[AngryCorgi]

The pentaxforums front page has a link to this discussion claiming that K-5 @ ISO6400 looks (more or less) like K-7 @ ISO800. I think maybe someone should edit that back to reality before everyone gets the wrong idea and gets depressed when their new K-5 arrives and isn't THAT amazing. No need to trump up unreal expectations for a what appears to be a great product...the only place that can lead is to disappointment.

[Adam]

We can do a new homepage post if someone PMs me some new concrete content to post. I can't be doing everything around here, and am very eager to continue seeing user submissions.

[alessandro63]

As a trial i printed a K-7 3200 picture on A3+ paper. Not very good but hang it higher than eye level and no-one will notice. I am quite sure after seeing this that 3200 can now be printed on A3+ without too much problems ( if you can prevent people form looking at it with magnifying glass. )
However, Pixelpeepers will be bashing ths performance as they are likely to look only at 100%.

Well, yes, I agree. Pixel peeping is a different story than printing and enjoying prints.
What's different now is that you can print a 6400 picture also cropped quite a bit...
And yes, printed resolution is strictly connected with the distance of the observer. People adhered (stuck) to big prints is just a nice photographic subject.

[alessandro63]

We can do a new homepage post if someone PMs me some new concrete content to post. I can't be doing everything around here, and am very eager to continue seeing user submissions.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/115076-pentax-photokin...ml#post1192333
Let's be real.

[AngryCorgi]

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/115076-pentax-photokin...ml#post1192333
Let's be real.

Yeah, I wasn't trying to break any balls...its just that some discretion is a good thing, even if the normal excitement tells you to do otherwise. I think most of the posts here and the sample comparisons suggest that a 1 to 1.5 stop noise improvement is more realistic (from a RAW standpoint, which is all that matters IMO) and should be more than enough to garnish praise. 1.5 stops is a HUGE difference.

[Adam]

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/115076-pentax-photokin...ml#post1192333
Let's be real.

Looks like new conclusions can be drawn after the further tests that you guys have conducted. As I said, though, the homepage won't update itself. Please PM me if you have something you'd like to share.

[alessandro63]

Looks like new conclusions can be drawn after the further tests that you guys have conducted. As I said, though, the homepage won't update itself. Please PM me if you have something you'd like to share.

Thanks. But it's too early to say anything conclusive. Yes, noise structure in the RAW file can't be changed with FW, but we have only one shot, that can be considered an hint more than a real sample.
Personally, I'd change the news saying there's a strong and visible difference, without giving any number... Anyway, we won't forget this is rumors area
One and a half stop gain with increased pixel count would indeed be great news, but won't let people think the K-7 isn't good. Cause it's good, better than it's said to be.

Cheers
Alessandro

[sirluke]

I made my own version of Falconeye's raw shot, developed the way I like.
It is on a separate thread:
K-5 ISO 6400

Take a look.

[falconeye]

I made my own version of Falconeye's raw shot, developed the way I like.
It is on a separate thread:
K-5 ISO 6400

Take a look.

I like the finer grain too.
Nevertheless, you should edit your post in the other thread to include a back link to my post where the raw was posted. So, people get a chance to play with you

[falconeye]

I photographed the K-5's AF module (as good as I could).

It is different from the K-7. Can somebody please photograph the K-7's AF box from the same angle and distance so we can compare? I don't have a 2nd camera right now.

K-5 AF box

Below is a cut model. It may be of a K-7 or K-5 and is on display on the Pentax booth. I've seen a similiar photo before, but not as this high a resolution. Can anybody knowing the older cut model shots if it is the same or a new one, i.e., if it is K-7 or K-5?

K-5/7 cut model

To my unaided eye, the cut model looks different from the K-7 bottom. E.g., the rear end blade has a gap with the K-7 but not with the K-5 or the cut model.

So, this may be a full cut model of the K-5 AF module indeed.

[falconeye]

Now that I look at the cut model again, I think it is from a K-5 indeed and I discover 2 interesting details:

• The shutter box has an absorber pad in the bottom.
• The prism has two overlay subprisms. One is for the status line at the bottom of the viewfinder, the other is for the red AF indicators. The second has tiny LEDs where three are visible in the cut model of. But it could be a full overlay screen. It is a pitty that this second prism still isn't used in a more powerful way. It could be a full OLED EVF w/o blowing up the size of the body.

[vespats]

i am impressed, i have to say.
thats what i hoped for.

I would not go that high, except I meet Elvis and have to document it, but if ISO1600 is what I expect it to be and maybe 3200 still OK I am more than happy.

With my K20 I almost never go above 400.
I think there are some FF cameras out there that not that much better

[deadwolfbones]

It's amazing how much stuff goes into the body, and how much of it is related to the AF system/viewfinder (at least in this portion of the body).

[Col]

It's amazing how much stuff goes into the body, and how much of it is related to the AF system/viewfinder (at least in this portion of the body).

Pentax I promise I won't demand that you make a smaller body again, until you state you've got Tardis capability. That is some piece of work.

[sirluke]

Nevertheless, you should edit your post in the other thread to include a back link to my post where the raw was posted. So, people get a chance to play with you

I've edited my original post. Everyone is welcome to edit and play with the DNG!