K-5: 16MP, ISO25600 and 7 FPS worth the upgrade?

Big G · 09-01-2010, 01:41 AM

Originally posted by pentaxmz

I don't want to call you a lier but I find this statement highly suspect for two reasons:

1. No advantage? How about the fact that DFS is optional on the 7D and the K20D it is not. That is one huge advantage!

2. I own the K20D and I know that a 5 minute exposure results in quite a few hot (at least 15 - 25 consistent but I never bothered counting) pixels and even more noise (when viewing the RAW image).

3. I own the Canon 5D (which is inferior to the 7D) and long exposures not only do not require the DFS wait time but the end results are vastly superior to the K20D.

4. See this link for 7D long exposures: How does the 7D handle LONG exposures? Pentax comparison...: Canon EOS 7D / 50D - 10D Forum: Digital Photography Review

All I want is a K5 with the noise and DFS issue fixed!

Did IQs drop suddenly when I was away???

My post states clearly that regarding noise on long exposures that the 7D offered no advantage over the K20D; this was in response to complaints on this thread about the K20D being noisy on long exposures. I do extensive (several minute) long exposures with both bodies so I am qualified to make this statement. Hot pixels are still a problem with the 7D on exposures of several minutes. Yes, DFS is a total pain in bum with the K20D and being able to turn it off on the 7D is a big benefit. Given the price of the 7D compared to the K20D, I bloody well hoped that I could turn off DFS when it arrived.

ogl · 09-01-2010, 01:50 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

The problem is with Pentax: they're listening to us.

P.S. If someone from Pentax is reading this: keep up the good work! And... you don't have to listen to everything we say

Funny post. Simply ridiculous opinion of single-minded Pentax fan...

I didn't notice it for the last years...Hoya makes what they want and what they need and they can.

Pentax had made small bodies for the long time before. They simply return to the tradition. And nothing else.

K-7 and K-x were made by Japanese engineers for Japanese hands first of all.
If they listen to us, they should offer not colourful K-x, but new EVIL system with WR and FF instead of top APS-C, new fast and silent and solid SDM and outstanding AF system. We need more fast primes instead of slow DA35/2.8.
No lenses roadmap for 1.5 year.

Between DA21 and FA31 (very expensive, by the way, and made in Vietnam now) is the HOLE.
Between DFA100 and DA200 is the HOLE. and e.t.c.
No cheap DA50/1.7, no FA35/2 (why???). No 135 mm lens. No 85 mm lens.
No 28-30 mm lenses. No non-expensive portrait lens - like 85/2 from Sony.
No anything longer 300 mm and no TC. No new flashes. e.t.c. e.t.c.

Photokina will give us the end answer to where Hoya goes...

ghelary · 09-01-2010, 02:21 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Funny post. Simply ridiculous opinion of single-minded Pentax fan...

I didn't notice it for the last years...Hoya makes what they want and what they need and they can.

Pentax had made small bodies for the long time before. They simply return to the tradition. And nothing else.

K-7 and K-x were made by Japanese engineers for Japanese hands first of all.
If they listen to us, they should offer not colourful K-x, but new EVIL system with WR and FF instead of top APS-C, new fast and silent and solid SDM and outstanding AF system. We need more fast primes instead of slow DA35/2.8.
No lenses roadmap for 1.5 year.

Between DA21 and FA31 (very expensive, by the way, and made in Vietnam now) is the HOLE.
Between DFA100 and DA200 is the HOLE. and e.t.c.
No cheap DA50/1.7, no FA35/2 (why???). No 135 mm lens. No 85 mm lens.
No 28-30 mm lenses. No non-expensive portrait lens - like 85/2 from Sony.
No anything longer 300 mm and no TC. No new flashes. e.t.c. e.t.c.

Photokina will give us the end answer to where Hoya goes...

The hole is in your mind. DA21 is 35 eq while the 31 is equivalent to a 45mm, Sure they can make a 24, but then there will be a hole between 24 and 31 isn't it ? And everybody knows that you NEED a 28mm prime ... and a 26.

Outside of any commercial consideration, when strickly speaking of Photagraphy, the following focal lenses (eq 35mm) are just what need 99% photographers :
28mm
35mm
50mm
85mm

Sure you have varants, 28mm can be replaced by 31mm, 50mm by 40mm etc...

While I'm a big supporter of primes, I come also to the conclusion that with 2 primes you get nearly all the job done. Once you know you equipment.

Sure there are specialised need for ultrawide, tilt-shift or tele lenses, but those are specialised works. When using those lenses in a more generic context, you often get gimmicky pictures.

Pentax has a superb range of un-orthodox lenses, and sincerly, if you think you can't replace a 85/1.4 by a 77/1.9, then you may have missed the point about photography.

Kunzite · 09-01-2010, 02:38 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Funny post. Simply ridiculous opinion of single-minded Pentax fan...

Too many poisonous mushrooms, Ogl?
The "too big" K10D's body was a complaint (not necessarily a valid one). Yes, the lack of an ISO button was a complaint. They were addressed. "Only" 3 FPS - fixed. K-7 directional buttons issue - fixed. Pentax is listening; they don't follow orders. And they have limited resources to work with.

Big G · 09-01-2010, 02:57 AM

The sample images of the A55 sensor are very impressive; if it's the same sensor making it's way into the K-5 then that is very good news indeed. I'd say the 7D and K-5 high ISO performance would be about the same.

Pleeeeeeeeease let the AF system be awesome.

thibs · 09-01-2010, 03:49 AM

Mmm I'd like to see an iso6400 pic comparing K-7 and A55, to get better idea of the progress in that area.

Big G · 09-01-2010, 04:15 AM

Judging by the samples on Image Resource (bearing in mind those are in-camera JPGs, so RAW processing might be different), i'd say a significant improvement. Some of the detail in the K-7 ISO 6400 shots are just mush, where as there is pretty reasonable detail retained in the A55 sample.

Last edited by Big G; 09-01-2010 at 04:23 AM.

Class A · 09-01-2010, 04:46 AM

Originally posted by pentaxmz

Additionally, there is a reason why almost every astronomical software tool supports Canon (and some Nikon) almost exclusively.

There is a reason why Nikon cameras are not popular in astrophotography: They are also known as "star eaters" since they treat small stars as hot pixels and remove them.

Agnostic · 09-01-2010, 05:14 AM

Originally posted by thibs

Mmm I'd like to see an iso6400 pic comparing K-7 and A55, to get better idea of the progress in that area.

There you go:
More and bigger images can be found at Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page
Also the A560 is about a stop better at high ISO than the A33. If that difference holds we can expect performance up to 1 stop better for the K-5 versus the A55.

A55

K-7

thibs · 09-01-2010, 05:55 AM

Thank you much Agnostic.
Mmm iso6400 fom K-7 isn't as bad as I thought. I have one, but never use 6400. That means only emergency shots though.

Indeed the difference is significant. I notice the right hand of the model looks wrong to me but it may be Jpeg artifact (hope it is) or Sony's usually bad rendering.

Can't wait to get my hands on a K-5 (Droooool)

ogl · 09-01-2010, 05:59 AM

Originally posted by Big G

The sample images of the A55 sensor are very impressive; if it's the same sensor making it's way into the K-5 then that is very good news indeed. I'd say the 7D and K-5 high ISO performance would be about the same.

Pleeeeeeeeease let the AF system be awesome.

The sample images A55 are very bad in JPEG.

ogl · 09-01-2010, 06:06 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Too many poisonous mushrooms, Ogl?
The "too big" K10D's body was a complaint (not necessarily a valid one). Yes, the lack of an ISO button was a complaint. They were addressed. "Only" 3 FPS - fixed. K-7 directional buttons issue - fixed. Pentax is listening; they don't follow orders. And they have limited resources to work with.

I see only one problem...
you are ordinary idolater, i'm sensible person.
that's a difference. you can repeat your flat joke till the Second Coming,
it can't change anything...you will be sick Pentax fanatic and nothing else.

Agnostic · 09-01-2010, 06:12 AM

Originally posted by thibs

Thank you much Agnostic.
Mmm iso6400 fom K-7 isn't as bad as I thought. I have one, but never use 6400. That means only emergency shots though.

Indeed the difference is significant. I notice the right hand of the model looks wrong to me but it may be Jpeg artifact (hope it is) or Sony's usually bad rendering.

Can't wait to get my hands on a K-5 (Droooool)

Of course this is a well lighted scene and you can see how badly the quality deteriorates in shadow areas for the K-7. Also these images are jpg images and the A55 output shows some detail loss through jpg smoothing.

thibs · 09-01-2010, 06:26 AM

Originally posted by Agnostic

Of course this is a well lighted scene and you can see how badly the quality deteriorates in shadow areas for the K-7.

Indeed, shadows are bad. Well lit areas are usable though (but not much more).

Originally posted by Agnostic

Also these images are jpg images and the A55 output shows some detail loss through jpg smoothing.

That's what I thought. Pentax Jpeg engine isn't so bad after all

Kunzite · 09-01-2010, 06:34 AM

Originally posted by ogl

I see only one problem...
you are ordinary idolater, i'm sensible person.
that's a difference. you can repeat your flat joke till the Second Coming,
it can't change anything...you will be sick Pentax fanatic and nothing else.

Showing your true, ugly face again, eh? At least without racial insults

Well, I can understand that not knowing anything but trying to pretend you do is quite taxing. But... it's not my fault, really!

Now, on topic: should we include the K-x here?

I'm not overly impressed with the A55's output, but it doesn't look that bad either. I'm curious what Pentax would be able to get from that sensor (if that's the sensor...)

09-01-2010, 01:50 AM	#332
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Kunzite The problem is with Pentax: they're listening to us. P.S. If someone from Pentax is reading this: keep up the good work! And... you don't have to listen to everything we say Funny post. Simply ridiculous opinion of single-minded Pentax fan... I didn't notice it for the last years...Hoya makes what they want and what they need and they can. Pentax had made small bodies for the long time before. They simply return to the tradition. And nothing else. K-7 and K-x were made by Japanese engineers for Japanese hands first of all. If they listen to us, they should offer not colourful K-x, but new EVIL system with WR and FF instead of top APS-C, new fast and silent and solid SDM and outstanding AF system. We need more fast primes instead of slow DA35/2.8. No lenses roadmap for 1.5 year. Between DA21 and FA31 (very expensive, by the way, and made in Vietnam now) is the HOLE. Between DFA100 and DA200 is the HOLE. and e.t.c. No cheap DA50/1.7, no FA35/2 (why???). No 135 mm lens. No 85 mm lens. No 28-30 mm lenses. No non-expensive portrait lens - like 85/2 from Sony. No anything longer 300 mm and no TC. No new flashes. e.t.c. e.t.c. Photokina will give us the end answer to where Hoya goes... Last edited by ogl; 09-01-2010 at 02:02 AM.

09-01-2010, 05:14 AM	#339
Agnostic Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 414	Originally posted by thibs Mmm I'd like to see an iso6400 pic comparing K-7 and A55, to get better idea of the progress in that area. There you go: More and bigger images can be found at Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page Also the A560 is about a stop better at high ISO than the A33. If that difference holds we can expect performance up to 1 stop better for the K-5 versus the A55. A55 K-7 Last edited by Agnostic; 09-01-2010 at 05:44 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Upgrade to K20D - worth it?	ihasa	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	02-25-2010 06:32 PM
worth the upgrade?	cinaibur	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	5	10-08-2009 08:54 AM
Upgrade to Tamron 17-50mm from kit 18-55mm: worth the investment?	virgilr	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	09-04-2009 07:33 AM
K100d super vs K20d?--Worth Upgrade?	pentaxian_tmb	Pentax DSLR Discussion	31	09-02-2009 02:12 PM
k10D Is an upgrade worth it?	emptydam	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	11-11-2007 04:18 PM

09-01-2010, 01:41 AM	#331
Big G Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 581	Originally posted by pentaxmz I don't want to call you a lier but I find this statement highly suspect for two reasons: 1. No advantage? How about the fact that DFS is optional on the 7D and the K20D it is not. That is one huge advantage! 2. I own the K20D and I know that a 5 minute exposure results in quite a few hot (at least 15 - 25 consistent but I never bothered counting) pixels and even more noise (when viewing the RAW image). 3. I own the Canon 5D (which is inferior to the 7D) and long exposures not only do not require the DFS wait time but the end results are vastly superior to the K20D. 4. See this link for 7D long exposures: How does the 7D handle LONG exposures? Pentax comparison...: Canon EOS 7D / 50D - 10D Forum: Digital Photography Review All I want is a K5 with the noise and DFS issue fixed! Did IQs drop suddenly when I was away??? My post states clearly that regarding noise on long exposures that the 7D offered no advantage over the K20D; this was in response to complaints on this thread about the K20D being noisy on long exposures. I do extensive (several minute) long exposures with both bodies so I am qualified to make this statement. Hot pixels are still a problem with the 7D on exposures of several minutes. Yes, DFS is a total pain in bum with the K20D and being able to turn it off on the 7D is a big benefit. Given the price of the 7D compared to the K20D, I bloody well hoped that I could turn off DFS when it arrived.

09-01-2010, 02:21 AM	#333
ghelary Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 613	Originally posted by ogl Funny post. Simply ridiculous opinion of single-minded Pentax fan... I didn't notice it for the last years...Hoya makes what they want and what they need and they can. Pentax had made small bodies for the long time before. They simply return to the tradition. And nothing else. K-7 and K-x were made by Japanese engineers for Japanese hands first of all. If they listen to us, they should offer not colourful K-x, but new EVIL system with WR and FF instead of top APS-C, new fast and silent and solid SDM and outstanding AF system. We need more fast primes instead of slow DA35/2.8. No lenses roadmap for 1.5 year. Between DA21 and FA31 (very expensive, by the way, and made in Vietnam now) is the HOLE. Between DFA100 and DA200 is the HOLE. and e.t.c. No cheap DA50/1.7, no FA35/2 (why???). No 135 mm lens. No 85 mm lens. No 28-30 mm lenses. No non-expensive portrait lens - like 85/2 from Sony. No anything longer 300 mm and no TC. No new flashes. e.t.c. e.t.c. Photokina will give us the end answer to where Hoya goes... The hole is in your mind. DA21 is 35 eq while the 31 is equivalent to a 45mm, Sure they can make a 24, but then there will be a hole between 24 and 31 isn't it ? And everybody knows that you NEED a 28mm prime ... and a 26. Outside of any commercial consideration, when strickly speaking of Photagraphy, the following focal lenses (eq 35mm) are just what need 99% photographers : 28mm 35mm 50mm 85mm Sure you have varants, 28mm can be replaced by 31mm, 50mm by 40mm etc... While I'm a big supporter of primes, I come also to the conclusion that with 2 primes you get nearly all the job done. Once you know you equipment. Sure there are specialised need for ultrawide, tilt-shift or tele lenses, but those are specialised works. When using those lenses in a more generic context, you often get gimmicky pictures. Pentax has a superb range of un-orthodox lenses, and sincerly, if you think you can't replace a 85/1.4 by a 77/1.9, then you may have missed the point about photography.

09-01-2010, 02:38 AM	#334
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by ogl Funny post. Simply ridiculous opinion of single-minded Pentax fan... Too many poisonous mushrooms, Ogl? The "too big" K10D's body was a complaint (not necessarily a valid one). Yes, the lack of an ISO button was a complaint. They were addressed. "Only" 3 FPS - fixed. K-7 directional buttons issue - fixed. Pentax is listening; they don't follow orders. And they have limited resources to work with.

09-01-2010, 02:57 AM	#335
Big G Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 581	The sample images of the A55 sensor are very impressive; if it's the same sensor making it's way into the K-5 then that is very good news indeed. I'd say the 7D and K-5 high ISO performance would be about the same. Pleeeeeeeeease let the AF system be awesome.

09-01-2010, 03:49 AM	#336
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Mmm I'd like to see an iso6400 pic comparing K-7 and A55, to get better idea of the progress in that area.

09-01-2010, 04:15 AM	#337
Big G Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 581	Judging by the samples on Image Resource (bearing in mind those are in-camera JPGs, so RAW processing might be different), i'd say a significant improvement. Some of the detail in the K-7 ISO 6400 shots are just mush, where as there is pretty reasonable detail retained in the A55 sample. Last edited by Big G; 09-01-2010 at 04:23 AM.

09-01-2010, 04:46 AM	#338
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by pentaxmz Additionally, there is a reason why almost every astronomical software tool supports Canon (and some Nikon) almost exclusively. There is a reason why Nikon cameras are not popular in astrophotography: They are also known as "star eaters" since they treat small stars as hot pixels and remove them.

09-01-2010, 05:55 AM	#340
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Thank you much Agnostic. Mmm iso6400 fom K-7 isn't as bad as I thought. I have one, but never use 6400. That means only emergency shots though. Indeed the difference is significant. I notice the right hand of the model looks wrong to me but it may be Jpeg artifact (hope it is) or Sony's usually bad rendering. Can't wait to get my hands on a K-5 (Droooool)

09-01-2010, 05:59 AM	#341
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Big G The sample images of the A55 sensor are very impressive; if it's the same sensor making it's way into the K-5 then that is very good news indeed. I'd say the 7D and K-5 high ISO performance would be about the same. Pleeeeeeeeease let the AF system be awesome. The sample images A55 are very bad in JPEG.

09-01-2010, 06:06 AM	#342
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Kunzite Too many poisonous mushrooms, Ogl? The "too big" K10D's body was a complaint (not necessarily a valid one). Yes, the lack of an ISO button was a complaint. They were addressed. "Only" 3 FPS - fixed. K-7 directional buttons issue - fixed. Pentax is listening; they don't follow orders. And they have limited resources to work with. I see only one problem... you are ordinary idolater, i'm sensible person. that's a difference. you can repeat your flat joke till the Second Coming, it can't change anything...you will be sick Pentax fanatic and nothing else.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-01-2010, 06:12 AM	#343
Agnostic Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 414	Originally posted by thibs Thank you much Agnostic. Mmm iso6400 fom K-7 isn't as bad as I thought. I have one, but never use 6400. That means only emergency shots though. Indeed the difference is significant. I notice the right hand of the model looks wrong to me but it may be Jpeg artifact (hope it is) or Sony's usually bad rendering. Can't wait to get my hands on a K-5 (Droooool) Of course this is a well lighted scene and you can see how badly the quality deteriorates in shadow areas for the K-7. Also these images are jpg images and the A55 output shows some detail loss through jpg smoothing.

09-01-2010, 06:26 AM	#344
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by Agnostic Of course this is a well lighted scene and you can see how badly the quality deteriorates in shadow areas for the K-7. Indeed, shadows are bad. Well lit areas are usable though (but not much more). Originally posted by Agnostic Also these images are jpg images and the A55 output shows some detail loss through jpg smoothing. That's what I thought. Pentax Jpeg engine isn't so bad after all

09-01-2010, 06:34 AM	#345
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by ogl I see only one problem... you are ordinary idolater, i'm sensible person. that's a difference. you can repeat your flat joke till the Second Coming, it can't change anything...you will be sick Pentax fanatic and nothing else. Showing your true, ugly face again, eh? At least without racial insults Well, I can understand that not knowing anything but trying to pretend you do is quite taxing. But... it's not my fault, really! Now, on topic: should we include the K-x here? I'm not overly impressed with the A55's output, but it doesn't look that bad either. I'm curious what Pentax would be able to get from that sensor (if that's the sensor...)