[theperception2008]

I shoot real estate photography with a K-5 IIs. Yes it is a 16 MP camera abut I have it set at 10 MP. The files are just to large and I don't need those giant files. The 10 MP are just as sharp and do not lack. No one has every asked me for a bigger picture. It is already bigger than what they can see on a computer and what they can print. I don't want monster megapixel cameras. They just kill hard drives. I will take 300 to 400 shots on a photo shoot. I edit what I want and keep about 30 pictures and delete the rest. The sensor quality is what matters not the size of the pixels.

Didn't the Nikon D700 come with a 12 MP sensor? I don't think I've ever heard that it wasn't enough. There are billboards that were printed which were taken with a Pentax K10D and that had only 10 MP. I know that higher resolutions mean more cropping to work with but how many situations would you need to make a 50mm lens work like a 100mm lens? I was using my DA15 and making 21mm equivalent crops with my Kr. I guess that using the DA560 you could technically make a 1120 by cropping 50%. Most likely though if one has the DA560, I don't think the user would be using it on the K50, more likely the K-5II/s or the next iteration of it.

Personally I would like to see a bigger jump in DR and ISO capabilities before I would like more MP

---

Last edited by theperception2008; 06-08-2013 at 01:19 AM.

[JohntheThird]

It would be difficult to fit a jog dial on a K-5 sized body. I think it would be easier to fit a third dial on the front, behind the shutter button. The controls on back of the K-5 is already squeezed to bit tight to fit a jog dial. The AF point switch is already too small, so I would prefer to have a K10D design on that rather than a jog dial.

Actually I liked the dedicated dial on the left top for exposure compensation on my Canon G10. There was also a dedicated dial for ISO. And a jog type dial for your Av and Tv modes. Three dials, of which two dedicated.

So how about a two-level dedicated dial (again like the G10, or like the mode selector/meter mode) with both compensation and ISO? Makes sense doesnt it? Where to put such button?

Then there is only two things left to select from - speed and aperture. They can be at the finger and at the thumb like the current e-dials.

[Fogel70]

Actually I liked the dedicated dial on the left top for exposure compensation on my Canon G10. There was also a dedicated dial for ISO. And a jog type dial for your Av and Tv modes. Three dials, of which two dedicated.

So how about a two-level dedicated dial (again like the G10, or like the mode selector/meter mode) with both compensation and ISO? Makes sense doesnt it? Where to put such button?

Then there is only two things left to select from - speed and aperture. They can be at the finger and at the thumb like the current e-dials.

A dual dial like on G10 do not work well IMO, as you have to move your grip on the camera for using them. It's much better to use two extra button like on K-5 IMO, as it's better optimized for using the camera when looking through the viewfinder. Using more dedicated dials do not always make the camera easier to use.

[mecrox]

Didn't the Nikon D700 come with a 12 MP sensor? I don't think I've ever heard that it wasn't enough. There are billboards that were printed which were taken with a Pentax K10D and that had only 10 MP. I know that higher resolutions mean more cropping to work with but how many situations would you need to make a 50mm lens work like a 100mm lens? I was using my DA15 and making 21mm equivalent crops with my Kr. I guess that using the DA560 you could technically make a 1120 by cropping 50%. Most likely though if one has the DA560, I don't think the user would be using it on the K50, more likely the K-5II/s or the next iteration of it.

Personally I would like to see a bigger jump in DR and ISO capabilities before I would like more MP

It's up to Pentax to make sure that their marketing (and/or training of sales personnel) hits home that in its price range the K-50 is more than a match for anything and for those who want outdoor and rugged, it's unique. Otherwise what a buyer will hear is Nikon ... 24 mp ... 39 focus points ... tilt-swivel LCD ... blah blah ... and suddenly a Pentax camera will seem anemic and overpriced ... and a salesman will close another deal on the basis that no one ever went wrong recommending Nikon.

I know a lot of folks won't agree, but for myself I think Pentax are taking a real risk in not producing a camera at this level which reaches a lot closer to at least one of those features. Their sensor aside, even m43 cams and MILCS are packing in the features these days. I'm sure the K-50 will be well made and produce excellent images because Pentax DSLRS are like that, but from the specs it sounds like a camera from 2010 or 2011, not 2013. I mean, chances are that a 100-buck compact will have a sweep/panorama mode, which folks love for those holiday views. What's so hard about implementing this on a camera costing many times that?

[Fogel70]

Another thing Pentax need to work on is cheap kit lenses with DC motors. I think Pentax loose quite a few new users when they try the camera and find how much noise the screw-drive generate. Pentax cameras/lenses is probably considered much less sophisticated than competition because of the screw-drive kit lenses.

DAL 18-55 DC WR and DAL 50-200 DC WR would be a great start.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

Personally I would like to see a bigger jump in DR and ISO capabilities before I would like more MP

If the past is anything to go by, we can have that and more MP.

[Rondec]

Clearly you don't understand the graphs. At ISO 100 the K20D shows a SNR of 39.3dB vs. 40.8 for the K-5. That's a difference of 1.5dB. One stop of noise is 6dB, so at ISO 100 there's only 1/4EV difference.

The highest level at which DXOMark considers an acceptable threshold of noise is ISO 639 for the K20D vs. ISO 1162 for the K-5. That's a difference of 0.82, i.e. less than one stop.
DxOMark - Use Case Scores

I don't know what you're looking at, maybe in-camera jpegs with differing amounts of noise reduction. You won't find any tests to back up your wildly exaggerated "experience".

The question is how much dynamic range the cameras have at a given iso. The K5 maxes out at 14.1 Evs at iso 80, but iso 100, DXO Mark still measures it to be 13.85 Evs. The K20 measures 11.05 Evs at iso 100. I believe that is the question is dynamic range, particularly at low iso. I can tell that in real world shooting, I can recover much more shadow detail on my K5 shot at low iso than I ever could on the K20/K7. They were good cameras and I shot them at high iso a fair amount, but even though noise was decently controlled on them at high iso (1600 to 3200), the images did look more washed than the K5 shots I have at similar iso.

[causey]

I shoot real estate photography with a K-5 IIs. Yes it is a 16 MP camera abut I have it set at 10 MP. The files are just to large and I don't need those giant files. The 10 MP are just as sharp and do not lack. No one has every asked me for a bigger picture. It is already bigger than what they can see on a computer and what they can print. I don't want monster megapixel cameras. They just kill hard drives. I will take 300 to 400 shots on a photo shoot. I edit what I want and keep about 30 pictures and delete the rest. The sensor quality is what matters not the size of the pixels.

A memory & hdd upgrade costs much less than a camera upgrade. You could have bought the K-5 instead of the K-5IIs; the difference in money would have covered 10-15 years of memory and hdd upgrades. I am pretty sure there's quite a bit more detail in 16mp from K-5 than in 10mp from from K-5IIs.

[IchabodCrane]

That's a sad reality. My friend was researching for his first DSLR and had narrowed down to Nikon D5200. He asked me if it's a good choice. I casually told him that for the same budget he can get the D7000 right now which is one segment above and is heavily discounted.

Guess what was his first reaction - "But it has only 16 megapixels."

To which you can say "It has the same number of pixels as Nikon's $6000 DSLR (D4 - body only)".

[audiobomber]

Nope, the ISO improvement from K20D to K-5 was just under three stops.
Even the DXO measurements almost back up my real world experience ( showing nearly 3 stops @ ISO100 ), although I claim better performance on my models at higher ISOs.than they do.

K-5 v. K-20D - see Dynamic Range Tab

From DXOMark:
Dynamic range of the K7 (landscape) = 10.6 Evs
Dynamic range of the K5 (landscape) = 14.1 Evs
14.1 – 10.6 = 3.5 EV
1EV = 1 stop.

"Maximum dynamic range is the greatest possible amplitude between light and dark details a given sensor can record, and is expressed in EVs (exposure values) or f-stops, with each increase of 1 EV (or one stop) corresponding to twice the amount of light."

The question is how much dynamic range the cameras have at a given iso.

Signal to noise ratio and dynamic range are different concepts. SNR is the difference, measured in decibels, between the signal you intended to capture, and the grunge that the sensor added that you do not want in your photo. A doubling of the signal to noise ratio is 6dB, which corresponds with one stop. As I stated previously, the SNR ratio of the K-5, i.e. noise performance, is one stop better than the K20D's.

The Dynamic Range spec does not measure noise. DR is the amount of signal captured, measured in EV stops between the brightest recorded portion of the signal and the darkest.

Capture a raw image, at ISO, of a dark mountain and bright sky using a K20D and K-5. Expose so that the highlights are at the same point in each image, just below clipping. Noise levels are about 1/3 stop difference, not significant. The K-5 will still have recoverable signal (detail) for three stops below the K20D. Let's say you take advantage of the K-5's DR and boost the shadows by 3EV. You will see more of the mountain, but also more noise. Noise will now be at ISO 800 level on the K-5 and ISO 100 level on the K20D. You used the extra DR and it was beneficial, but the unboosted K20D photo now has lower noise, by approximately 1.2 stops (32dB vs. 39.3dB = 7.3dB).

Smeggypants' original statement, that noise is 3 stops better, is overstated by two stops. You can't interchange DR stops and SNR stops. If you push the shadows, you push the noise by an equal amount.

[JohntheThird]

A dual dial like on G10 do not work well IMO, as you have to move your grip on the camera for using them. It's much better to use two extra button like on K-5 IMO, as it's better optimized for using the camera when looking through the viewfinder. Using more dedicated dials do not always make the camera easier to use.

Well, as already concluded, ISO adjustment and exposure compensation are normally not used as readily as speed and aperture. Normally you preset ISO and EC, then play with A or T, have the camera calculate T or A and shoot. So four dials is indeed a bit overdone. Anyway, between ISO, EC, T and A, three of them fix the fourth.

Anyone reguarly using the TAv mode?

PS: shouldnt this be a different topic? Is there a thread for ideal button layout? The original cause of the rumor has long gone...

[Smeggypants]

Signal to noise ratio and dynamic range are different concepts. SNR is the difference, measured in decibels, between the signal you intended to capture, and the grunge that the sensor added that you do not want in your photo. A doubling of the signal to noise ratio is 6dB, which corresponds with one stop. As I stated previously, the SNR ratio of the K-5, i.e. noise performance, is one stop better than the K20D's.

The Dynamic Range spec does not measure noise. DR is the amount of signal captured, measured in EV stops between the brightest recorded portion of the signal and the darkest.

Capture a raw image, at ISO, of a dark mountain and bright sky using a K20D and K-5. Expose so that the highlights are at the same point in each image, just below clipping. Noise levels are about 1/3 stop difference, not significant. The K-5 will still have recoverable signal (detail) for three stops below the K20D. Let's say you take advantage of the K-5's DR and boost the shadows by 3EV. You will see more of the mountain, but also more noise. Noise will now be at ISO 800 level on the K-5 and ISO 100 level on the K20D. You used the extra DR and it was beneficial, but the unboosted K20D photo now has lower noise, by approximately 1.2 stops (32dB vs. 39.3dB = 7.3dB).

Smeggypants' original statement, that noise is 3 stops better, is overstated by two stops. You can't interchange DR stops and SNR stops. If you push the shadows, you push the noise by an equal amount.

Being an audio engineer I know all about dB's thanks

and yes I do understand the "Graphs"


The K-5 exhibits an almost 3 stop better ISO performance than the K-20D/K-7 regardless how much you try claim otherwise

I don't know what you're looking at, maybe in-camera jpegs with differing amounts of noise reduction. You won't find any tests to back up your wildly exaggerated "experience".

I'm looking at RAWs. The DXO tests back up my real world experience ( and yes I do know the difference between DR and SNR ) and regardless of any SNR tests on an 18% grey card, the K-5 shows an almost 3 stop better ISO performance over K-20D/K-7 in the real world.

In a debate between thousands of actual photographs taken on both cameras versus an anonymous poster on the Internet, I'm afraid "thousands of actual photographs taken on both cameras" always wins I'm afraid.

I've heard plenty of other owners of both K-20D and K-5 note similar improvements in high ISO performance too. Real world results count, not graphs.

[Smeggypants]

Well, as already concluded, ISO adjustment and exposure compensation are normally not used as readily as speed and aperture. Normally you preset ISO and EC, then play with A or T, have the camera calculate T or A and shoot. So four dials is indeed a bit overdone. Anyway, between ISO, EC, T and A, three of them fix the fourth.

Anyone reguarly using the TAv mode?

PS: shouldnt this be a different topic? Is there a thread for ideal button layout? The original cause of the rumor has long gone...

Yes I do. Almost exclusively. Given the K-5's greatly increased ISO performance over previous models, it's nice to be able to tweak speed and aperture on two wheels and let the ISO float without having to worry too much about grainy pics.

"PS: shouldnt this be a different topic?"


Feel free to start one

[Racerdew]

A memory & hdd upgrade costs much less than a camera upgrade. You could have bought the K-5 instead of the K-5IIs; the difference in money would have covered 10-15 years of memory and hdd upgrades. I am pretty sure there's quite a bit more detail in 16mp from K-5 than in 10mp from from K-5IIs.

No not true, the MP size determines the size of the photo, not the quality of the photo. Do you own study; take the same photo in the 16 MP mode and one at the 10 MP mode and recropp both of them to around 1500 MP. You won't find any difference in the pictures. Why would Nikon have a $4000 camera that is only 16 MP if what you are saying is true? MP size determines the size capacity of the photograph and not the quality of the image.

[audiobomber]

The DXO tests back up my real world experience

No, they demolish your real world opinion. I won't waste any more of my time on it though.

Anyone reguarly using the TAv mode?

Yes, I use TAv almost exclusively for wildlife. I also use it for low light with lenses that don't like to be opened up all the way (e.g. FA 50 1.4).