[gazonk]

They have the 645D to protect.

Heh, that didn't stop them from adding the fabulous ISO 80 mode to the K-5.

I wonder what sensor the new 645D will have? I hope they make two versions: a lower cost 40mp 33x44 version with a less expensive sensor (same pixel density as 24mp FF) and a 72mp 36x48 version (same pixel density as 36mp FF)

[eurostar]

That's what I meant. High ISO is cool for being able to make family snap in low light. But when high IQ is needed, the other end is much more important.

I use high ISO in overcast day to photograph bird in flight with 1/4000 sec to freeze the wings, so I suppose high ISO are not useful only for family snap in low light. When you could simply use a flashgun. On the other hand, I find really difficult to imagine better quality a low ISO than K-5 IIs. If you need more detail, you need more pixels, because when you have no noise and large DR, it's difficult to imagine what lower ISO could bring more inside the square of each pixel.

[thibs]

Heh, that didn't stop them from adding the fabulous ISO 80 mode to the K-5.

I wonder what sensor the new 645D will have? I hope they make two versions: a lower cost 40mp 33x44 version with a less expensive sensor (same pixel density as 24mp FF) and a 72mp 36x48 version (same pixel density as 36mp FF)

If they chage their cropped sensor, they'd go straight to 1.1x or 1.0. Why change slightly the size?
Would be like APS-H instead of FF for K-mount, a non sense, stupid and costly idea.

[RonHendriks1966]

If they chage their cropped sensor, they'd go straight to 1.1x or 1.0. Why change slightly the size?
Would be like APS-H instead of FF for K-mount, a non sense, stupid and costly idea.

Sounds like a great idea to me!

[ogl]

K-5 (II)(s) is still the best low ISO APS-C camera - only a few FF cameras have (marginally) better DR, for instance. I would be surprised if the new camera doesn't match or surpass that.

It would be cool if it came with an ISO 25 mode, though, or at least ISO 50

K-5II has already real ISO68 (marked as ISO80)

[farhagh]

Swivel LCD goes with enhanced video capabilities, a spot where Pentax is non-competitive at the price point.

You think so? Well, the swivel LCD is my most wanted feature in next body, and I have never used my camera for videos.

[farhagh]

Heh, that didn't stop them from adding the fabulous ISO 80 mode to the K-5.

I wonder what sensor the new 645D will have? I hope they make two versions: a lower cost 40mp 33x44 version with a less expensive sensor (same pixel density as 24mp FF) and a 72mp 36x48 version (same pixel density as 36mp FF)

Well, I guess Pentax is not in the position to decide about these things. They have to choose between whatever available in the market.

[Clavius]

I use high ISO in overcast day to photograph bird in flight with 1/4000 sec to freeze the wings, so I suppose high ISO are not useful only for family snap in low light. When you could simply use a flashgun. On the other hand, I find really difficult to imagine better quality a low ISO than K-5 IIs. If you need more detail, you need more pixels, because when you have no noise and large DR, it's difficult to imagine what lower ISO could bring more inside the square of each pixel.

You don't find the K5's ISO 80 noisy? And are those BIF shots of any usable quality?

I'm sorry, I must be spoiled.

[ElJamoquio]

If the K-3 would be a top APS-C camera with very advanced specs regarding velocity (top tracking AF-C, top burst, very big buffer, top quality very high ISO) I don't see why it should cost less than a basic slow FF. I guess it should cost the same, or more.

Concur.

I'd still buy the FF, but there are people for whom fast and accurate AF and burst rate are more important than IQ.

There's quite a ways to go on AF and fast telephotos before that market segment should consider Pentax, though.

[ElJamoquio]

Why? The K-3 is for those who want an APS camera. Incidentally, the rumored Nikon D400 is rumored to be significantly more expensive than the D600. It will also almost certainly sells in much higher volume.

I'd wager on that assertion.

Say, 6 months after introduction of the D400, amazon sales results of top selling variant?

[cfraz]

You don't find the K5's ISO 80 noisy?

Is this a joke - I don't get it???

[Caat]

Why? The K-3 is for those who want an APS camera. Incidentally, the rumored Nikon D400 is rumored to be significantly more expensive than the D600. It will also almost certainly sells in much higher volume.

The D300s launched at £1300 in the UK. The D600 is currently about £1500. So that would mean that the D400 is going up a tier over and above where the D300s slotted into the Nikon range.

But the position is different for Pentax anyway because it has a brand perception problem to overcome, lower pricing is one way to overcome this (to an extent).

[hangman43]

That's what I meant. High ISO is cool for being able to make family snap in low light. But when high IQ is needed, the other end is much more important.

I rarely or never use a high ISO for family snap shots but this past week end I shot a indoor rodeo and I had to use ISO 4500 just to get a decent shutter speed to stop the action and before you ask yes they were usable you might not be able to count the hairs on the horse but compared to what you would get with a low ISO the results were more than usable and the customer loved them.

[Wired]

Is this a joke - I don't get it???

me niether. ISO 80 seems pretty clean to me... and I use it all the time.

[eurostar]

You don't find the K5's ISO 80 noisy? And are those BIF shots of any usable quality?

I'm sorry, I must be spoiled.

I don't find noisy 800 ISO on the K-5. And I find shot with 6400 ISO of BIF actually usabile, after cleaning the background. I see people giving much more attention to content than appearence of a picture.