Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-14-2012, 01:14 PM   #1
Forum Member
houstonmacgregor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 97
K7 to K5

Have K 20 and K7 and was thinking of selling and getting the K5. Is the K-5 that much of a upgrade/improvement vs the K7. Don't do a lot of high ISO photography

Thanks

01-14-2012, 02:41 PM   #2
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
K-5 has much better sensor, delivering much less noise in shadows even at lower ISOs and much more dynamic range, so I was told. Apart from that it's main improvement over older bodies seems to be AF.
01-14-2012, 05:23 PM   #3
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: NJ
Posts: 78
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
K-5 has much better sensor, delivering much less noise in shadows even at lower ISOs and much more dynamic range, so I was told. Apart from that it's main improvement over older bodies seems to be AF.
K-7 image quality is very good but the K-5 definitely has a better dynamic range. Not sure about the actual performance of the AF being better, my K-5 seems to hunt quite a bit, sometimes even refusing to take the snap - but perhaps that has more to do with my DA* 16-50?
01-14-2012, 05:35 PM   #4
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,487
I had a K7 and did what you are doing, that is, is it better?
YES!
I never regretted the change-over.
I got a good price for my K7, but these days I doubt you will get as much as I did when I sold mine.
At around $400-600, as the going rate for a used K7, I would recommend keeping the K7 as a back up if you go the K5 route.
If you can get more? Great!

01-14-2012, 05:47 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,198
QuoteOriginally posted by robr7 Quote
. Not sure about the actual performance of the AF being better, my K-5 seems to hunt quite a bit, sometimes even refusing to take the snap - but perhaps that has more to do with my DA* 16-50?
Sometimes all needed is to tune the microadjustment correctly. I found that when it is done wrong, camera my even slow down in AF or refuse to lock on target. With correctly adjusted AF there is no problem even in considerably low light.
Just do not accept poor performance. That is not OK with K-5.
01-15-2012, 06:20 AM   #6
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 931
I had the K20D and switched to the K7 and now after 1.5 years have finally bought the K5. It i a vast improvement on the K7
01-15-2012, 08:52 AM   #7
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,254
QuoteOriginally posted by houstonmacgregor Quote
Have K 20 and K7 and was thinking of selling and getting the K5. Is the K-5 that much of a upgrade/improvement vs the K7. Don't do a lot of high ISO photography

Thanks
I think that K-5 is upgrade of K-7. Much - hard to say...I don't think so...

RAW files at ISO1600 is rather noisy without NR and any PP in bad light condition.
But better structure of noise and easy to apply NR in converter...
And sometimes ISO1600 (with small amount of dark places) are outstanding with GOOD sharpness and GOOD details.
DR of K-5 is outstanding - never seen before...
As for me - exposure is very good and WB is SIMPLY OUTSTANDING.


As for AF - I see very small difference in AF speed and accuracy vs my K200D. There is. Of course.
A bit faster, a bit steady in low light...AF-C can work really.
But...The same dependence of lighting condition.
1/125 is still the same (blur sometimes).
To say honest my K200D has no need of any AF adjustment with all my FA lenses.
K-5 needs.

BUT...I like K-5 VERY MUCH. It was the love at first sight. Paradox.

Last edited by ogl; 01-15-2012 at 09:07 PM.
01-15-2012, 12:59 PM   #8
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
apart from Better Dynamic Range and Better AF...there's not much of an advantage over K-5....as you said you're not interested in high iso.....K-5 has some nice features, but at low iso K-7 is pretty close, unless you need extended dynamic range

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, k7, pentax k-5
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:03 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top