Originally posted by ogl The weaknesses of K-5 - what do you think?
What could be better?
1. no 12/14 bit RAW mode ? GordonBGood says that 14 bit mode (only) plays a low-down trick with IQ of K-5 in some situations.
I'll wait to see the images in 14 bit (JPEG files from converted RAW files) before I judge, but if it has a negative influence on IQ that's measurable, than the lack of 12 bit RAW files is going to be a real issue.
Quote: 2. small buffer size ?
Not a major issue for most, I believe.
Quote: 3. weak video control ?
4. no AF in video ?
The lack of some manual control in video mode is a big issue for serious video users and cinematographers. And there are MANY of them out there, which will still favor Canon (better controls of the 7D) and Nikon (continuous AF of the D7000).
Continuous AF in video might be a serious issue for many video users, but not for all. More serious cinematographers often rely on MF and follow-focus to achieve accurate focus, so the lack of AF-C in video might not be a big issue. But then DSLR video accessories like follow-focus adapters as easier to find for a D7000 than they are for a K-5. In the end, the D7000 has a slight advantage over the K-5.
Quote: 5. price? higher than 60D and D7000
The main issue, I believe. Not that the K-5 is expensive for such a high-quality camera, but rather because it is expensive compared to direct competition.
No double SD/SDHC memory card slot, no continuous AF in video and slower X-sync than the D7000 (which now has weather seals, magnesium body and a 100% viewfinder, features similar to the K-5) means the K-5 should sell for a bit less than the D7000. However, the D7000 is cheaper by about 400 dollars!
And although the 60D has no AF in video, but also no 100% viewfinder, no magnesium body and no weather seals, it's still a bargain compared to the K-5.
Quote: 6. still 1/180 x-sync
Not a big issue, again, but a little bit disappointing. Pentax might not be able to upgrade both its AF and flash systems at the same time. P-TTL II flash metering will come in time...
Quote: What is your impressions, thoughts, feelings???
I think the K-5 looks like an excellent camera, at least on paper. However, its very high price tag (especially compared to the D7000, its most direct competitor) means people will expect more performance and better image quality, or performance and image quality that's equal to cameras with a similar price tag, like the D300s and EOS 7D.
While the Nikon D300s is getting older, it remains very good competiton: it still has excellent high ISO performance and exceptional 3D tracking AF. The Canon EOS 7D, however, is brand new and represents even tougher competition for the K-5.
Although both the K-5 and 7D are pretty equal on paper (magnesium alloy body, weather seals, 100% viewfinder, 1080p video, etc.), there are some differences that did set the 7D appart from the K-7, differences that should be eliminated with the K-5.
First, the autofocus.
The K-7's AF performance in good light is far from matching the 7D's accuracy and speed in low light. Trying to compete against the currently best autofocus system in the APS-C DSLR class is not going to be easy for the K-5.
But if the new SAFOX IX+ is really as good as some claim it is, it might actually even out the differences between the K-5 and 7D, thanks to some advantages the K-5 has, like in-body image stabilisation. The size and weight of the camera is also another strong selling argument in favor of the K-5...
Then, there's the high ISO image quality.
High ISO image quality being the new Holy Grail of DSLR improvement these days, people expect DSLRs to make excellent pictures from ISO 100 all the way to ISO 3200. The K-5 has strong competition in the 7D, but not as strong as might one think.
If Pentax managed to replicate the high ISO performance of the incredible K-x with its new the K-5, then Pentax's new flaship might already have won the IQ war against the 7D.
Or maybe not...
The problem with high ISO image quality is that noise itself is not the only issue. Reduced dynamic range is another. And there, the K-7 was struggling compared to the 7D (and the D300s as well). If the dynamic range hasn't improved at high ISO on the K-5, half of the high ISO performance will be lost with the missing DR.
But if Pentax managed to push the K-5 to the same level of impressive performance of the K-x at high ISO, I'm sure both the noise levels and the DR will be fantastic.
Judging from the K-5's highest standard ISO setting of 12800, and 51200 (!) in expanded mode, I feel confident Pentax will remain the leader of APS-C DSLR high ISO performance. And that, alone, might be what makes the K-5 a real success, even when facing competition like the EOS 7D, D300s and D7000.
In the end, I feel like this DSLR will be more successful than the K-7.
Looks like the K-5 is going to be to the K-7 what the K20D was to the K10D: not a revolution, but a solid improvement that adresses the weaknesses of the previous model while building on its strengths.