[sbroadbentphoto]

Big pros to the K-5 are the 14bit pixel depth for better dynamic range, the magnesium alloy body, the compatibility with the K-7/K-5 grip, the external mic input, and the top LCD.

I don't think that 14bit has to do with dynamic range. it affects colour depth. Dynamic range will be slightly different due to the option for iso80 on the K5. You will not likely notice the difference between 14bit and 12bit. I was talking to the people at pentax australia about this.

K30 = better video with the ability to shoot at 60fps @ 720p amongst other things, slightly better image clarity, slightly lower colour depth. Less ISO range. more battery options, improved AF

K5 = quiter, slighly faster burst rate, much larger battery capacity, slightly more colour depth, better build quality.

The fact is, most won't notice the difference. The will both excel at different things. I will have both soon, one for the video function and the the other for the battery life. Image quality is going to be an almost unnoticeable difference and i believe that they will make a killer team at weddings together!

[sbroadbentphoto]

Photomatter Reviews - Nikon D300 Review Part IV - 12 bit versus 14 bit color - James Markus Photography LLC

[nulla]

thanks for the link

[wed7]

nice link, hardly notciable indeed, tfs!

[sbroadbentphoto]

The only part i can notice it in is the last comparison where it seems to who a little bit more red in the gradient. But regardless, once you get a photo onto a computer, you don't say, "oh god..... can't use that photo, there is a touch less colour depth in the shadow gradient". You wouldn't miss what is not there unless you are one very high end retoucher..... even then, they used to get great results with less.

[CyberManiaK]

Sure, you will not miss it, but the problem with 12 bit vs 14 bits raws is that the 14bits raw let you extract more information of the shadows, with out degrading the color gradients.

For example here is with a D700 (without shadow recovery)
http://s55.radikal.ru/i149/1201/be/140c3ea7c0de.jpg

And here with fill light to lift the shadows
http://s017.radikal.ru/i421/1201/35/9ad90a3384e5.jpg

If you see there, the bottom of the table has way less "yellow blotches".

The orginal document is here Fotógrafo Sergey Drobkov: RAW 12-bit vs RAW 14-bit comparación it's in spanish.

[Ryan Trevisol]

It works throughout the range, too. Say you intentionally over-expose a shot to create a high-key picture. If you want to pull the dark levels down in post to make the contrast pop, you can go further without as much risk of banding.

[sbroadbentphoto]

i do see what you guys mean. it does not improve the amount of dynamic range but it does improve the quality of shadows if needing to bring them back in for whatever reason.

[Anvh]

How many more buttons are you talking about?

Quite simple, i use AF and EA-L button the K30 has that under 1 button so i need to change my shooting style and no ISO button.
So the K30 is more limited while shooting on the fly, it's more menu based but good enough for most people though.

[Anvh]

Photomatter Reviews - Nikon D300 Review Part IV - 12 bit versus 14 bit color - James Markus Photography LLC

Different camera and 2 generation older as well.
I've read that the K5 is one of the first APS-C camera's that can take advantage of these extra bits.

[soalle]

genuine question:

how can you see the difference of 14bits pics when your screen reproduces only 16Mil and the printer most probably much less?

[benjikan]

Just looking online at a local store and there is only a bit more then 100 dollars difference...
with the better auto focus, and new processing engine, is k30 a better camera as far as image quality, sports, etc.
I do know that the k30 can't get as high ISO as the k5, but if the k30 has a cleaner image, the trade off is worth it for me.
I love the looks of the k30, just not sure how I would get used to having no lcd screen on top


any thoughts and comments welcomed!

thanks

slip

Of course it is better. Two years better and probably capable of focussing without worrying yourself in to a major anxiety attack before every major shoot you do...Glad I got that off my chest!

[Pentaxor]

genuine question:

how can you see the difference of 14bits pics when your screen reproduces only 16Mil and the printer most probably much less?

massive cropping perhaps?

[madbrain]

Quite simple, i use AF and EA-L button the K30 has that under 1 button so i need to change my shooting style and no ISO button.

The K-30 has an ISO button.

[Ryan Trevisol]

genuine question:

how can you see the difference of 14bits pics when your screen reproduces only 16Mil and the printer most probably much less?

You would never see the difference if you never tweak your RAW files (in which case you should be shooting JPEG). When you process the RAW files and you start manipulating the histogram, stretching some parts, and compressing others to develop the photo the way you want, you have more granularity to work with. For example. Over expose a JPEG by 1.5 stops. When you pull that file into Aperture (or lightroom), pull the histogram down until the darkest pixels are black. The histogram starts to look like a comb, meaning you're going to have posterization and banding. With 12-bit raw, that rarely happens, but with the dynamic range of the K-5 and the K-30, there are situations where I feel better having 14 bit raw.

Case in point, and this is not a great photo, but it's one that I intentionally did the above process with. The clouds are blown out, so I shouldn't have over-exposed that much.

The detail shown throughout the range, especially in the shadows, is what I'm talking about.