[Priyantha Bleeker]

Still not good enough...
The pictures are just still NOT in the right focus.
And they have still used the old FA 50mm 1:1.4 instead of the newer DA* 55mm 1:1.4 which does a much better job with resolving a high resolution sensor.

[Jonson PL]

Good to hear. They were probably a bit too fast coming out with the Eos 60D review. I read a poster at Dpr complaining that the D7000 crop from Raw looked awful in the color. When he downloaded the original, there wasn't really a problem. It was merely a poor conversion to JPEG that they had done.
So it is the same; they're great at specs. Sometimes not so good photographers at Dpr

They do some fine work, but as always one should consider how results apply to own preferences. And doesn't harm to have a critical eye with you, as to how they implement the findings.

[lexurian]

Cracking big hot pixel in the D7000 sensor that Imaging Resource used - or has that already been noticed? I'd be a bit annoyed about that if I was Nikon...

[robgo2]

As I see the new samples posted at dpr, it appears that the on-chip NR of the K-5 at ISO 3200 and above is effective and quite good at retaining detail. Otherwise, it would appear that the only differences between the K-5 and the D7000 can be explained by differences in the lenses used and exposure. Also, GordonBGood has looked at the Imaging Resource raw files and confirms that the K-5 has slightly larger DR at ISO 800 and below, but that there is otherwise very little IQ difference between the two cameras, certainly not enough for choosing one camera over the other.

John Bee has stated that high ISO noise from the K-5 cleans up more easily than that from the K-7000. We will see if his observation is confirmed by others.

Rob

[Pentaxor]

John Bee has stated that high ISO noise from the K-5 cleans up more easily than that from the K-7000. We will see if his observation is confirmed by others.

Rob

I noticed this and this is much easier to see on the blacks. it starts from ISO6400.

[secateurs]

quite stunning, but the Pentax picture shows CA ... you can see it on the Martini bottle near the brush

Try looking in the top corners at the chequered indicators then! The CA is horrendous!!!!

[jpette]

Yes...for the high iso pentax very GOOD..

But this point has been forget.

The AF when pentax have also GOOD af that Nikon (hace for example)
Today...is very very far. turtle...always.
And the viewfinder...also, look in the viewfinder nikon, you're understand me.

Now great in picture quality, pentax has nice idea NOW working seriously AF quality

Best regards, jpette

[Smeggypants]

I just re-checked the DPReview jpeg comparison widget thingy, and it seems that they have re-uploaded shots for both the Nikon and the K-5!

And guess what! Surprise, surprise, the K-5 takes the cake at ALL ISO's!

Interestingly, the Canon 50D still seems to be suffering from some sort of focus issue, as it's quite soft. Perhaps this is to convince Canon users of the need for an upgrade?

Here's the (broken) link:

http://*************/reviews/studiocomparefullscreen.asp?masterCamera=canon_...57203378199089

Why is this link **** out?

[Smeggypants]

Try looking in the top corners at the chequered indicators then! The CA is horrendous!!!!

I wouldn't say it was horrendous. Easily fixed in PP though. Not the fault of the camera though

[aragondina]

While I'm glad that DPreview decided to redo their samples, I'm finding that the K5 is actually the worst between the K5 and the D7000. While the K5 seems to have a little less chroma noise, the D7000 has more detail and less luminance noise. All the Chroma noise in the 50d makes it look the worst. I shoot RAW so really JPEG comparisons are useless for me, but I'll play along because everyone seems to want to compare JPEG to JPEG.

One thing I notice in this thread is everyone seems to be using the 3 1/2 year old D3 as a benchmark, and yes the K5 is getting close to that, even though it does not have as much detail. Why not compare it to the current model the D3s to see how it compares?



It looks way cleaner than the K5 sample, and all the others too, and by a wide margin. By about 2 stops actually.



Very telling, While both the D7000 and the K5 are class leaders for APSC cameras, if people want to compare and say it's as good as a full frame they should compare it to the current model, not a 3.5 year old one.

In a normal sized print very few people would notice the difference between the K5 and the D7000, and maybe even the D3s at moderately high ISO's, but 3200 and beyond even in an 8X10 I think you would notice a big difference between the APS-C and the full frame.

Again I shoot RAW 99% of the time so when looking at the RAW files, all the APS-C cameras look about the same. The 50d looks the worst, with the D7000 and the K5 being a essentially a tie. The K5 has a little more luminance, and the D7000 a little more chroma noise. The difference is slight both ways and I think both files will clean up the same in ACR.

[rightangle]

Regarding the dpreview link not working - PentaxForums has temporarily blocked links to dpreview because for awhile now dpreview has been blocking links to PentaxForums from their forum. I am a bit disappointed with some of the K-5 shots so far, and certainly it is very difficult to say that the K-5 has a big advantage over either the the D7000 or D60. If you look at the imaging resource samples and compare those to say the D60 at even ISO 800 the red cloth is just about blown out in the k-5, hardly any detail remains, a terrible result. The yellow appears a bit off too. I checked the k-5 against the k-7 at ISO 1600 and honestly in some ways the k-7 looks more detailed, especially with the red cloth although I know the k-7 starts to falls apart above that, but then again I doubt I would shoot above 1600 too often even with these new models.

[janneman]

It looks way cleaner than the K5 sample, and all the others too, and by a wide margin. By about 2 stops actually.

On sharpness and detal you may be right but if you look at all samples you will see an ugly blotchyness, almost brightly coloured patches, on the dark areas for the D7000. Not sure if that looks nice in Real life

Very telling, While both the D7000 and the K5 are class leaders for APSC cameras, if people want to compare and say it's as good as a full frame they should compare it to the current model, not a 3.5 year old one.

Just and indication of the leaps APS C has made in IQ, the leap made in IQ for APS just dwarves IQ improvemenets in FF.

[gazonk]

While I'm glad that DPreview decided to redo their samples, I'm finding that the K5 is actually the worst between the K5 and the D7000. While the K5 seems to have a little less chroma noise, the D7000 has more detail and less luminance noise.

That's just the JPEG NR and sharpness settings. Try comparing the RAW images, the K-5 RAW images has far more detail than the K-5 JPEG (but note that dpreview mixed up the sorting of the D7000 RAW images - ISO 12800 seems to be what is marked as ISO 200).

[Pentaxor]

Regarding the dpreview link not working - PentaxForums has temporarily blocked links to dpreview because for awhile now dpreview has been blocking links to PentaxForums from their forum. I am a bit disappointed with some of the K-5 shots so far, and certainly it is very difficult to say that the K-5 has a big advantage over either the the D7000 or D60. If you look at the imaging resource samples and compare those to say the D60 at even ISO 800 the red cloth is just about blown out in the k-5, hardly any detail remains, a terrible result. The yellow appears a bit off too. I checked the k-5 against the k-7 at ISO 1600 and honestly in some ways the k-7 looks more detailed, especially with the red cloth although I know the k-7 starts to falls apart above that, but then again I doubt I would shoot above 1600 too often even with these new models.

what's with the blocking?

[janneman]

Now I look on a diferent monitor and what strikes me on the D7000 compared to the others, yes all others, is that the area around the letters and the thin dark line looks rather "artefacty" compared to the others....