[eddie1960]

any camera can be a pro camera, just needs to be used by a pro, but to really define it I always thought of Pro cameras as systems (the Nikon f/f2/f3 etc aas an example, or Pentax's LX for that matter, pretty much any medium format slr as well, in the digital age I think contstruction,speed, AF, advanced metering, tethering etc as well as a broad selection of lenses of high quality/good build along with a support network that can fulfill pro demands - based on this really only Nikon, Canon Hassy, Phaseone/mamiya really can be truly called pro as they meet all these and more.)
I've seen pro shots done with a holga though so when all is said and done cameras are just a tool like any other (I may have posted this before i'm a little zoned out today too many beers at a memorial last night)

[aleonx3]

What defines pro cameras mega pixels or the photographer I know from experience it is the photographer even though I am a fanatical PENTAX user and owner. nuff said. IAN

When I bought my first k100D DSLR 5 years ago coming from the Olympus D40 P&S, I thought the Rebel series (XT, XS) or D200 owners were avid photographers who know something that I don't; showing me their best zoom lens 18-200VR and the EFS 17-85 IS lens and how wonderful those lenses were. What did I know at the time - the only thing that attracted me to the Pentax K100D was the fact that it uses SD card instead of CF (which I thought is was brilliant idea) as I know SD format will eventually become a de facto standard - in fact it is true.

Later I found some literature about the (3 amigo) FA limited lens and started to collect them (31mm limited was priced below the most sought after super zooms -18-200VR and 17-85 IS lens). I sure really glad I did. In the Canikon world, the 'prime' word is seldom used and often referred to as inferior and outdated system - the big words are zooms and superzooms.

The majority of Cannikon 'owners' I know probably know very little about how to take photos... other than boasting about 'better' flash system which they never learn how to use except 'auto' mode and high pixel count per dollar as one of them just bought the T2i thinking that it is cheaper than buying 7d for the same sensor (brilliant marketing on Canon's part as many of the T2i are sold this way). It is not that Canikon system are bad (they are solid systems), but there are just too many blind followers over there and most believe that once they have the 5D mkII or D700, even D300s/7D they become 'pro'... and they are not shy to brag about it....

[PixleFish]

Sorry I have to disagree with this comment, the following from Snapsort where the K5 scored 100 and the 7D 81.

Significantly better image quality 82.0 vs 66.0 More than 20% better image quality


The 7D is only 1 FPS faster and falls short of the K5 in nearly every department.

Thats an interesting website, they gave the K-5 very high marks. In-fact they gave it the same score as the Nikon D3S when it comes to image quality.

1. I've seen the IQ of the D3S and I'm sorry to say the K5 does not have the same IQ, but thats understandable since the D3S is a $5,000 pro camera.
2. That website puts the K5 in the "entry level" category.

I have a feeling that that website is comparing the K5 to other cameras in "its league" so YES when you compare it to the D90 and the Cannon Rebel T2i it gets high marks. But I don't believe they mean for you to compare an "entry level" camera like the K5 to the "pro level" camera of the 7D or D3S.

Don't get me wrong. I shoot pentax, and would love to see the K5 take on Canikon, but I'm not sure how credible that website is.

[doc.mark.dimo]

This entire debate on whether something is Pro or Semipro or entry level is actually moot. In the end, like others have mentioned it comes down to who is shooting and not necessarily the equipment.

If you get paid for your work, then I guess its acceptable to be classified as professional. Now after saying that, I have seen enthusiasts shoot some of the most amazing landscapes, never get paid, yet I feel their work screams..."professional."

I shoot with what I am most comfortable with, and am secure in knowing that the camera I choose is the tool that makes my job easier. Pentax just seems to do that best for me.

Other systems I have worked with have made achieving the decisive moment a little easier, but the prep time and obstacles by way of poor ergonomics and weight have prompted me to return to Pentax.

When my travel mag sends me on assignment to shoot a resort or a location, Im happy bringing the Kx and the lot of DA pancake limiteds. More than enough equipment to get the job done. It may be viewed as a toy, but I like to be discrete and perceived as a novice when Im working, so no distractions.

Shoot with whatever you feel suits your needs, that's photography

[aleonx3]

This entire debate on whether something is Pro or Semipro or entry level is actually moot. In the end, like others have mentioned it comes down to who is shooting and not necessarily the equipment.

If you get paid for your work, then I guess its acceptable to be classified as professional. Now after saying that, I have seen enthusiasts shoot some of the most amazing landscapes, never get paid, yet I feel their work screams..."professional."

I shoot with what I am most comfortable with, and am secure in knowing that the camera I choose is the tool that makes my job easier. Pentax just seems to do that best for me.

Other systems I have worked with have made achieving the decisive moment a little easier, but the prep time and obstacles by way of poor ergonomics and weight have prompted me to return to Pentax.

When my travel mag sends me on assignment to shoot a resort or a location, Im happy bringing the Kx and the lot of DA pancake limiteds. More than enough equipment to get the job done. It may be viewed as a toy, but I like to be discrete and perceived as a novice when Im working, so no distractions.

Shoot with whatever you feel suits your needs, that's photography

Doc, I like that approach... true professional in my book.

[johnmflores]

I'd categorize the K-5 as semi-awesome. The rest of the awesome has to come from the photographer.

[WerTicus]

I've been paid for shots taken with the K-x, therefor the K-x is a professional camera. That makes the K-5 somewhere above professional.

[luke0622]

Thats an interesting website, they gave the K-5 very high marks. In-fact they gave it the same score as the Nikon D3S when it comes to image quality.

1. I've seen the IQ of the D3S and I'm sorry to say the K5 does not have the same IQ, but thats understandable since the D3S is a $5,000 pro camera.
2. That website puts the K5 in the "entry level" category.

I have a feeling that that website is comparing the K5 to other cameras in "its league" so YES when you compare it to the D90 and the Cannon Rebel T2i it gets high marks. But I don't believe they mean for you to compare an "entry level" camera like the K5 to the "pro level" camera of the 7D or D3S.

Don't get me wrong. I shoot pentax, and would love to see the K5 take on Canikon, but I'm not sure how credible that website is.

"Pro Level" camera of the 7D?

[Rin]

I put the &D int he same league as the K5. The focus is a little bit faster and has more crosstype sensors but the K5 has better weathersealing and sensor (especially the DR is higher). But i think both are targeted to a different type of user.

However i put the D7000 bellow the 7D and the K5, Nikon really did not want to mess with their higher end cams. The focus is not as fast as it could be considering the massive amount of focus points, the sensor is good, but the camera body is not really made to withstand harder abuse. It has a magnesium frame but the rest is plastic. Nonetheless a good and i think better camera compared to the 60D, close to the 7D and the K5.

[PixleFish]

I don't think the debate is whether or not the camera is worthy of being used by pros, its about whether or not Dpreview will put it in the semipro category.

First off my bet is it will be in the semipro category because thats how pentax is marketing it.

Secondly, its going to take amazing pictures regardless... AKA... who cares.

D7000 now in correct category [Page 1]: Nikon D90 - D40 / D7000 - D3000 Forum: Digital Photography Review

interesting ... the D7000 was put in mid range category by dpreview
should be interesting to see where they put the K5 .. i predict the semipro (with the D300s and 7d) which also means it will have to best those 2 to get the gold award (and impress the staff)
exciting times ahead

[PixleFish]

"Pro Level" camera of the 7D?

7D is semi pro

[buster110]

The category placement of a camera has a direct effect on what competition it is compared to by marketers and sales reps. Period. Does it really matter to the end user if it has a prosumer, pro or enthusiast classification? No, of course not, but it certainly helps the salesman trying to make a sale. It's up to you to make a choice on price points.

In the end the features and quality are typically self selecting based on price and without need of a classification, other than Full Frame, NOT Full Frame or Medium Format. No manufacturer is going to sell a product with significantly more/less features for significantly more/less then their competition.

Prosumer is a marketing word that has zero relevance other than to stroke the ego of the person buying it and the company that made up the stupid term to create and sell yet another body( stupid or genius... depending on how you look at it) .

A standard will never come about and all manufacturers and the ad agencies that push for the slightest differences will tweak/wordsmith, take liberties on features until the cows come home and the common buyer will not care, nor ever push the camera features to the limits they embellish.

I choose Pentax and have adjusted my camera to shoot how I like it. I would do the same if I had a Canon or whatever. If the skin tones look a little blue then I'll adjust my settings until they don't. I personally like my photo's a little warmer, my shooting buddy likes to over saturate his... at least to me. He's been paid for some of his images and I've been paid for some of mine. If my IQ is just a little better or worse or I have a little soft focus or whatever, the only one who gives a rats ass are the pixel peepers who spend more time looking at someone else's pixels then shooting and enjoying their camera themselves... Besides doesn't a lot of that have to do with the lens?

I spend day after day after day (reluctantly) looking at stock photography for clients and I can say with 100% certainty that they do not care at all about any of the above.


In the end who really cares what camera you buy. If you are happy with it, great. Have fun. If you are so insecure about your purchase that you have to belittle someone else's choice then that's your freakin problem, not mine. I proudly go out and shoot with what I own (which doesn't mean I don't want a K5 anytime soon!)

[doc.mark.dimo]

I'd categorize the K-5 as semi-awesome. The rest of the awesome has to come from the photographer.

Love that comment!!!

[Eruditass]

Thats an interesting website, they gave the K-5 very high marks. In-fact they gave it the same score as the Nikon D3S when it comes to image quality.

1. I've seen the IQ of the D3S and I'm sorry to say the K5 does not have the same IQ, but thats understandable since the D3S is a $5,000 pro camera.
2. That website puts the K5 in the "entry level" category.

I have a feeling that that website is comparing the K5 to other cameras in "its league" so YES when you compare it to the D90 and the Cannon Rebel T2i it gets high marks. But I don't believe they mean for you to compare an "entry level" camera like the K5 to the "pro level" camera of the 7D or D3S.

Don't get me wrong. I shoot pentax, and would love to see the K5 take on Canikon, but I'm not sure how credible that website is.

Snapsort pulls data from other websites. Most of it is from dxomark.

[jbinpg]

@Pixlefish - Do you actually have and use a K-5 or are you just comparing its output to the Nikon based on web images?