[Franklin]

Maybe there is not enough user data as yet but I was curious:

1. The AF is said to be better in low light for the II/IIs. Is it actually considerably improved? How advanced is the AF of the K5 Classic over the K10D/K20D era of AF?

2. The color and DR on the K5 Classic is already confirmed to be among the best of any APS-C cameras. Do the new models carry this forward precisely the same, do they improve upon this, or is there an inferior performance in any way regarding the way they render given a particular lens?

Thanks in advance

[Adam]

2. The color and DR on the K5 Classic is already confirmed to be among the best of any APS-C cameras. Do the new models carry this forward precisely the same, do they improve upon this, or is there an inferior performance in any way regarding the way they render given a particular lens?

It's basically the same.

1. The AF is said to be better in low light for the II/IIs. Is it actually considerably improved? How advanced is the AF of the K5 Classic over the K10D/K20D era of AF?

The II's AF does work better in low light, but in general, the AF of both cameras is quite good (certainly better than previous models). The only area where they're lacking is continuous/sport shooting.

IMO there isn't much of a reason to get the K-5 II over the K-5 classic, but if you want the more decisive low-light AF, then it would make sense to go for the II. Have you seen our K-5 II review?

Pentax K-5 II / IIs Review - Introduction - PentaxForums.com

[normhead]

I'm wondering the same kinds of things.
Basically, does the K5 II focus better, have better tracking for BIFs and other fast moving subjects, and what difference does this 2.8 sensor make. It seems like industry babble. Some guy in industry guy made it up, everyone has to have one, but what is it?

IMO there isn't much of a reason to get the K-5 II over the K-5 classic, but if you want the more decisive low-light AF, then it would make sense to go for the II. Have you seen our K-5 II review?

I've achieved focus on wild life when it was so dark I could barely see. I saw stuff in the picture I couldn't see in real life. So if that's the improvement.. I have ask, if the K-5 isn't good enough already. With K-5s at 749$ even for a "gotta have the latest greatest thing " guy like myself, I'm thinking the extra $600 will buy me a very good lens.

So it's like K-5 and Tamron 17-50 2.8, or K-5 IIs. Given how much I like my K-5 I'm starting to lean toward the Tammy. It's crazy though. If i buy the 2.8 sensor, I can't afford the 2.8 lens.

[Adam]

Basically, does the K5 II focus better, have better tracking for BIFs and other fast moving subjects, and what difference does this 2.8 sensor make. It seems like industry babble. Some guy in industry guy made it up, everyone has to have one, but what is it?

Industry babble certainly gets in the way a lot, and I think that the K-5 II is a classic example of it (with the -3EV and the F2.8 thing). In practice, I'm pretty sure most users wouldn't be able to tell which camera is which if the name badges and rear screens were covered up.

Definitely get yourself a better lens and stick with the K-5. If you want better AF, go with Canon or Nikon. Their AF systems are faster and more responsive, but it will really only make a difference if you're a sports shooter. For everyday use, Pentax's AF is more than adequate, and it's actually really fast if you have a fast-focusing lens like the 18-135mm or DA limited. IMO it's mostly a myth that Pentax's AF sucks- as I've already said, the K-5's AF is really quite good for the price you're paying.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[RBellavance]

Don't forget that the II doesn't have the "front-focus in low tungsten light" problem of the Classic. That can be very significant (it is for me).

[Noam]

Don't forget that the II doesn't have the "front-focus in low tungsten light" problem of the Classic. That can be very significant (it is for me).

My K10D has suffered from this severely, and then the K-7 suffered, too. This is the reason why I gave up shooting Pentax and bought into Micro 43. Amazingly accurate and amazingly fast AF-S.
I was too frustrated when I saw user evidence (in forums) that the K-5 still suffers from this. I was angry that this happens despite the official claim that the SAFOX "+" variants in K-7 and K-5 feature a dedicated color-sensor that supposedly solves this issue.

Fast-forward to today: All of my Pentax system gear (including 3 Limiteds and much more) gather dust and I miss using it sorely. I loved my K-7 otherwise.. Now that the K-5II is out and the promise of accurate AF "for real this time" I have decided to give Pentax one more chance and ordered one (It's on its way).

So, I agree, the Tungsten-light problem fix is a big deal - the biggest for me anyway. - which hopefully makes the k-5II a totally different camera from the K-5.

BTW, I sure hope that the P-TTL exposure problems many have encountered with the K-5 are over as well... I'm counting on a single 2nd-hand testimony I read in DPR that it is "spot on" with the 540 (I have a sigma 610 BTW).

Please don't kill me - I'm not a troll or Pentax basher. I'm heavily invested and giving Pentax yet another (expensive) chance, and speak from my own 1st-hand non-imagined experience.

Peace

[toukan]

It's basically the same.



The II's AF does work better in low light, but in general, the AF of both cameras is quite good (certainly better than previous models). The only area where they're lacking is continuous/sport shooting.

IMO there isn't much of a reason to get the K-5 II over the K-5 classic, but if you want the more decisive low-light AF, then it would make sense to go for the II. Have you seen our K-5 II review?

Pentax K-5 II / IIs Review - Introduction - PentaxForums.com

Considering that the K-5 is not available currently with the 18-135 kit, it only cost about $150 more for the K-5II, 18-135 kit that it would have cost to buy the K-5 and 18-135 separately when the Black Friday special was in effect. for that price difference, the improvements were worth it, IMO, especially if you consider the 2% cash back from B&H.

[zapp]

Maybe there is not enough user data as yet but I was curious:

1. The AF is said to be better in low light for the II/IIs. Is it actually considerably improved? How advanced is the AF of the K5 Classic over the K10D/K20D era of AF?

2. The color and DR on the K5 Classic is already confirmed to be among the best of any APS-C cameras. Do the new models carry this forward precisely the same, do they improve upon this, or is there an inferior performance in any way regarding the way they render given a particular lens?

Thanks in advance

I would assume that the K5II cameras also fix some design flaws of the K5 classic - things you don't want to mention in spec sheets. Well, AF performance in artificial light did not improve according to the first tests. Camera focus alignment - we don't know yet. Besides that the K5IIs appears to provide more information per pixel at the same pixel count which is already something.
I am still thnking about the upgrade, but will wait a little longer to read reveiws by trustworthy people.

[john5100]

How bad is AF in artificial light really? I don't meant to be a show off but my lowly KX and K200D work in all kinds of terrible light. They hesitate a little but not too much. The KX is much better than the K200D. I can't imagine the K5 is worse but maybe it is. I am looking to upgrade next year so please tell me if I'm wrong.

Here are some samples.

K200D - Really terrible light.