Pulling the trigger -- purchase the k-5 now or wait?

Chex · 02-26-2011, 11:14 PM

I'm sure someone wanting to upgrade from their K-7 or K20D might have a body to sell and you could keep those pancakes! Then you could get the K-5 down the road (probably in a month) when they have addressed the problem.

lsucadien · 02-26-2011, 11:56 PM

I'm actually trying to be objective here now that I've calmed down a bit, scanning my files looks like my D300s had the same problems in low indoor lighting. That's a relief actually, I don't want to go back to Nikon, the form factor of this Pentax kit is just perfect.

**loveisageless** · 02-27-2011, 12:06 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

Just don't buy a D7000. Apparently it is plagued by focus issues as well as a few other things that are making users unhappy.

Nope, not the D7000 for sure. Uncomfortable ergonomically and as you note, buggy in its own right. I've actually been looking at the D700. All of its quirks are known and it seems to be the closest to the K5 in image quaity and high ISO performance. It's heavier than the K5, but I've discovered that the extra weight and the stablized lenses actually help with the hand tremor issue. If I sold my Pentax glass I could pick one up with a 16-35mm, 28-300mm, 105mm macro and a 50mm f/1.4.

That being said, I am very ambivalent at the prospect. I love the FA limiteds, the DA* 16-50mm and the DA* 50-135mm lenses. It is really unclear what direction Pentax will go in next. Micro 4/3rd? Mirrorless? A K3 with better autofocus and a dedicated button for video? It doesn't sound like full frame is in their game plan at this point and I'm a little camera shy so to speak about their QC and design problems with the K5. Does anyone think that Pentax didn't know about these problems prior to its release? One would assume that thorough testing would have been part of the design process. I don't know which possibility is more concerning. Either they failed to rigorously test their design along the way, or they knew it had problems and released it anyway.

I suspect any other members leaving the fold will be looking to get a good price for their gear, so don't count on getting someone's primes at a discount lol After all, they will have to replace it with something else.

Chex · 02-27-2011, 12:08 AM

Just knowing the acknowledge the problem and are working on it is a relief IMO, some manufacturers could just say it is what it is and leave it. Companies like Cannon & Nikon that have a broader range of DSLR camera's could probably eat the hit by annoyed end users of the D7000's/60D's issues because they have a LOT of users in higher end markets of the D3s & D3x/5D Mark II. But any company not willing to do its best for its customers will suffer in the long run.

**loveisageless** · 02-27-2011, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by Chex

Yeah, that crazy manual focus setting must not work for those situations that you would normally FF in...At least Pentax is acknowledging and working on it. If the store won't take your Limited's back, please put them up in the market! I would assume frustraded people wanting to get rid of their pentax gear would be willing to take a good hit on their stuff... $200 for your 70/77mm?

Actually, Pentax has not formally acknowledged the problem and all we are left with (with no disrespect for Adam or Faulk intended) rumors that they are indeed working on it. The camera was released in October. Almost 6 months later and they haven't had the respect for their customers to provide any direction or reassurance about the FF problem. If they are working on it you can bet its only because of the issue going viral on the net. All this thinly disguised macho photographer crap about just using manual focus to work around it, is besides the point. Not everyone can do so. Some people have vision or other impairments that make it difficult if not impossible to do so. Bottom line is that Pentax's customers paid $1500 a piece for a camera that is defective in design, whether the culprit be hardware or firmware. I'm not a troll, but I am a Pentax customer for over 36 years now and I think Pentax owes all of us an apology.

Chex · 02-27-2011, 12:40 AM

I would also accept a FA 31 or 77mmm ltd as a formal apology. I think that if they don't have it hammered out by the next 3-5 months people should just return them under warranty. But I'm still hopeful that the "rumors" are founded. It would be asinine of them to turn their back on what has the potential to start taking market share away from the competition.

**dadipentak** · 02-27-2011, 04:38 AM

Originally posted by Chex

It would be asinine of them to turn their back on what has the potential to start taking market share away from the competition.

Agree 100%.

jolepp · 02-27-2011, 04:48 AM

I guess the really frustrating thing is having something almost but not quite totally unlike junk

. (borrowing from Douglas Adams' magnum opus

).

**dadipentak** · 02-27-2011, 05:18 AM

Originally posted by jolepp

something almost but not quite totally unlike junk

Well put!

30v iPentax · 02-27-2011, 06:52 AM

Jalusta on jo keksitty.

Wheatfield · 02-27-2011, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by loveisageless

Actually, Pentax has not formally acknowledged the problem and all we are left with (with no disrespect for Adam or Faulk intended) rumors that they are indeed working on it. The camera was released in October. Almost 6 months later and they haven't had the respect for their customers to provide any direction or reassurance about the FF problem. If they are working on it you can bet its only because of the issue going viral on the net. All this thinly disguised macho photographer crap about just using manual focus to work around it, is besides the point. Not everyone can do so. Some people have vision or other impairments that make it difficult if not impossible to do so. Bottom line is that Pentax's customers paid $1500 a piece for a camera that is defective in design, whether the culprit be hardware or firmware. I'm not a troll, but I am a Pentax customer for over 36 years now and I think Pentax owes all of us an apology.

This is going to be an unpopular post but....
The AF specification is to work down to EV-1 according to DPReview. I don't know where they get their info, as the specification published on the Pentaximaging website seems to not mention an EV basement. My K5, in daylight, works well to about EV-2.
I'm sure if you check, you will find that your K5 will work as well, providing the colour spectrum isn't too far off daylight.
I will admit that I have lost patience with the bleating about 1500 dollar cameras that are defective, when that camera is working within the specification according to the spec sheet that Pentax has released.

lsucadien · 02-27-2011, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

This is going to be an unpopular post but....
The AF specification is to work down to EV-1 according to DPReview. I don't know where they get their info, as the specification published on the Pentaximaging website seems to not mention an EV basement. My K5, in daylight, works well to about EV-2.
I'm sure if you check, you will find that your K5 will work as well, providing the colour spectrum isn't too far off daylight.
I will admit that I have lost patience with the bleating about 1500 dollar cameras that are defective, when that camera is working within the specification according to the spec sheet that Pentax has released.

Which spec sheet would that be?

Parallax · 02-27-2011, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

This is going to be an unpopular post but....
The AF specification is to work down to EV-1 according to DPReview. I don't know where they get their info......

I think they make it up as they go along.

Zugzwang · 02-27-2011, 09:45 AM

The bottom line is that the K5 AF does not work in low light where the previous models do. This to me is the root of Pentax's problem, and one they need to solve quickly.

Ray Pulley · 02-27-2011, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

This is going to be an unpopular post but....
The AF specification is to work down to EV-1 according to DPReview. I don't know where they get their info, as the specification published on the Pentaximaging website seems to not mention an EV basement. My K5, in daylight, works well to about EV-2.
I'm sure if you check, you will find that your K5 will work as well, providing the colour spectrum isn't too far off daylight.
I will admit that I have lost patience with the bleating about 1500 dollar cameras that are defective, when that camera is working within the specification according to the spec sheet that Pentax has released.

Take a look at page 358 of the manual.

EV -1 to 18

In addition, if the camera records what it calculates the EV value to be (and it does), then we do not need any other calculations or formulas to decide whether it meets spec or not.

Pretty simple:

Shoot some images.

Assess the focus by looking at the image.

Look at the EXIF and see what PENTAX thinks the EV was.

If the EV is above -1 and the focus is off, the camera does not meet spec.

Ray

02-27-2011, 12:06 AM	#93
loveisageless Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Oakland, California Photos: Albums Posts: 1,250	Alternative to the K5 and D7000 Originally posted by Wheatfield Just don't buy a D7000. Apparently it is plagued by focus issues as well as a few other things that are making users unhappy. Nope, not the D7000 for sure. Uncomfortable ergonomically and as you note, buggy in its own right. I've actually been looking at the D700. All of its quirks are known and it seems to be the closest to the K5 in image quaity and high ISO performance. It's heavier than the K5, but I've discovered that the extra weight and the stablized lenses actually help with the hand tremor issue. If I sold my Pentax glass I could pick one up with a 16-35mm, 28-300mm, 105mm macro and a 50mm f/1.4. That being said, I am very ambivalent at the prospect. I love the FA limiteds, the DA* 16-50mm and the DA* 50-135mm lenses. It is really unclear what direction Pentax will go in next. Micro 4/3rd? Mirrorless? A K3 with better autofocus and a dedicated button for video? It doesn't sound like full frame is in their game plan at this point and I'm a little camera shy so to speak about their QC and design problems with the K5. Does anyone think that Pentax didn't know about these problems prior to its release? One would assume that thorough testing would have been part of the design process. I don't know which possibility is more concerning. Either they failed to rigorously test their design along the way, or they knew it had problems and released it anyway. I suspect any other members leaving the fold will be looking to get a good price for their gear, so don't count on getting someone's primes at a discount lol After all, they will have to replace it with something else.

02-27-2011, 10:14 AM	#105
Ray Pulley Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Fallon Nevada Photos: Albums Posts: 504	Wrong Originally posted by Wheatfield This is going to be an unpopular post but.... The AF specification is to work down to EV-1 according to DPReview. I don't know where they get their info, as the specification published on the Pentaximaging website seems to not mention an EV basement. My K5, in daylight, works well to about EV-2. I'm sure if you check, you will find that your K5 will work as well, providing the colour spectrum isn't too far off daylight. I will admit that I have lost patience with the bleating about 1500 dollar cameras that are defective, when that camera is working within the specification according to the spec sheet that Pentax has released. Take a look at page 358 of the manual. EV -1 to 18 In addition, if the camera records what it calculates the EV value to be (and it does), then we do not need any other calculations or formulas to decide whether it meets spec or not. Pretty simple: Shoot some images. Assess the focus by looking at the image. Look at the EXIF and see what PENTAX thinks the EV was. If the EV is above -1 and the focus is off, the camera does not meet spec. Ray

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pulling out my dad's old ME, what do I need to do to get it up and running?	mojoe_24	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	9	11-14-2010 10:54 PM
Pulling the trigger on a K-7 tomorrow... Advice please?	Unsinkable II	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	04-05-2010 11:07 PM
purchase advice: K-7? K-x? Wait?	WMBP	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	03-09-2010 09:25 AM
People Horse Pulling	treebeard	Post Your Photos!	5	09-26-2009 12:19 PM
Pulling the K20D trigger - need advice please	loony33	Pentax DSLR Discussion	21	03-14-2009 12:51 PM

02-26-2011, 11:14 PM	#91
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	I'm sure someone wanting to upgrade from their K-7 or K20D might have a body to sell and you could keep those pancakes! Then you could get the K-5 down the road (probably in a month) when they have addressed the problem.

02-26-2011, 11:56 PM	#92
lsucadien New Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Houston Posts: 18	I'm actually trying to be objective here now that I've calmed down a bit, scanning my files looks like my D300s had the same problems in low indoor lighting. That's a relief actually, I don't want to go back to Nikon, the form factor of this Pentax kit is just perfect.

02-27-2011, 12:08 AM	#94
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	Just knowing the acknowledge the problem and are working on it is a relief IMO, some manufacturers could just say it is what it is and leave it. Companies like Cannon & Nikon that have a broader range of DSLR camera's could probably eat the hit by annoyed end users of the D7000's/60D's issues because they have a LOT of users in higher end markets of the D3s & D3x/5D Mark II. But any company not willing to do its best for its customers will suffer in the long run.

02-27-2011, 12:31 AM	#95
loveisageless Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Oakland, California Photos: Albums Posts: 1,250	Originally posted by Chex Yeah, that crazy manual focus setting must not work for those situations that you would normally FF in...At least Pentax is acknowledging and working on it. If the store won't take your Limited's back, please put them up in the market! I would assume frustraded people wanting to get rid of their pentax gear would be willing to take a good hit on their stuff... $200 for your 70/77mm? Actually, Pentax has not formally acknowledged the problem and all we are left with (with no disrespect for Adam or Faulk intended) rumors that they are indeed working on it. The camera was released in October. Almost 6 months later and they haven't had the respect for their customers to provide any direction or reassurance about the FF problem. If they are working on it you can bet its only because of the issue going viral on the net. All this thinly disguised macho photographer crap about just using manual focus to work around it, is besides the point. Not everyone can do so. Some people have vision or other impairments that make it difficult if not impossible to do so. Bottom line is that Pentax's customers paid $1500 a piece for a camera that is defective in design, whether the culprit be hardware or firmware. I'm not a troll, but I am a Pentax customer for over 36 years now and I think Pentax owes all of us an apology.

02-27-2011, 12:40 AM	#96
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	I would also accept a FA 31 or 77mmm ltd as a formal apology. I think that if they don't have it hammered out by the next 3-5 months people should just return them under warranty. But I'm still hopeful that the "rumors" are founded. It would be asinine of them to turn their back on what has the potential to start taking market share away from the competition.

02-27-2011, 04:38 AM	#97
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	Originally posted by Chex It would be asinine of them to turn their back on what has the potential to start taking market share away from the competition. Agree 100%.

02-27-2011, 04:48 AM	#98
jolepp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Finland Photos: Albums Posts: 3,196	I guess the really frustrating thing is having something almost but not quite totally unlike junk . (borrowing from Douglas Adams' magnum opus ).

02-27-2011, 05:18 AM	#99
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	Originally posted by jolepp something almost but not quite totally unlike junk Well put!

02-27-2011, 06:52 AM	#100
30v iPentax Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Suomi , Finland Posts: 368	Jalusta on jo keksitty.

02-27-2011, 08:53 AM	#101
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by loveisageless Actually, Pentax has not formally acknowledged the problem and all we are left with (with no disrespect for Adam or Faulk intended) rumors that they are indeed working on it. The camera was released in October. Almost 6 months later and they haven't had the respect for their customers to provide any direction or reassurance about the FF problem. If they are working on it you can bet its only because of the issue going viral on the net. All this thinly disguised macho photographer crap about just using manual focus to work around it, is besides the point. Not everyone can do so. Some people have vision or other impairments that make it difficult if not impossible to do so. Bottom line is that Pentax's customers paid $1500 a piece for a camera that is defective in design, whether the culprit be hardware or firmware. I'm not a troll, but I am a Pentax customer for over 36 years now and I think Pentax owes all of us an apology. This is going to be an unpopular post but.... The AF specification is to work down to EV-1 according to DPReview. I don't know where they get their info, as the specification published on the Pentaximaging website seems to not mention an EV basement. My K5, in daylight, works well to about EV-2. I'm sure if you check, you will find that your K5 will work as well, providing the colour spectrum isn't too far off daylight. I will admit that I have lost patience with the bleating about 1500 dollar cameras that are defective, when that camera is working within the specification according to the spec sheet that Pentax has released.

02-27-2011, 09:25 AM	#102
lsucadien New Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Houston Posts: 18	Originally posted by Wheatfield This is going to be an unpopular post but.... The AF specification is to work down to EV-1 according to DPReview. I don't know where they get their info, as the specification published on the Pentaximaging website seems to not mention an EV basement. My K5, in daylight, works well to about EV-2. I'm sure if you check, you will find that your K5 will work as well, providing the colour spectrum isn't too far off daylight. I will admit that I have lost patience with the bleating about 1500 dollar cameras that are defective, when that camera is working within the specification according to the spec sheet that Pentax has released. Which spec sheet would that be?

02-27-2011, 09:29 AM	#103
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by Wheatfield This is going to be an unpopular post but.... The AF specification is to work down to EV-1 according to DPReview. I don't know where they get their info...... I think they make it up as they go along.

02-27-2011, 09:45 AM	#104
Zugzwang Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Canada Posts: 49	The bottom line is that the K5 AF does not work in low light where the previous models do. This to me is the root of Pentax's problem, and one they need to solve quickly.