature, as in providing a breaking point which was relatively easy to repair and would hopefully prevent the (presumably metal) lens mount from breaking in case of impact. No idea if this really true, but it makes some sort of sense to me. That actually makes sense to me as well. A bent mag body would be more expensive to replace than a plastic/composite mount.

10-22-2010, 12:08 PM	#14
bobmaxja Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Laval, Quebec Canada Posts: 2,171	The reason they using magnesium is for weight consideration and wall thickness. A 3rd reason is that magnesium is a good heat dissipator, plastic is an insolator who is not very good for high end camera. a 4th reason is electric shielding , standard plastic is not I am working with OEM all the time and I can mention that today with more than 10,000 different grade of plastic , you can beat metal almost anytime in strenght, toughness and cost. But if you need a very thin, light and extra stiff case, magnesium is the way to go. When you look at the cut of the K-5, not a lot of space left because Pentax camera are selling this as a feature (smal size)

10-22-2010, 12:26 PM	#15
SpartanWarrior Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Sparta, Greece. Posts: 104	Originally posted by Conan The 7D lens mount is directly on the Magnesium body: rawr rates the 7D last because he hates Canon that's it, but in reality it is pretty much as weather sealed as K-5 7D #1 Weather Sealing try that with the D7000 and your screwed.