Pentax K-5

Pentax Lover · 10-27-2010, 12:08 PM

Hello from Texas.

I was a Member of PentaxForums at one time, and canceled because of interest in Nikon D7000, but I must say it is rather unimpressive at the moment, all for the reason of complaints on the initial units, and ALL having Dead Pixels in Live View, and those Dead Pixels show up in the Movies recorded.:ugh: I have never seen Nikon have troule with first bafches of Cameras that I can recall, and I might be jumping the Gun knowing me.

But Every since that first Pentax Camera, the istDL that I had, I WAS IMPRESSED with such an Under-Dog of a Camera maker of Pentax!
Yes Pentax is an under dog when considering Canikon are concerned.

Please read carefully the following: I heard it for myself that Pentax plans to HEAVILY push the Pentax K-5 hard, so they must be proud of it, and I saw it at youtube.com on the Pentax K-5 Video from Pentax, which is a Camera I will probably get, since the D7000 is of non interest until the fix the problems mentioned already, even then I probably wont be interested for the reason the Pentax has better Video in my Book.

I don't know how i am going to put my Kit togwther till i hear about the new Pentax flash introduce with K-5 and the 18-135mm Lens, and until the price goes down from the rediculous price to at least $1300. something, I will wait.

Tthe one thing that bugs me about the K-5 is the small Buffer, I hope a Firmware upgrade can fix that somewhat.

Considering the Nikon's HUGE Buffer, up to 100 Shots, oh well, win some loose some. Besides, the K-5 HAS BRACKETING OPTIONS the d7000 doesn't have, which holds more interest to me anyway.

Last edited by Pentax Lover; 10-28-2010 at 09:52 AM.

Ole · 10-27-2010, 09:41 PM

Just a comment on the buffer: That is based on physical limitations. While a firmware upgrade might be able to optimize the image processing and write speed a bit it will not be significant and probably have no measurable impact on the number of shots that can be buffered.

I would think in a crunch one could shoot jpeg at a lower resolution and thus obtain more shots at the max fps.

Pentax Lover · 10-27-2010, 11:50 PM

[
Removed to prevent misunderstanding

Photo1960 · 10-27-2010, 11:54 PM - **1 Like**

Pentax Lover,

Welcome - I joined yesterday. I'm like you in that I was drifting from Pentax until I got the goods on the K-5. Pentax is finally getting worthy of its historic reputation with this one.

Pentax Lover · 10-28-2010, 12:13 AM

Originally posted by Photo1960

Pentax Lover,

Welcome - I joined yesterday. I'm like you in that I was drifting from Pentax until I got the goods on the K-5. Pentax is finally getting worthy of its historic reputation with this one.

Thanks for that coment Matee (an old Pirate term) you made me feel welcome already.

buaobao · 10-28-2010, 01:06 AM

This is of no big deal about d7k 100 images burst but .. i still remember in some post that shows that 100 image in burst burst mode of jpeg was only in 4mb size. and holding a shutter for more than 10 seconds is impractical. Don't you think that if K-5 sets at smaller size such as the d7k will also do the job ? (provided that sandisk extreme sdhc 30mb/s is in the slot)

...buaobao

MRRiley · 10-28-2010, 05:58 AM

Originally posted by Pentax Lover

thanks for the comment, but i believe this is in wrong thread, and should have been placed in "I have a question", but again thanks and no biggee

You do realize that Ole is one of the forum Administrators don't you? Nice of you to approve his post.

Mike
PF Moderation Team

Parallax · 10-28-2010, 07:20 AM

Originally posted by Ole

Just a comment on the buffer: That is based on physical limitations. While a firmware upgrade might be able to optimize the image processing and write speed a bit it will not be significant and probably have no measurable impact on the number of shots that can be buffered.

I would think in a crunch one could shoot jpeg at a lower resolution and thus obtain more shots at the max fps.

Originally posted by Pentax Lover

thanks for the comment, but i believe this is in wrong thread, and should have been placed in "I have a question", but again thanks and no biggee

Originally posted by MRRiley

You do realize that Ole is one of the forum Administrators don't you? Nice of you to approve his post.

Mike
PF Moderation Team

It was good of you, though, to point out the part about his post belonging in another thread.
In deference to your concern about posts being in the proper place, I have moved this thread to its proper forum.

WerTicus · 10-28-2010, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by Pentax Lover

I was a Member of PentaxForums at one time, and canceled because of interest in Nikon D7000

You do sound impulsive, I recommend a deep breath.

Pentax Lover · 10-28-2010, 09:50 AM

Folks I have two different threads, and they must each be lookedd and posted accordingly.

A misplaced comment here and there makes it no fun, so PLEASE READ CAREFULLY before commenting

MRRiley · 10-28-2010, 10:03 AM

Originally posted by Pentax Lover

Folks I have two different threads, and they must each be lookedd and posted accordingly.

A misplaced comment here and there makes it no fun, so PLEASE READ CAREFULLY before commenting

YOU mentioned the buffer in the opening post of this thread... so Ole's post regarding the buffer was 100% properly placed...

Jasvox · 10-28-2010, 10:52 AM

Oh Lord.

Jason

pxpaulx · 10-28-2010, 11:04 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Jasvox

Oh Lord.

Jason

Umm, are you sure this doesn't belong in the OTHER thread? Geez.

r0ckstarr · 10-28-2010, 11:08 AM

Best thread ever.

Parallax · 10-28-2010, 11:10 AM

Which one?

10-27-2010, 12:08 PM	#1
Pentax Lover Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Silsbee, TX Posts: 73	Hello from Texas Hello from Texas. I was a Member of PentaxForums at one time, and canceled because of interest in Nikon D7000, but I must say it is rather unimpressive at the moment, all for the reason of complaints on the initial units, and ALL having Dead Pixels in Live View, and those Dead Pixels show up in the Movies recorded.:ugh: I have never seen Nikon have troule with first bafches of Cameras that I can recall, and I might be jumping the Gun knowing me. But Every since that first Pentax Camera, the istDL that I had, I WAS IMPRESSED with such an Under-Dog of a Camera maker of Pentax! Yes Pentax is an under dog when considering Canikon are concerned. Please read carefully the following: I heard it for myself that Pentax plans to HEAVILY push the Pentax K-5 hard, so they must be proud of it, and I saw it at youtube.com on the Pentax K-5 Video from Pentax, which is a Camera I will probably get, since the D7000 is of non interest until the fix the problems mentioned already, even then I probably wont be interested for the reason the Pentax has better Video in my Book. I don't know how i am going to put my Kit togwther till i hear about the new Pentax flash introduce with K-5 and the 18-135mm Lens, and until the price goes down from the rediculous price to at least $1300. something, I will wait. Tthe one thing that bugs me about the K-5 is the small Buffer, I hope a Firmware upgrade can fix that somewhat. Considering the Nikon's HUGE Buffer, up to 100 Shots, oh well, win some loose some. Besides, the K-5 HAS BRACKETING OPTIONS the d7000 doesn't have, which holds more interest to me anyway. Last edited by Pentax Lover; 10-28-2010 at 09:52 AM.

10-27-2010, 11:50 PM	#3
Pentax Lover Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Silsbee, TX Posts: 73 Original Poster	[ Removed to prevent misunderstanding Last edited by Pentax Lover; 10-28-2010 at 09:54 AM.

10-27-2010, 09:41 PM	#2
Ole Administrator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,409	Just a comment on the buffer: That is based on physical limitations. While a firmware upgrade might be able to optimize the image processing and write speed a bit it will not be significant and probably have no measurable impact on the number of shots that can be buffered. I would think in a crunch one could shoot jpeg at a lower resolution and thus obtain more shots at the max fps.

10-27-2010, 11:54 PM - 1 Like	#4
Photo1960 New Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Anaheim, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 22	Pentax Lover, Welcome - I joined yesterday. I'm like you in that I was drifting from Pentax until I got the goods on the K-5. Pentax is finally getting worthy of its historic reputation with this one.

10-28-2010, 12:13 AM	#5
Pentax Lover Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Silsbee, TX Posts: 73 Original Poster	Originally posted by Photo1960 Pentax Lover, Welcome - I joined yesterday. I'm like you in that I was drifting from Pentax until I got the goods on the K-5. Pentax is finally getting worthy of its historic reputation with this one. Thanks for that coment Matee (an old Pirate term) you made me feel welcome already.

10-28-2010, 01:06 AM	#6
buaobao Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: des veoux rd west, kennedy town Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51	This is of no big deal about d7k 100 images burst but .. i still remember in some post that shows that 100 image in burst burst mode of jpeg was only in 4mb size. and holding a shutter for more than 10 seconds is impractical. Don't you think that if K-5 sets at smaller size such as the d7k will also do the job ? (provided that sandisk extreme sdhc 30mb/s is in the slot) ...buaobao

10-28-2010, 05:58 AM	#7
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	Originally posted by Pentax Lover thanks for the comment, but i believe this is in wrong thread, and should have been placed in "I have a question", but again thanks and no biggee You do realize that Ole is one of the forum Administrators don't you? Nice of you to approve his post. Mike PF Moderation Team

10-28-2010, 07:20 AM	#8
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	Originally posted by Ole Just a comment on the buffer: That is based on physical limitations. While a firmware upgrade might be able to optimize the image processing and write speed a bit it will not be significant and probably have no measurable impact on the number of shots that can be buffered. I would think in a crunch one could shoot jpeg at a lower resolution and thus obtain more shots at the max fps. Originally posted by Pentax Lover thanks for the comment, but i believe this is in wrong thread, and should have been placed in "I have a question", but again thanks and no biggee Originally posted by MRRiley You do realize that Ole is one of the forum Administrators don't you? Nice of you to approve his post. Mike PF Moderation Team It was good of you, though, to point out the part about his post belonging in another thread. In deference to your concern about posts being in the proper place, I have moved this thread to its proper forum.

10-28-2010, 08:52 AM	#9
WerTicus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Perth Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,514	Originally posted by Pentax Lover I was a Member of PentaxForums at one time, and canceled because of interest in Nikon D7000 You do sound impulsive, I recommend a deep breath.

10-28-2010, 09:50 AM	#10
Pentax Lover Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Silsbee, TX Posts: 73 Original Poster	Folks I have two different threads, and they must each be lookedd and posted accordingly. A misplaced comment here and there makes it no fun, so PLEASE READ CAREFULLY before commenting

10-28-2010, 10:03 AM	#11
MRRiley Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Sterling, VA, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,275	Originally posted by Pentax Lover Folks I have two different threads, and they must each be lookedd and posted accordingly. A misplaced comment here and there makes it no fun, so PLEASE READ CAREFULLY before commenting YOU mentioned the buffer in the opening post of this thread... so Ole's post regarding the buffer was 100% properly placed...

10-28-2010, 10:52 AM	#12
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107	Oh Lord. Jason

10-28-2010, 11:04 AM - 1 Like	#13
pxpaulx Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Twin Cities, MN Posts: 2,867	Originally posted by Jasvox Oh Lord. Jason Umm, are you sure this doesn't belong in the OTHER thread? Geez.

10-28-2010, 11:08 AM	#14
r0ckstarr Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,507	Best thread ever.

10-28-2010, 11:10 AM	#15
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	Which one?