[guillermovilas]

The are a lot of cooler heads who are reminding people (correctly) that the difference between the K-5 and the D7000 scores are well within testing tolerance, and the performance is essentially the same.

The difference between the K-R and K-X is even less - the Overall dXOMark score is the same between the two. Easily within testing tolerance and individual body differences.
So I'm confused why people keep saying the K-R is worse....

(low light high ISO)
K-x 811
k-r 755

and i must say that i do believe by experience that there notes are correct :ugh:

I once had 4 Canon bodies : 5d,50d,450d and 1000d and the high ISO performance of each body compared exactly like they said

[dosdan]

Also, people should keep in mind that the D700 still beats the K-5 in terms of high-ISO performance (signal to noise ratio) up to ISO 6400. The K-5 wins in dynamic range and total score, but full frame still has the advantage in terms of noise (though, the gap is narrowing, when the latest DX is compared to two-year-old FX technology).

But the D700 is 50% heavier (995g vs 670g) and bulkier. I don't like lugging big, heavy cameras around. I don't want a grip either, or shudder, a monstrosity like the D3. Where's the sleek lines in that camera? Pentax puts good performance in reasonably sized, ergonomic packages.

Let's not all bow down at the altar of "Bigger is Better". Otherwise, we'll end up playing games like "My 400/F2.8 on my D3 is bigger than yours, so I must be a more serious photographer than you".

Dan

[rawr]

That is a huge difference, and I can smell motives like commercial advantage there. So is Canon being an evil rogue who writes their own rules, or is APS-? just some dartboard at a piss-up party for any mfgr to flaunt as much and if they want?

Canon no doubt has technical and business reasons for offering it's DSLRs in 3 sensor sizes (APS-C 1.6 ultracrop - eg 7D, APS-H 1.3 eg 1DMark4, and FF eg 5D2). But as the numbers from DXO show, it does pay a performance penalty for choosing a denser ultracrop format for its consumer DSLRs (like the 7D and 60D).

And no, I don't think APS-C sensor size is regulated by any particular standards body or something - the only loose guideline is that it is a "format approximately equivalent in size to the Advanced Photo System "classic" size negatives. These negatives were 25.1 × 16.7 mm and had an aspect ratio 3:2" according to Wikipedia:
APS-C - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[falconeye]

I agree, but... in my own research(its been a long week), I've found that the D700 holds no visible advantage over the K-5 anywhere under ISO5000.

That depends on what you mean by visible...

We have compared D700 vs. K-x ( Falk Lumo: Lumolabs: Sensors of Nikon D700, D5000 and Pentax K-x ) and found a 3 dB SNR advantage for D700 18% gray at ISO 1600 (after demosaicing). BTW, DxO later found a 4 dB advantage (normalized iso) for this pair (before demosaicing).

In our above article, you find crops of noise wedges where you can inspect the effect visually. It is not very noticeable due to 1600 still being excellent for both cameras. It is a bit more visible at 12800 although K-x applies NR which makes the numeric values equal (both our's and DxO's). Interestingly, the eye isn't fooled and sees the 1 stop difference more clearly than at ISO 1600 (the numeric value is for 18% anyway).

As for the K-5, it performs great and manages to maintain the low pixel noise of the K-x despite the higher pixel count (it's even 0.4 dB better at ISO 1600).

The K-5's pixel advantage corresponds to another 1.2 dB but this still isn't enough to beat the D700. It stays 2.9 dB or 1 stop ahead.

You don't easily see the difference at ISO 1600 because of the high overall quality. I assume it will be more visible at ISO 6400 where K-5 applies NR making the numbers equal but doesn't fool the eye. At ISO 12800, the D700 runs into problems because of read-out noise and the K-5 indeed achieves FF performance.

[Rite]

OBSERVATION: The K-5 indicative price in the DxO comparison is $1,374 USD, or $186 less than is currently available in the US.

[rawr]

The K-5 indicative price in the DxO comparison is $1,374 USD, or $186 less than is currently available in the US

Maybe DXO got a special discount from Pentax. Hence the VIP treatment they gave to the K-5.

[Just kidding, of course. Pls don't kill me.]

[Rite]

Maybe DXO got a special discount from Pentax. Hence the VIP treatment they gave to the K-5.

======================================

If DxO's USD review price was the actual Pentax USD SALE PRICE, I might actually BUY it.

[Hypocorism]

Maybe DXO got a special discount from Pentax. Hence the VIP treatment they gave to the K-5.

Yep maybe wads of cash passed under desks or other clandestine favours were exchanged -- and, if we didn't know that the market will drive that number to look expensive soon enough, then it might even look appealing now.

[Just kidding, of course. Pls don't kill me.]

Oh yes, you can rest assured that the resident sycophant apologists will have back-of-neck hair sharply raised at mere sight of your flippancy there.

.R.

[rawr]

If DxO's USD review price was the actual Pentax USD SALE PRICE

It's all about the exchange rate and the local pricing policies of each Pentax distributor. World-wide, K-5 pricing seems all over the place.

In Australia K-5 body only goes for AUD $1595 minimum, which is equivalent to $1600 USD. So stop complaining And in Australia the K-5 is cheaper by $100 than the D7000 as well. Go figure. It's a mad world.

[bobmaxja]

OBSERVATION: The K-5 indicative price in the DxO comparison is $1,374 USD, or $186 less than is currently available in the US

THis have been fiscussed already . DXO is base in France and that the Euro price converted in USD
In Canada , I am buying the K-5 for $1420 but our $ in stranger than the USD vs Yen

[m8o]

...which is equivalent to $1600 USD. So stop complaining ...

That's exactly what it's selling for here. And I will not stop complaining.

[JohnBee]

THis have been fiscussed already . DXO is base in France and that the Euro price converted in USD
In Canada , I am buying the K-5 for $1420 but our $ in stranger than the USD vs Yen

The difference between the D7K and K-5 in Canada seems to be aprox. 100 dollars.

I do feel bad for US pricing though... very odd tbh.

[Hypocorism]

The difference between the D7K and K-5 in Canada seems to be aprox. 100 dollars.

I do feel bad for US pricing though... very odd tbh.

I smell it as a calculated strategy by Nikon to entrench their brand and position on US dirt over any and every impending opposition. (eg. C.60D, the other "big on video" prosumer in that space had been creeping down in street price so that has to be contended with hard-hitting impact)

The attack also includes USD100-400 instant rebate sweeteners on most D7000 kits too so it's not just body only bait.

I agree with you though, it's been odd to fathom from the start. Mostly because they obviously don't see need for same game-plan in other market regions, which has to be confusing and or disappointing for many prospective buyers.

All makes Pentax global play look pretty normal, really.

.R.

[kittykat46]

Where I live, the K-5 costs USD $ 35 less than the D7000, both body only.

I expect there will soon be various permutations of deals with Kit Lenses, rebates etc. making direct comparisons difficult.

I find it kind of hilarious actually.....Pentax and Nikon are obviously watching their turf very closely, almost removing comparative price from the equation.

[Agnostic]

Great results and unexpected. Seems someone has been listening to my comments (well ok not really )

I expressed the hope previously that the next DSLR battleground after the megapixel and high iso races would be dynamic range.

What I stated I wanted most for my next DSLR was increased dynamic range and improved dynamic range distribution and a cleaner blue channel a lower iso's for b&w conversions. From what I have seen so far all my wishes have come true. It's been very annoying to see those years old Fuji cams sitting at the top of the dynamic range plot at DXO.

Of course the bad thing is that now it looks like I'm going to have to buy the K5... When the price drops a bit and some full reviews have come in from other sources that is. Hoping it will not be too far from the 1000 Euro mark in a few months.

By the way does anybody have any data on the dynamic range distribution? Is there a distribution curve up somewhere? How much of it is in shadow and highlight areas?