[glanglois]

"The camera’s new, highly sensitive AF sensor enables photographers to work with a luminous flux based on F2.8 levels in addition to F5.6..."


I understand what better sensitivity to low light levels means, but can someone please explain the above sentence? What is the significance of the reference to f2.8/5.6?

That was a mis-step in the announcement, Instead of "luminous flux" it should have read "luminiferous aether".

Now, will someone please answer this gentleman's question so I, too, can learn something this week?

[TomTextura]

"The camera’s new, highly sensitive AF sensor enables photographers to work with a luminous flux based on F2.8 levels in addition to F5.6..." I understand what better sensitivity to low light levels means, but can someone please explain the above sentence? What is the significance of the reference to f2.8/5.6?

I honestly don't know but at first I thought it was something similar to the f/8 auto-focus ability of the Nikon D4 and D800 that allows them to focus decently well even with a closed down aperture or with say a teleconverter on an f/4 or f/5.6 lens. But boasting f/2.8 is going in the other direction of what Nikon is claiming so it can't be the same thing.

[pinholecam]

Clavius, your "I have full-frame lenses!" argument is valid, and from this forum I know a lot of others also do. However a lot is not all. And I believe it would be silly for Pentax to sell a full-frame camera without offering at least a 24-70mm zoom, "Hey buy this camera for your old lenses, if you dont have some wait a few years for us to sell some. Good day to you Sir!." Now it is true that you have the FA limiteds......

I only have 3 lenses for my G3.
14/2.5; 20/1.7; 45/1.8 (ie. WA; 'normal'; portrait/short tele).
With that, it covers 95% of what I need in most situations (ie. tours, walkabouts, portrait shoot, family use)

If there is to be a Pentax FF, the 31mm, 35mm, 50mm, 77mm, 100mm end of things are already covered (ie. WA, normal, portrait/short/tele)
Pentax just needs to to release a UWA and/or WA 28mm/24mm.
That will keep things going as a 'system' until more lenses come out.

[CypherOz]

The K-5II is mighty disappointing. NO reason to upgrade from the current K-5.
K-3 24Mpx next year? One can only hope.
Sadly I have to agree with Ricelow on this announcement.

[bxf]

I honestly don't know but at first I thought it was something similar to the f/8 auto-focus ability of the Nikon D4 and D800 that allows them to focus decently well even with a closed down aperture or with say a teleconverter on an f/4 or f/5.6 lens. But boasting f/2.8 is going in the other direction of what Nikon is claiming so it can't be the same thing.

I encountered one or two comments that, if I recall correctly (and I'm not sure I do, and there's too much material to sift through if I were to try to locate them), said something to the effect that the new AF system permits more accurate focusing with wide aperture lenses. I don't know if the phrase in my post is related to these comments. I'm particularly interested in this because I have a couple of lenses that during AF adjustment tests repeatedly gave significantly different readings for apertures <=f2.0 as opposed to others (DOF differences were taken into consideration).

[Ash]

The K-5II is mighty disappointing. NO reason to upgrade from the current K-5.
K-3 24Mpx next year? One can only hope.
Sadly I have to agree with Ricelow on this announcement.

Mate, this announcement was not meant for existing K-5 owners. Our announcement will be coming, but give it time. Pentax have to focus their efforts on Photokina right now with the 'new' products they have available so far, then it'll be all systems go for a new product that will provide an upgrade path for K-5 users.

[mee]

Mate, this announcement was not meant for existing K-5 owners. Our announcement will be coming, but give it time. Pentax have to focus their efforts on Photokina right niw with the 'new' products they have available so far, then it'll be all systems go for a new product that will provide an upgrade path for K-5 users.

If that is true.. For whom did they make this announcement?

Because I'm looking at it with a K-x and wanting to upgrade and it isn't clear to me.. K-30 or a used K-5 v1 looks a lot more appealing. simply due to price vs features.

They could have resolved this by actually having a cut and dry 'flagship.' As it stands, Pentax has decided to have the 'flagship' only stand out on general photography (image quality and supposed autofocus).

All other things (video af, video modes, video compression, focus peaking, etc) seem to be left out. It seems the K-5 mk2 is for Pentaxians who care mostly (only?) about photos and the K-30 is for people who need more of an all-in-one good at all things, not great at anything sort of camera. Or desire a lighter body.. or don't want to spend the extra money.

I guess there really isn't a flagship per say.. there is a new Mid level camera meant to fit between low and mid tier.. and another meant to fit between mid and upper tier. There is no direct tiered body in Pentax land at the moment.

Dilemma if one wants the better bit depth or shutter speed of one.. or focus peaking and much enhanced video support of another.. which makes me either want to wait and see how cheaply I can get one or the other.. or wait and see what happens to Pentax. Bottom line is.. they make me want to wait and see and that isn't helping Pentax.

[Ash]

Because I'm looking at it with a K-x and wanting to upgrade and it isn't clear to me.. K-30 or a used K-5 v1 looks a lot more appealing. simply due to price vs features.

In your case, the K-5 II is a more significant upgrade. For the few extra dollars, you are getting a more refined AF mechanism (I'm tipping this will be a significant improvement on SAFOX IX) and a MUCH better rear LCD display (the gapless screen is akin to Apple's iPhone 4/4S display - very brilliant).

It seems the K-5 mk2 is for Pentaxians who care mostly (only?) about photos

Pentaxian = photos
video capability is a secondary issue - nice to have, but not essential IMO

Bottom line is.. they make me want to wait and see and that isn't helping Pentax

There is no need to wait - there are products suited to your needs/wants available in alternate brands that you can get now if you want them.
In the meantime, the K-5 II is about as good an APS-C camera as you can get anywhere.

[mee]

In your case, the K-5 II is a more significant upgrade. For the few extra dollars, you are getting a more refined AF mechanism (I'm tipping this will be a significant improvement on SAFOX IX) and a MUCH better rear LCD display (the gapless screen is akin to Apple's iPhone 4/4S display - very brilliant).

If 400 dollars is a 'few' to you, then may I please have a 'few extra dollars' to cover the difference?

Pentaxian = photos
video capability is a secondary issue - nice to have, but not essential IMO

I must not be a Pentaxian then. Because the video side of the camera interests me as well.

That said, I'm afraid you could be maybe might be mistaking your personal views for truths a teency bit. There is obviously nothing wrong with having and perhaps even sharing one's views.. but let's not mistake them with overarching truths that hold for all.

There is no need to wait - there are products suited to your needs/wants available in alternate brands that you can get now if you want them.
In the meantime, the K-5 II is about as good an APS-C camera as you can get anywhere.

But the longer I wait, the more the prices continue to drop. The K-30 has dropped around 20% in a single month since release!! Pentax, in some places, is not holding their defined (and seemingly overinflated) MAP too well. And with the K-5 II coming out, that means we should expect to see original K-5's on the used market for cheap also should one wish to go that route.

Right now seems to be probably the WORST time to buy a Pentax body brand new. Perhaps after CP+ or at least closer to it, the dust will be a little more settled.

But I agree about alternative brands.. decisions.

[PPPPPP42]

Hmm, kinda bothersome, I was eying a used K-5 myself from the people dumping it cheap for the next model since I use all MF glass and don't need or like AF either way. Doesn't look like many K5 users will bother to upgrade for this.

I also see this as Pentax buying time, its better than continuing the K5 with its few important flaws and it probably cost them almost nothing to add to the K5 since the improvements were already needed for its eventual successor anyways and fit the K5 without extensive modifications. The K5 is now essentially the perfect camera of last year, I expect the price on it to drop $100-200 before years end and a real successor within 6 months to a year depending on how extensive the rework will be.

The K5 II isn't really behind the times if people who would own one can't see any real need to upgrade, many K5 users already say that.

In all honesty I would love a FF Pentax since I actually NEED (not want) the wider FOV with same magnification for just about everything I do but even if it were released tomorrow it would be 4 versions from now before I would have a chance of affording a used one. I can't say for sure if there is a market for a new Pentax FF, but there sure as hell is a market for a cheap (or used) one though.

Ah well, I shelved the K20D awhile back anyways (except for things like HDR).
It occurred to me one day that with good film my refurbished (by Eric!) Super Program has every feature and ability of the newest Canikon DSLR that is actually worth a damn, plus better dynamic range to boot. Life is good when you have the old fashioned skills to use a real camera and have a complete set of matching lenses and accessories to go with it.

Sometimes these things need to be put in perspective, a K5 II is more than you need to do what you want.

[Essdubbya]

Yes but I have been putting off buying a k5 to replace my k7 (relegated to landscape work) and now I have a reason to buy the k5II

[Ash]

Sometimes these things need to be put in perspective, a K5 II is more than you need to do what you want.

We'll have none of that level-headedness here!

If 400 dollars is a 'few' to you, then may I please have a 'few extra dollars' to cover the difference?

It's a borrower's market out in the finance world at the moment. If you really want something, you'll get it with the help of the banks.
If you cannot afford a K-5 II, good luck with finding what you really want at a price you want to pay...

Yes but I have been putting off buying a k5 to replace my k7 (relegated to landscape work) and now I have a reason to buy the k5II

And there we have it. I'm sure you'll find value in the upgrade.

[mee]

It's a borrower's market out in the finance world at the moment. If you really want something, you'll get it with the help of the banks.
If you cannot afford a K-5 II, good luck with finding what you really want at a price you want to pay...

The issue is in claiming 400 dollars is 'a few' which was quite silly of you to say.

A 'few' is 3. Which is over 133x what you consider a few.

Another thought is.. Why is the common practice when someone mentions high cost is for others to attack on the basis of inability to afford? That is clearly ignorant of knowledge on the person or situation one is judging.

Perhaps they simply feel it is no where near worth the asking price.


Oh, and borrower is slave to the lender. I'd never be so silly as to pay interest on a non-essential (and also heavily depreciating item) such as a camera.

[Ben_Edict]

"The camera’s new, highly sensitive AF sensor enables photographers to work with a luminous flux based on F2.8 levels in addition to F5.6..."


I understand what better sensitivity to low light levels means, but can someone please explain the above sentence? What is the significance of the reference to f2.8/5.6?

Almost all AF systems are optimized for the incoming light cone of a f/5.6 lens. The light cone of an f/2.8 lens has an wider angle and thus may not be AFed correctly. This problem increases at lower light levels, when the faster lens is more needed... It makes a lot of sense to optimize the AF system for faster lenses in my opinion, as this is the right way to make the best out of the more expensive faster lenses. Good move by Pentax, I think.

Ben

[Ash]

The issue is in claiming 400 dollars is 'a few' which was quite silly of you to say.

A 'few' is 3. Which is over 133x what you consider a few.

Another thought is.. Why is the common practice when someone mentions high cost is for others to attack on the basis of inability to afford? That is clearly ignorant of knowledge on the person or situation one is judging.

Perhaps they simply feel it is no where near worth the asking price.


Oh, and borrower is slave to the lender. I'd never be so silly as to pay interest on a non-essential (and also heavily depreciating item) such as a camera.

Then you would do well to desist on arguing about cost, whether you can afford to or not, about a consumer item that you don't need.

The term 'few' is clearly relative. It is not silly to use the term in reference to photographic gear, as $400 is not a large amount in the prosumer/professional photographic world (though it is considerable for a consumer item).

If you want to call me ignorant based on my use of the word 'affordability', good for you. It still means you're balking at the thought of spending the amount of money on something you want - that just portrays a low value for money position, which I disagree with in terms of the K-5 II.

Now back onto the discussion.