[felixkh]

He already knows Nikon, he wants to know why he should use a K-5. People who have used both and are Nikon users obviously have a bias. A bias this user may not share. Now if there was a Nikon user that had switched to a K-5, that would be the person who has the information that person is asking for, not the ones who chose Nikon. The guy is clearly contemplating a change, of course that's blasphemy to the shrill Nikon users who love their religion so much they can dismiss the things that are good about Pentaxes, deny they exist despite independent research, ignore sensor ratings, ignore focus accuracy ratings, ignore even auto-focus speed ratings where Pentaxes do very well as long as there is enough light.. and make it sound like their systems are some kind of perfection. NO, I don't think somehow he wanted to talk to those guys.

He wanted to know why he should buy a K-5, and if that bothers your sorry little Nikon worshipping asses, tough. To bad so many of you had conniptions. Learn how to present an unbiased view of the facts. Not one Pentaxian came on here and ran down Nikons. You Nikon users need to get some class. I don't spend my time on Nikon sites looking for issues to trash Nikons with. If that's wrong, shoot me.

TS suld talk to creampuff as he used to use Niko and switced to the K20D, K7 and now the K5.

[twitch]

I guess you're right Pentax users should just lie down and take the abuse, after all, any criticism of Pentax is justified.

IMHO yes we should; it's not "abuse"; and yes it is justified. In the realm of opinions anything is possible or permissable, but then I've always been a libertarian

[Verglace]

You didn't mention fanatical Pentax bashing posts... your bias is showing. I guess you're right Pentax users should just lie down and take the abuse, after all, any criticism of Pentax is justified. All those Canokon users can't be wrong. Hey we wouldn't want to go on too long and lose the people with short attention spans.. so I'll stop here.

I haven't seen any pentax bashing around here. The only instances i've seen of pentax bashing are indirect sources in these forums (stories about them). Perhaps the sole exception is that Canon Girl video where they took a jab at pentax at the end of the video. Where as here you have those threads that compare a k-5 with a 1d and say they are compensating for something etc etc.

[weave2d2]

Man, I can't believe I read all these replies. What was I thinking? I fear to watch yet I cannot look away. Anyway, I'm in the process of switching from a d90 to a k5, and my quick observations, in no order. The K-5 is really quiet. I've had no problems with AF but haven't pushed it that hard yet. It's about the same size as my d90 but has higher build quality (perceived.) Image Quality is a nice improvement. I dig the colors. As far as cost goes.... call it a wash. Really. Part of the draw for me was having a fast mid-range telephoto that is stabilized (50-135mm), as well as small primes that are stabilized. I don't think Nikon is going to tackle those lenses for DX format. I must say when switching systems you get surprised by all the little costs adding up. Remotes, extra batteries, flash accessories, bigger memory cards for higher-res files, and the other stuff I haven't realized yet. I love shooting good glass but to be honest I think the sensor and other aspects of the camera body and processing are quickly becoming as-important as the lens. But they depreciate fast, unlike lenses, so that's a bummer. One last thought... unless you're going high-end (d7000 or higher) you can't count on the Nikon legacy lenses fitting future bodies. So while the d5100 is probably a good alternative for the OP, the choice in lenses is quite reduced (extremely in the case of primes, although third-parties are closing down some gaps.) I'm a recent switcher though, so my feelings on this could be a little premature.

[riff]

Any openly-shared idea that goes against Pentax is considered a sin and makes mods trigger-happy.

I call bull shite! (and you know it is). Shame on you.

[Tommot1965]

Man, I can't believe I read all these replies. What was I thinking? I fear to watch yet I cannot look away. Anyway, I'm in the process of switching from a d90 to a k5, and my quick observations, in no order. The K-5 is really quiet. I've had no problems with AF but haven't pushed it that hard yet. It's about the same size as my d90 but has higher build quality (perceived.) Image Quality is a nice improvement. I dig the colors. As far as cost goes.... call it a wash. Really. Part of the draw for me was having a fast mid-range telephoto that is stabilized (50-135mm), as well as small primes that are stabilized. I don't think Nikon is going to tackle those lenses for DX format. I must say when switching systems you get surprised by all the little costs adding up. Remotes, extra batteries, flash accessories, bigger memory cards for higher-res files, and the other stuff I haven't realized yet. I love shooting good glass but to be honest I think the sensor and other aspects of the camera body and processing are quickly becoming as-important as the lens. But they depreciate fast, unlike lenses, so that's a bummer. One last thought... unless you're going high-end (d7000 or higher) you can't count on the Nikon legacy lenses fitting future bodies. So while the d5100 is probably a good alternative for the OP, the choice in lenses is quite reduced (extremely in the case of primes, although third-parties are closing down some gaps.) I'm a recent switcher though, so my feelings on this could be a little premature.

Id be interested in your finding of the AF...not so much the quickness of it..but rather its accuracy ..in my experience I found a tendency for it to front focus in low light with SDM and HSM lenses..but to work ok with screw-drive primes , this was using a F2.8 lenses though to gain as much light and shutter speed as possible...but even when using the flash at 1/60..it would still be OOF due to the FF issues my pair of K5's had...is yours new ?...Id be well pleased if the problem is really sorted ..
yep I know what you mean about all the bits and bobs added up..when I sold my pentax gear I was in the same boat...

if I could afford two systems..Id love a K5 and a F77

[Tommot1965]

And we quoted an actual study... people who don't care and don't have a bias, that was done way more recently than the long litany of posts about Pentax AF, that said the Pentax AF was second to none in terms of accuracy, yet you continue to harp on past issues. It's irrelevant... even if Pentax hasn't fixed the issue to the satisfaction of some on here, they are still more accurate than their competition, according to recent research. So why would you not buy a Pentax when the equivalent Nikon or Canon is worse? That is exactly the kind of internal bias I see constantly in these threads. Irrelevant anecdotal information spawned by a few bad experiences , the loud noise of a few complainers drowning out the hundreds of happy users who post on here every day.

But let someone say their thinking of switching, and all the folks like yourself come in and pile it on.

I get along fine with lots of Canon and Nikon users. We don't criticize each others gear, we just admire each other's pictures. Ask any of us about a camera and you'll here "Oh ya ----- gets great pictures with his --------- camera." coming from anyone of us...because really, that's the truth. Not once has one of our discussions fallen into this mindless finger pointing at one brands "perceived" limitations.

have you read Falks thread on his white paper study of the K5s AF ?..this was done with the original FW and the new one that was supposed to address the situation ..nothing wrong with the K5s AF in good light..in fact Id say it was pretty good..it only gets dodgy when the light dims...but its no worse than a canon 5dII..LOL...

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/134215-lumolabs-pentax...published.html

Im no Nikon fanboy mate ..just a well rounded human that looks beyond brand preferences etc...and Id be well happy if the K5s low light Af was really sorted with any lens....and to be honest..if there are so many happy users of the K5 { I know there are}..then a purchaser would surely take that into consideration and not just mine and a few others concerns?....

[Xentinus]

Those claiming the K-5 doesn't "hold a candle" to the D300/s? Short of action or complicated flash photography (where Nikon is clearly ahead of Pentax), I struggle to see where the D300/s is better. I've owned all three of these. For image quality, ergonomics, and value, the K-5 is a real winner. Pentax needs some serious help in the brand strategy department, though. Let's see if Ricoh helps them get this sorted out, or whether we're in for another squandered ownership fiasco.

The switch the OP is contemplating is not an odd one.

Hey
i really want to know if K-5's AF performance (not just speed,performance) far behind of d300/s or d7000
i ve pentax equipments;35mm macro tamron 28-75 55-300 and k-x with k200d and i will probably replace my tammy with 70 limited
i want to upgrade my k-x to k-5 or d7000 with new lenses (85 1..8 35 1.8)
actually i love pentax and its limited lenses
they are small and optically really nice
but pentax loses its price advantage .70mm limited and 35mm limited are more expensive than nikon's 85 35 combo (1200 $ against 625 $ )

[StepOne]

Hey
i really want to know if K-5's AF performance (not just speed,performance) far behind of d300/s or d7000
i ve pentax equipments;35mm macro tamron 28-75 55-300 and k-x with k200d and i will probably replace my tammy with 70 limited
i want to upgrade my k-x to k-5 or d7000 with new lenses (85 1..8 35 1.8)
actually i love pentax and its limited lenses
they are small and optically really nice
but pentax loses its price advantage .70mm limited and 35mm limited are more expensive than nikon's 85 35 combo (1200 $ against 625 $ )

Well i could say K-x AF is far behind D90. D300/s is better than D90. D7000...has the same amount of problems as K-5. I was in your shoes a little while ago, and decided to keep K-x and see what's after K-5 and Nikon D7000 (for both there are rumors about coming this year).

I would have liked a D300s at D7000 or K-5 price . But you should go in a store and try both (K-5 and Nikon D7000). You can read in the forum about K-5 (what's great and what's not), and in DPR forum about D7000, or even here at the non-pentax section. One plus for Pentax, not related to the company though, is the great support you can get here.

[weave2d2]

I'm shooting an event this evening in a big room w/ bad light (I've shot it before with my d90.) I shot it previously with the Nikon 12-24 and 100mm VR. I did miss focus w/ the tele a few times, shooting at f/2.8 in single-point AF. I'll probably be switching between the 21mm ltd and the 50-135 tonight. It should be a decent test of the AF, though of course one person one camera on one specific shoot. Yes my K-5 is new from Amazon, bought a few weeks back, so I hope it's the latest iteration. The 21 is used, the 50-135 is new. FWIW.

[westmill]

Hey
i really want to know if K-5's AF performance (not just speed,performance) far behind of d300/s or d7000
i ve pentax equipments;35mm macro tamron 28-75 55-300 and k-x with k200d and i will probably replace my tammy with 70 limited
i want to upgrade my k-x to k-5 or d7000 with new lenses (85 1..8 35 1.8)
actually i love pentax and its limited lenses
they are small and optically really nice
but pentax loses its price advantage .70mm limited and 35mm limited are more expensive than nikon's 85 35 combo (1200 $ against 625 $ )

I cant say anything about the D7000 since Ive never used one. But I own a D300 and a K5 so its easy for
me to compare the two. The D300s focussing is not just better its in a totaly different leauge. In all fairness though the D300 prob has the best autofucus of any camera. I noticed a slight improvement on the K5 after downloading the latest software. I hear talk of poor low light performance in the K5 where as I personly dont think its that bad. Its not anywhere near as good as a D300 but not that bad though. Not all pics are spot on 100% of the time with the D300 even, but they are always 100% close enough to be usable.
The problem with the K5 is that it acheives focus lock Ok.
So you expect to have the pic in the bag.
Only to find some of the pics are that far out they are simply unusable. Ive noticed it works fine when close up,
say upto three quater body lengh but loses the plot when you go further back. Its not that the camera doesnt lock, because it finds lock ok. Its just not accurate. In a lot of circumstances it wont matter so much IE... shooting close objects or landscape where DOF is covering the sharpness etc. Flash accuracy is also poor. Its poss, this could be related to the focussing being out though, since the camera also uses this info.
Not sure about that.... but I think thats what it is because again, at close quaters its spot on.
Other issues ive had with the K5 are stupid irrating little things like I press the reveiw button and no pic comes up. Turn the thing off and on and its fine again.
There is a lot to like about the K5 for sure, and when it
gets things right its poss the best APSC camera on the market. Again, in all fairness, the K5 is half the price of the D300 and as such considering its capabilitys its a total bargain.

[Winder]

Hey
i really want to know if K-5's AF performance (not just speed,performance) far behind of d300/s or d7000
i ve pentax equipments;35mm macro tamron 28-75 55-300 and k-x with k200d and i will probably replace my tammy with 70 limited
i want to upgrade my k-x to k-5 or d7000 with new lenses (85 1..8 35 1.8)
actually i love pentax and its limited lenses
they are small and optically really nice
but pentax loses its price advantage .70mm limited and 35mm limited are more expensive than nikon's 85 35 combo (1200 $ against 625 $ )

It is not just the bodies. SDM might be the slowest technology for any modern lens. The difference is not huge, but for fast moving subjects it is very noticeable. I don't shoot a lot of fast action, so it has not been an issue, but for people that do I'm sure the difference seems huge. You only need to miss a few great shots to feel like the AF is awful.

The low-light AF on the k-5 and the golf ball sized center AF point are my biggest complaints.

[westmill]

I'm shooting an event this evening in a big room w/ bad light (I've shot it before with my d90.) I shot it previously with the Nikon 12-24 and 100mm VR. I did miss focus w/ the tele a few times, shooting at f/2.8 in single-point AF. I'll probably be switching between the 21mm ltd and the 50-135 tonight. It should be a decent test of the AF, though of course one person one camera on one specific shoot. Yes my K-5 is new from Amazon, bought a few weeks back, so I hope it's the latest iteration. The 21 is used, the 50-135 is new. FWIW.

I took that plunge a couple of wks ago and shot a christning with the K5 at night in a church.
The lighting in the church was hardly what you would call floodlit lol. The focussing only struggled a couple of times though, but still managed to lock after seeking a bit of contrast. I did a group shot of the congregation that worked well and I did another with flash.
At least I was allowed to use flash though lol
My biggest worry was around the font, since this is where the camera strugles. To be on the safe side I took a few horizontal shots half lengh to close the gap.
Most of the pics were spot on, but as expected a few wernt so spot on. It was just the group shots and the horizontal full lengh that suffered here. Luckily I took a couple in manual focus here too which worked ok.
I also shot in RAW which gave me plenty of leeway in
correcting. The D300 and SB900 would have coped without any hassel here with enough accuracy to even shoot in jpg. On the other hand, the K5 did an exceptional job without the flash of the congregation.
3200 ISO and gave a good sharp clean print.
All the flash pics I shot at 400 ISO to give the flash a bit of oomph.

[fs999]

I cannot complain the low-light AF of my body. From hundreds of shots only four or five were out of focus. I had more oof shots in AF-S than AF-C !

indoor football. 5000 iso in TAv and AF-C with DA* 50-135 and DA* 200 (second shot).

[westmill]

Ive got a feeling that autofocus improves greatly with longer lenses !
I cant help wondering if its not linked to winders observation or knowledge
of the autofocus points being large. I have noticed that autofocus accuracy increases when I zoom out. This could be just chance or coincidence of course.
My technical Knowledge here is limited.
I often do press work and shoot racehorses. I would love to give the K5 a bash using
the 50-135 but again, its one of those times i cant afford get it wrong, so I need
to have complete faith before I dare use it.