Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-11-2012, 06:08 PM   #16
Site Supporter
LaurenOE's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: San Francisco Bay Area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,476
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well it is still a very capable camera and with a new and better AF-module it would be even better. We have to see how good the AF-module is, but the sensor is still best in class! I hoped for a new processor making it more swift in working around the files and be snappier.

I'm happy with continuing the body (since july 2009 in my hands with the start off the K-7) and hope it can go on for a few more years. I'm also happy with the 16mp sensor since I can make descent sportsimages at iso6400 where a 24mp sensor would fall flat on his nose.
I agree. Since the K7 form factor, the K7/K5 accessories market should also be happy.

09-12-2012, 10:35 AM   #17
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I don't think it is a bad camera. I am assuming that Pentax looked at the 24 megapixel sensor from Sony and didn't feel like it measured up to the 16 megapixel sensor that they were already assuming.
To go on about these sensors, i believe 24mp would have been better, certainly without AA filter.
Reason for this is that the 24mp and 16mp sensor socre overall the same in the DXO tests but the 24mp yield just a little bit more details with lower ISO. That with the fact that having no AA filter on higher density sensor has less negative effect it would have meant K5 mkIIs with 24mp would have been better in certain ways.
09-12-2012, 12:22 PM   #18
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 72
The original K-5 received much praise in reviews, and also from users. It was often described as a very well thought-through photographic tool, with important features accessible through hard buttons, quick and useful hyper modes, the special TAv mode and so on. It also received a lot of praise for its combination of compact dimensions and good ergonomics. The viewfinder was considered one of the best, image quality was second to none for the sensor size and it had the quietest shutter of all comparable cameras. Many features were customizable, such as auto ISO behavior, noise reduction, and also more specialty functions such as flash white balance or whether the white balance should favor a cozy or neutral look under tungsten lightening, so that each photographer could set up the behavior of the camera to his/her preferences.

One thing that was criticized by several users was the auto focus performance under tungsten low-light conditions, and it is my interpretation that this was agreed to be the cameras weakest point by many users - especially considering that so many other things about the camera were top-notch.

I think it was a very good decision by Pentax to keep the already top-notch parts and focus the improvement work on the very important area were it was needed the most: the auto focus system. If the auto focus system is as improved as they say, the K-5 II should be a really great camera by today's standards, in my opinion. The one area were I can see a possibility that the K-5 II would fall behind its competition is the video performance, but I do not know if that will be the case. One thing that was not upgraded is the processor. Even though the Prime II processor is fast enough to not "be in the way" when taking pictures, snappier is always better (as long as it does not mean less battery life). Still the original K-5 was not slow, so I would not consider that a problem.

Lastly, making the screen more readable in sunlight may not look as flashy on paper as for example increasing the number of pixels would, but it is very useful in real life.
09-12-2012, 06:59 PM   #19
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
To go on about these sensors, i believe 24mp would have been better, certainly without AA filter.
Reason for this is that the 24mp and 16mp sensor socre overall the same in the DXO tests but the 24mp yield just a little bit more details with lower ISO. That with the fact that having no AA filter on higher density sensor has less negative effect it would have meant K5 mkIIs with 24mp would have been better in certain ways.
Anvh, i'm not sure how you can say that. According to this link:
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

which compares k5 to Nex 7 (24mp) to nex 5n (16mp). Dxo rates the 3 cameras with these scores:
K5 82
Nex7 81
Nex5n 77

More importantly, Under the sports scoring, the existing K5 sensor out rates the Nex7 24mp sensor:
K5 1162iso
Nex5n 1079iso
Nex7 1016iso

These scores seem pretty consistent with the various posts on dpreview which compare the 2 Nex cameras, the Nex7 is just not as good in low light situations.with either the Nex5n or the K5.

09-12-2012, 08:01 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,660
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
More importantly, Under the sports scoring, the existing K5 sensor out rates the Nex7 24mp sensor:
It's interesting to note that in the DxOMark scores for the Nikon D800 vs the D800E, the D800E scores a tad better on the low-light score. Ditto for dynamic range, but not as noticeably.

So I wonder: does no AA filter mean more light reaches the sensor, hence better low-light performance?

If yes, we can probably look forward to slightly better low-light performance for the K-5 IIs than regular K-5s.

So higher resolution plus better low light performance - plus the better AF. Cool.
09-13-2012, 09:46 AM   #21
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Anvh, i'm not sure how you can say that. According to this link:
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

which compares k5 to Nex 7 (24mp) to nex 5n (16mp). Dxo rates the 3 cameras with these scores:
K5 82
Nex7 81
Nex5n 77

More importantly, Under the sports scoring, the existing K5 sensor out rates the Nex7 24mp sensor:
K5 1162iso
Nex5n 1079iso
Nex7 1016iso

These scores seem pretty consistent with the various posts on dpreview which compare the 2 Nex cameras, the Nex7 is just not as good in low light situations.with either the Nex5n or the K5.
The K5 is very differnt but good you also have 2 nex's you should compare those and all in all there is little between the two.
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, info, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will K-5II/IIs firmware work for K-5 Classic? LIJ Pentax K-5 18 11-04-2012 09:16 AM
Pentax Facebook says K-5II will boast the widest AF range of any DSLR currently avail LeDave Pentax News and Rumors 211 09-18-2012 08:15 AM
Technology Realistically Inserts Objects Into Existing Photographs RioRico Photographic Industry and Professionals 1 10-23-2011 11:52 AM
Macro Paper Wasps.......... eaglem Post Your Photos! 2 11-09-2010 10:58 PM
Realistically........what's next? Rory Pentax News and Rumors 63 09-29-2010 11:08 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:43 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