[UnknownVT]

Not yet up on their site PopPhoto.com - but the full test of the Pentax K-5 is in the March, 2011 issue of the paper "Popular Photography" magazine.

Scan of their useful Test panel including AF speed at different light values:



For reference these are the AF speeds for the K-7 and K-x


EDIT to ADD -

from the responses about AF I thought their results from the grass is greener current top hot-shot dSLRs the CaNikon 60D and D7000 - with AF speeds that can be "envied" may relevant here (I edited this post as the comparison may be easier here than in a separate post)

---

Last edited by UnknownVT; 02-12-2011 at 10:30 AM.

[Photo1960]

Got my on-line delivery today. Overall, a very positive test from Pop P.

However, did you notice the typos in the highest 3 ISO's in the noise rating?

[Matjazz]

The "blazing" AF doesn't seem to be that much faster from it's predecessor

[starbase218]

I think it is a nice improvement, but Nikon (D7000) and Canon (60D) are still faster, if only by 1/2 second at the most.

[Noisychip]

Interesting, thanks for posting.

The funny thing is, it seems to have worse noise ratings than the K10D:

Camera Test: Pentax K10D | Photography - PopPhoto.com Offers Camera Reviews and Exclusive Photo Tips

K10d is rated "low 1.95" at ISO 1600 and IQ "excellent at every ISO"!
K-5 is 1.9 at ISO 400 and IQ excellent from 40-800...

According to this, one would better get a used K10 instead (AF left aside)...? I was condering the k-5 an improvement over the K10D in terms of noise. And from the images I've seen, it actually is a big improvement.



Looks like they modified their ratings, doesn't it?

[starbase218]

Interesting, thanks for posting.

The funny thing is, it seems to have worse noise ratings than the K10D:

Camera Test: Pentax K10D | Photography - PopPhoto.com Offers Camera Reviews and Exclusive Photo Tips

K10d is rated "low 1.95" at ISO 1600 and IQ "excellent at every ISO"!
K-5 is 1.9 at ISO 400 and IQ excellent from 40-800...

According to this, one would better get a used K10 instead (AF left aside)...? I was condering the k-5 an improvement over the K10D in terms of noise. And from the images I've seen, it actually is a big improvement.



Looks like they modified their ratings, doesn't it?

Yes it does. Btw on the AF speed test comparison, I wonder what lenses they used. Also they say that the 60D's sensor is better for high-ISO than the D7000's, which is contradicted in almost every other test I've read.

[ogl]

PopPhoto is for housewifes.

[normhead]

PopPhoto is for housewifes.

Then why have I never seen one reading it at the grocery check out? Why has it never been mention on Opra ? Why isn't it featured in the ads on "the Young and the Restless." And given that they run tests on cameras and try and provide some kind of objective evaluation on something other than a personal opinion, where does that leave the rest of us?

Am I reading this correctly, that the auto-focus times are pretty much the same as the Canon 60D, except a big falloff in low light? Someone must have made a mistake. That would mean you guys have been duping me for months. I thought when everyone went on about Canon having faster auto focus, I thought you were talking about something that might affect me. I don't have enough fast lenses to worry about auto focus in low light.

[amoringello]

er, um, ISO 3200 unacceptable? I think they are testing with the wrong camera.
Or have their tests been skewed for high-ISO-capable cameras? What compete trash!

[RonHendriks1966]

The "blazing" AF doesn't seem to be that much faster from it's predecessor

I think the biggest step in this regard is the AF in Liveview that is twice as fast as with the K-7. Then again it is stil slow compared to normal AF.

Always a bit trickey these tests. If you like your K10D then you will sleep better with this test. I don't think that the K10D is up to challenge the CMOS sensors of this generation.

[Fl_Gulfer]

It still got 4 1/2 Stars in "The Guide" section same as the Mark III, Mark IV, DS3, the only camera that beats it cost $7500.oo the D3X.
I think it was a good review. I like the "StandOut Spec quote: What A Body!, To Hold It Is To Love IT"

[Steelski]

Pop photo. thats the one that just copied the K10D results and pasted them onto the K20D right. Their reasoning was that it was the same module.
I would not touch their POS publication with a bargepole.

[ogl]

Pop photo. thats the one that just copied the K10D results and pasted them onto the K20D right. Their reasoning was that it was the same module.
I would not touch their POS publication with a bargepole.

So do I...I remember this story

[UnknownVT]

I edited my OP and added the PopPhoto.com AF speed results for the current APS-C top dogs the CaNikon 60D and D7000 for easier comparison.

If I may make a comment -

The K-5 and both the K-x and K-7 AF at LV (Light Level) 6 or brighter are already faster than those CaNikon hotshots.
LV=6 is f/4, 1/4sec @ ISO100 so it is not that bright......
as PopPhoto describes it about the level of kitchen lighting....

But it's the low light levels that the Pentaxes seem to lag.....

I do a lot of very low available light photography with the K-x and two kit zoom lens (OK, stop laughing please?).
I recently did the calculations - there are some areas at that venue where the light is so low it actually falls below the spec'd minimum levels of both the AF and metering.

I realize that one could do better allowing in more light through the lens - so I bought a Pentax-A 50 f/2 prime - it's not that great a lens since it was cheap - but it ought to be better than zooms, especially the cheapo kit zooms......

Well after a lot of re-practice to get my manual focusing right - I took it to my dark venue to use.

First thing I noticed is that I could not focus fast enough - remember it was dark, so hard to see through the VF - even if I had almost 2 stops advantage viewing through the lens.

However the metering was now just in range - so I could see the correct exposure - but it was the focusing - the green Hex was very useful but on real live subjects it was hard to get it stay on - whereas on either of the humble kit zooms the lock was really good - once I found an area to focus on - and on that night the difference was HUGE - I had almost no confidence of focus with the manual focus lens (and I have years of experience of manual focus on pre-AF film SLRs) -

Whereas I was actually delighted and even after over 20 sessions at that venue - surprised at what the K-x and either kit zooms could manage to focus on.

Now again I am not claiming world record breaking speeds - and of course I am now used to that venue and level of lighting and the K-x's performance - so I may have a better tolerance/acceptance level - but I would say that the K-x really does not lack for much in its low light AF performance for my use - and that is very low light with live musicians who constantly move.

Please see thread: Kx in Use for lots of low light samples,
or go directly to this most recent shot (and navigate BACKwards - 418 shots)

The Pentax K-5 is a slight improvement over my K-x - so what's not to like?

Of course YMMV

[Smeggypants]

er, um, ISO 3200 unacceptable? I think they are testing with the wrong camera.
Or have their tests been skewed for high-ISO-capable cameras? What compete trash!

I agree. Complete and utter rubbish test.

Noise is perfectly acceptable upto 6400 IMO


I've even had acceptable results over that for some shots