Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-17-2010, 06:05 AM   #46
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 119
QuoteOriginally posted by dgaies Quote
As for your comparison to the D3, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't that camera 2-3 times more expensive than the K-5? So basically a camera, with a larger sensor, that is significantly more expensive than the K-5, also outperforms it? Shocking.
Actually the D700 uses the same sensor as the D3, and is selling for around $700 more than the K5, hardly triple, and not significantly more expensive.

And isn't the fact that everyone was praising the K5 as being as good as a full frame sensor the point? Everyone was saying it was going to be as good as a 3.5 year old FF, and it still isn't there. The k5 still gets slapped down by the current pro FF model the D3s, which does cost 3 times as much, but that sensor will work its way into the d800 and will probably sell for around half of the D3s.

Cameras are a lot like cars. Think of the K5 as a Mazda 3, and the D3s as a Chevrolet Corvette. While both will get the job done well, the Corvette, like the D3s will win every category except for price.

11-17-2010, 06:07 AM   #47
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,531
QuoteOriginally posted by aragondina Quote
Think of the K5 as a Mazda 3, and the D3s as a Chevrolet Corvette.
What? Are you accusing D3s-using professionals of being pimps??

(sorry, couldn't resist )
11-17-2010, 06:15 AM   #48
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 119
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
What? Are you accusing D3s-using professionals of being pimps??

(sorry, couldn't resist )
No pimps be drivin' Cadillacs. D3s users are like Nascar drivers, with the women all flocking around them because of their smooth lines and big lenses
11-17-2010, 06:43 AM   #49
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by aragondina Quote
Actually the D700 uses the same sensor as the D3, and is selling for around $700 more than the K5, hardly triple, and not significantly more expensive.

And isn't the fact that everyone was praising the K5 as being as good as a full frame sensor the point? Everyone was saying it was going to be as good as a 3.5 year old FF, and it still isn't there. The k5 still gets slapped down by the current pro FF model the D3s, which does cost 3 times as much, but that sensor will work its way into the d800 and will probably sell for around half of the D3s.

Cameras are a lot like cars. Think of the K5 as a Mazda 3, and the D3s as a Chevrolet Corvette. While both will get the job done well, the Corvette, like the D3s will win every category except for price.
I was replying to the post specifically comparing the K5 to the D3, which is why I said 2-3x more expensive. The K5 is much closer in price to the D700, although to be fair the D700 is still 50% more. Whether or not that is significant or not probably depends on the buyer.

The fact that the sensor you are comparing it to is 3.5 years old doesn't really matter. Again, if someone is interested in a certain price/performance level, the date when something was released is irrelevant. Judged solely based on what is for sale today, the K-5 (and D7000) do quite well in terms of price/performance. The fact that the D700/D3 may outperform the K-5 at a higher cost doesn't in any way detract from the K-5, IMO. As I stated in the previous post, for someone going form a K-7 to a K-5, there is significant improvment for the $700 premium. I would also go so far as to argue that there is as much improvment for that $700 (K-7 to K-5) as there is to spending the next $700 to go from a K-5 to a D700.

FWIW, I never claimed the K-5 could outperform a FF sensor. I have stated in many porevious posts that I was looking for an upgrade to my K-7 with better high ISO performance and improved AF. In this respect, it would be hard to call the K-5 aything but successful.

11-17-2010, 07:38 AM   #50
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,327
QuoteOriginally posted by aragondina Quote
Actually the D700 uses the same sensor as the D3, and is selling for around $700 more than the K5, hardly triple, and not significantly more expensive.

And isn't the fact that everyone was praising the K5 as being as good as a full frame sensor the point? Everyone was saying it was going to be as good as a 3.5 year old FF, and it still isn't there. The k5 still gets slapped down by the current pro FF model the D3s, which does cost 3 times as much, but that sensor will work its way into the d800 and will probably sell for around half of the D3s.

Cameras are a lot like cars. Think of the K5 as a Mazda 3, and the D3s as a Chevrolet Corvette. While both will get the job done well, the Corvette, like the D3s will win every category except for price.
Why do people use car analogies so much? Doesn't really work for me, but anyway...

The question for most people is one of "good enough." The people buying the K5, 60D and D7000 are not the same people buying the D3s and D3x. If image quality is decent enough at high iso for good sized prints, that is the end of the story.

Professional photographers need to evaluate as well what camera (for the price) will get them the image quality and performance they need for what they do. There are plenty of professionals that still shoot with Canon 40D and are very happy. Do they need full frame? Probably not.
11-17-2010, 08:04 AM   #51
Pentaxian
Mike.P's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South Coast .. UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,888
As a K-5 user I have to say its excellent for what it is, however it will never outperform a full frame camera ISO wise and to be honest I would find it a little strange if it did. Personally I would only use it past ISO 3200 in an emergency but how many Pentax owners would have been happy to say that just 12 months ago .. quite a few I bet.

I am still not convince the AF is much faster than the K-7 (the main reason I bought it) but to be honest I haven't had much of a chance to try that side of the camera .. it does seem snappier with the SDM lenses.

All in all it is the best DSLR Pentax have produced by far, the IQ is outstanding as long as you use Raw (IMO jpeg has always been a problem with Pentax), IS works well and the body is solidy built and a joy to hold.

It's certainly not anywhere near a FF beater noise wise though.
11-17-2010, 08:21 AM   #52
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by Mike.P Quote
As a K-5 user I have to say its excellent for what it is, however it will never outperform a full frame camera ISO wise and to be honest I would find it a little strange if it did. Personally I would only use it past ISO 3200 in an emergency but how many Pentax owners would have been happy to say that just 12 months ago .. quite a few I bet.

I am still not convince the AF is much faster than the K-7 (the main reason I bought it) but to be honest I haven't had much of a chance to try that side of the camera .. it does seem snappier with the SDM lenses.

All in all it is the best DSLR Pentax have produced by far, the IQ is outstanding as long as you use Raw (IMO jpeg has always been a problem with Pentax), IS works well and the body is solidy built and a joy to hold.

It's certainly not anywhere near a FF beater noise wise though.
+1 to pretty much everything said here.

I'm not sure when "beating" FF became the criteria for the K-5 being a good camera.


Having used the K-5for about a month, I know that it's a very solid improvment over the K-7 in terms of ISO from 800-6400. The AF is also improved, although in many situations I don't think you'd be likely to notice. But the bottom line is for someone who wants to upgrade from a current Pentax body, the K-5 is an excellent choice. For potential buyers who want a compact, very solid WR body with built-in SR and access to Pentax primes, the K-5 is also a good choice. For people who want, need or think they need FF, just go buy a Canon/Sony/Nikon FF so you won't be disappointed that the K-5 can't fully deliver FF IQ.
11-17-2010, 08:47 AM   #53
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 116
QuoteOriginally posted by Mike.P Quote
As a K-5 user I have to say its excellent for what it is, however it will never outperform a full frame camera ISO wise and to be honest I would find it a little strange if it did. Personally I would only use it past ISO 3200 in an emergency but how many Pentax owners would have been happy to say that just 12 months ago .. quite a few I bet.

I am still not convince the AF is much faster than the K-7 (the main reason I bought it) but to be honest I haven't had much of a chance to try that side of the camera .. it does seem snappier with the SDM lenses.

All in all it is the best DSLR Pentax have produced by far, the IQ is outstanding as long as you use Raw (IMO jpeg has always been a problem with Pentax), IS works well and the body is solidy built and a joy to hold.

It's certainly not anywhere near a FF beater noise wise though.
I'm very interested in what owners are saying, not so much what number peepers are, so I appreciate your take, Mike. But are you saying that you find the K5 JPG output subpar? (as I do my K10D) or just that you can't use JPG to judge anything much, particularly IQ (which is a given : ) ).


Last edited by hut234; 11-17-2010 at 03:51 PM.
11-17-2010, 04:45 PM   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by aragondina Quote
And isn't the fact that everyone was praising the K5 as being as good as a full frame sensor the point? Everyone was saying it was going to be as good as a 3.5 year old FF, and it still isn't there.
Yes, it is EXACTLY my point. Thank you. I predicted before the camera was released that the IR results would show it to be far from a near-equal to the D700/D3 etc., since the only way to get noise performance anywhere close was going to be heavy-handed noise reduction, which is EXACTLY what we see. Amazing how short the memories become when the back pedaling to "for the money" arguments begins. There were only about 50 posts announcing the end of any discernible difference between FF and APS-C based on the supposedly superior performance of the K5.
11-17-2010, 04:50 PM   #55
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
Hate to burst your bubble, but those K-5 shots over at IR are badly back focussed. You can tell it from the purple fringing (due to longitudinal CA) in the strong highlights, check out e.g. the metal parts of the salt jar.
Seriously?!

You're going to argue, with a straight face, that the five-year-old-fingerpainter mush of the red fabric with the leaves on it in the IR shots is the result of some imprecision in focusing?! When the swatches near it don't show much of any (if any) focusing issue?! C'mon. Recognize heavy noise reduction when you see it, and recognize that you couldn't realistically expect anything different, given 16 megapixels on a less-than-half-frame sensor, to get low high-ISO noise.
11-17-2010, 04:53 PM   #56
Veteran Member
dgaies's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Maryland / Washington DC
Posts: 3,917
QuoteOriginally posted by 24X36NOW Quote
Yes, it is EXACTLY my point. Thank you. I predicted before the camera was released that the IR results would show it to be far from a near-equal to the D700/D3 etc., since the only way to get noise performance anywhere close was going to be heavy-handed noise reduction, which is EXACTLY what we see. Amazing how short the memories become when the back pedaling to "for the money" arguments begins. There were only about 50 posts announcing the end of any discernible difference between FF and APS-C based on the supposedly superior performance of the K5.
Why do you care that the K-5 doesn't equal/beat the D700/D3 at high ISO? As far as I understood, it wasn't suppose to. As I said in my previous post, I fail to understand how that in and of itself makes the K-5 a bad camera.
11-17-2010, 05:06 PM   #57
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
And I don't understand why people spend so much time posting about it.

It seems that some can scratch their FF itch only by bringing nearly every topic back to that. Please, give it a rest.
11-17-2010, 07:13 PM   #58
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,327
QuoteOriginally posted by 24X36NOW Quote
Yes, it is EXACTLY my point. Thank you. I predicted before the camera was released that the IR results would show it to be far from a near-equal to the D700/D3 etc., since the only way to get noise performance anywhere close was going to be heavy-handed noise reduction, which is EXACTLY what we see. Amazing how short the memories become when the back pedaling to "for the money" arguments begins. There were only about 50 posts announcing the end of any discernible difference between FF and APS-C based on the supposedly superior performance of the K5.
I don't know about "for the money" arguments. People who have shot both the D700 and worked with K5 files say that they are very similar when dealing with RAW files. Not sure what jpegs tell us about anything.

For the record, I think you would be better off going to Canon or Nikon. Every time that Pentax has been asked about full frame, they reply with a negative answer. It is clear to me that however much people whine for it, Pentax is banking on the 645D being their professional camera. That means full frame is years in the future, if ever.
11-18-2010, 01:52 AM   #59
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,531
QuoteOriginally posted by 24X36NOW Quote
Seriously?!

You're going to argue, with a straight face, that the five-year-old-fingerpainter mush of the red fabric with the leaves on it in the IR shots is the result of some imprecision in focusing?!
Well the clothing is pretty close to being within focus, but probably also slightly in front of the focus point (since the dial on the right hand side shows clear signs of being in front of the focus point).

The red fabric looks very good in the DNG file I'm looking at(*), so I assume you are looking at "bright mode" jpegs, which, and I agree here, have too much saturation, and especially in the red channel.

But who wants to shoot in bright mode anyway? It just seriously limits your PP options.

(*) Interesting thing about the DNG file: It looks good in PPL, but with Apple's RAW converter I get too strong red and pink. Some are reporting strange results from LR 3.3 too. I wonder if some of the RAW converters may have trouble with the 14 bit RAW?
11-18-2010, 03:40 AM   #60
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,559
AFAIK LR does not support K5 raw yet so problems are to be expected.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
d7000, ev, iso, iso100, iso1600, iso200, iso400, iso800, k-5, pentax news, pentax rumors, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New DxO Mark camera+lens database lol101 Pentax News and Rumors 22 06-27-2010 11:31 AM
DxO Mark for Pentax KX sensor eigelb Pentax News and Rumors 1 03-09-2010 05:27 PM
I feel bad for saying this... but who else is waiting for the k-7's DXO mark? Isaac314 Pentax DSLR Discussion 14 05-29-2009 12:28 PM
New DXO Mark for K200d Das Boot Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 12-11-2008 10:37 AM
Image Resource Comparomenter: a corollary to the Mark DXO thread konraDarnok Pentax News and Rumors 5 11-27-2008 11:48 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:24 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top