Pentax K-5 (?) - new camera this year

Pentaxor · 03-11-2010, 10:09 PM

Originally posted by WerTicus

645d quality inside a kx sized body would be nice

I love portability!

Cannot see myself lugging around a 645d... its a studio camera imo.

sorry, but that ain't possible. you need a lot of room for processing power and a pretty big lens inorder to have that kind of IQ.

WerTicus · 03-11-2010, 11:07 PM

interestingly none of the 645 lenses are faster than f2.8...

malakola · 03-11-2010, 11:38 PM

please,51-point autofocus system...

Anastigmat · 03-12-2010, 12:15 AM

Originally posted by RMabo

K-5 is a name used by salesmen from swedish Pentax distributor about new camera coming in-between K-7 and K-x. No details about technology, price or launch date.
But since the distributors are getting info about it now, my guess is that the camera is undergoing the beta test procedure so hopefully not that far away.

They could just put the 12mp sensor from the K-x into the K-7 body and call it the K5. It has fewer pixels than the K7, so it is in between K7 and KX. I think a lot of people would like that, because the K-x sensor has lower noise, but they want the extra features and performance of the K7 body. If it is lower priced than the K7, that would be icing on the cake.

Erik · 03-12-2010, 01:57 AM

Originally posted by WerTicus

interestingly none of the 645 lenses are faster than f2.8...

I don't feel like doing the math at the moment but f/2.8 in medium format gives much shallower DoF than f/2.8 in a 35mm or APS-C lens. The elements would have to be huge in a faster 645 lens and the largest aperture would be almost useless anyway except for special effects, so there's no real point -- especially as most medium format work is landscape and studio work where you'll be working stopped down anyway.

ogl · 03-12-2010, 02:42 AM

Originally posted by WerTicus

interestingly none of the 645 lenses are faster than f2.8...

DoF of f2.8 at 645 = f1.7 at 35 mm.

falconeye · 03-12-2010, 03:45 AM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

sorry, but that ain't possible. you need a lot of room for processing power and a pretty big lens inorder to have that kind of IQ.

Actually, K-7 and 645D have identical electronics. Identical down to the two main processors, buffer memory, 4 channel read-out DACs, HDMI and 921k LCD drivers. The K-7 has additional electronics for audio, the 645D for 2nd SD card.

Originally posted by Erik

I don't feel like doing the math at the moment but f/2.8 in medium format gives much shallower DoF than f/2.8 in a 35mm or APS-C lens.

Originally posted by ogl

DoF of f2.8 at 645 = f1.7 at 35 mm.

DFA 645 55/2.8 and Sigma 30/1.4 render about the same images (both using a cropped sensor). The DFA 645 is much lighter and about same size.

However, this entire consideration misses the entire point.

A 645D is built to turn studio light or daylight into upmost resolution and dynamic range.
Where an f/2.8 lens may still deliver 80 lp/mm, it will be hopeless for an f/1.4 lens to deliver the required 160 lp/mm to compete.
And the sensor will be too small to have a large enough potential well to store all those electrons for high dynamic range.

Therefore, the usual APS-C vs. FF "argument dynamics" doesn't apply to MF. Because light simply is at ample supply.

BTW, in this situation, the K-7 is a much better camera than K-x. May be a point of interest in this K-5 discussion

philippe · 03-12-2010, 05:46 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

Actually, K-7 and 645D have identical electronics. Identical down to the two main processors, buffer memory, 4 channel read-out DACs, HDMI and 921k LCD drivers...
...BTW, in this situation, the K-7 is a much better camera than K-x. May be a point of interest in this K-5 discussion

With this knowledge, what must or can be done to make a better APS-C camera than the K7? A FF being not for the near future…
The supposed K5 could be better then the K-X, but has it to be of a lesser kind than the K7? When the effort of designing a new camera is done anyway, why not make an ‘improved K7‘ and leave the medium quality role for the somewhat doomed K7?

wll · 03-12-2010, 06:28 AM

The same great high ISO performance or better than that of the Kx and improved DR.

I will take all the other bells and whistles.

Oh Ya, I do want a battery grip !

wll

elkarrde · 03-12-2010, 07:29 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

DFA 645 55/2.8 and Sigma 30/1.4 render about the same images (both using a cropped sensor).

both f/1.4 on APS-C sensor and f/2.8 on cropped 645 sensor deliver approximately the same DoF - equivalent to f/2 lens on full 35mm film/sensor frame. or, to add more formats to the mix - equivalent to f/4 6×7 lens, equivalent to f/1 FourThirds lens.

julia · 03-12-2010, 04:05 PM

... make sure it has a dedicated AF assist beam (like K-7), so I can replace my K-x.

yeatzee · 03-12-2010, 05:38 PM

whatever it is, please have a battery grip!!!

i couldn't care less about high ISO low noise performance, so I'd rather it not have the K-x sensor. If I shoot high ISO i WANT noise because pentax DSLR's make it look much like film. That is something I love about my K200d and hate about the K-x.

Everyone dwells on high iso performance way to much IMO. First it was DR, and all everyone here cared about was how the K20d had less DR than the competition. Than later everything switched to high iso noise, as if we shoot above 800 all the time. Granted there are a few of you that do, but Im willing to bet a LARGE portion of us shoot at 800+ ISO EXTREMELY rarely. Me included

Therefore give me a camera with a great base ISO performance, with a high resolution sensor around the K-7's, battery grip, assist light and personally I say lets keep the AA's. It works great having a bunch of eneloop duracell clones that i use in my flash and camera. If im not using the flash and my camera dies bam I have more ready on hand. If those are dead finding AA's is relatively easy and cheap

My 2 cents.

jct us101 · 03-12-2010, 05:49 PM

I suppose if anything it'll be like the K200D.

dande · 03-13-2010, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by yeatzee

whatever it is, please have a battery grip!!!

i couldn't care less about high ISO low noise performance, so I'd rather it not have the K-x sensor. If I shoot high ISO i WANT noise because pentax DSLR's make it look much like film. That is something I love about my K200d and hate about the K-x.

Everyone dwells on high iso performance way to much IMO. First it was DR, and all everyone here cared about was how the K20d had less DR than the competition. Than later everything switched to high iso noise, as if we shoot above 800 all the time. Granted there are a few of you that do, but Im willing to bet a LARGE portion of us shoot at 800+ ISO EXTREMELY rarely. Me included

Therefore give me a camera with a great base ISO performance, with a high resolution sensor around the K-7's, battery grip, assist light and personally I say lets keep the AA's. It works great having a bunch of eneloop duracell clones that i use in my flash and camera. If im not using the flash and my camera dies bam I have more ready on hand. If those are dead finding AA's is relatively easy and cheap

My 2 cents.

So you are basically saying K-7 with AA batteries?

Anyways, I really agree with you about the high ISO stuff. It's like when you hear that the K-7 has lower high-ISO quality than the K-x, and suddenly it becomes the worst camera ever produced by Pentax. C'mon! It's so rare when you need more than ISO800, and in this case, the other cameras aren't crystal clear also (quick story, I was told that the 1D Mark IV has outstanding High-ISO performance, and yes, it indeed has. But when I was shown a couple of pictures shot in ISO 3200, I wasn't that amused. I was expecting crystal clear base ISO style photographs). Especially when you are shooting in RAW there is no incredible differences.

henryk · 03-13-2010, 07:43 AM

I want a K-9 for my dog.

03-12-2010, 06:28 AM	#129
wll Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Mission Hills, CA Posts: 773	Most Important Features for Me The same great high ISO performance or better than that of the Kx and improved DR. I will take all the other bells and whistles. Oh Ya, I do want a battery grip ! wll

03-13-2010, 07:43 AM	#135
henryk Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Evanston IL Posts: 62	Pentax dreams I want a K-9 for my dog.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
My new 73 year old camera	void7910	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	1	09-10-2010 11:06 AM
Camera for a 2.5 year old	Ramitt	Photographic Technique	7	11-14-2009 03:35 PM
Pentax wins European Camera of the Year!	Nesster	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	8	10-01-2009 04:58 PM
Just in: Pentax K10D Camera of the Year	Damn Brit	Pentax News and Rumors	11	05-25-2008 01:15 PM
PopPoto's Camera of the Year... Not Pentax	loudbay	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	12-14-2007 02:52 PM

03-11-2010, 10:09 PM	#121
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by WerTicus 645d quality inside a kx sized body would be nice I love portability! Cannot see myself lugging around a 645d... its a studio camera imo. sorry, but that ain't possible. you need a lot of room for processing power and a pretty big lens inorder to have that kind of IQ.

03-11-2010, 11:07 PM	#122
WerTicus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Perth Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,514	interestingly none of the 645 lenses are faster than f2.8...

03-11-2010, 11:38 PM	#123
malakola Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 42	please,51-point autofocus system...

03-12-2010, 12:15 AM	#124
Anastigmat Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Posts: 126	Originally posted by RMabo K-5 is a name used by salesmen from swedish Pentax distributor about new camera coming in-between K-7 and K-x. No details about technology, price or launch date. But since the distributors are getting info about it now, my guess is that the camera is undergoing the beta test procedure so hopefully not that far away. They could just put the 12mp sensor from the K-x into the K-7 body and call it the K5. It has fewer pixels than the K7, so it is in between K7 and KX. I think a lot of people would like that, because the K-x sensor has lower noise, but they want the extra features and performance of the K7 body. If it is lower priced than the K7, that would be icing on the cake.

03-12-2010, 01:57 AM	#125
Erik Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Umeå, Sweden Posts: 755	Originally posted by WerTicus interestingly none of the 645 lenses are faster than f2.8... I don't feel like doing the math at the moment but f/2.8 in medium format gives much shallower DoF than f/2.8 in a 35mm or APS-C lens. The elements would have to be huge in a faster 645 lens and the largest aperture would be almost useless anyway except for special effects, so there's no real point -- especially as most medium format work is landscape and studio work where you'll be working stopped down anyway.

03-12-2010, 02:42 AM	#126
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by WerTicus interestingly none of the 645 lenses are faster than f2.8... DoF of f2.8 at 645 = f1.7 at 35 mm.

03-12-2010, 03:45 AM	#127
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by Pentaxor sorry, but that ain't possible. you need a lot of room for processing power and a pretty big lens inorder to have that kind of IQ. Actually, K-7 and 645D have identical electronics. Identical down to the two main processors, buffer memory, 4 channel read-out DACs, HDMI and 921k LCD drivers. The K-7 has additional electronics for audio, the 645D for 2nd SD card. Originally posted by Erik I don't feel like doing the math at the moment but f/2.8 in medium format gives much shallower DoF than f/2.8 in a 35mm or APS-C lens. Originally posted by ogl DoF of f2.8 at 645 = f1.7 at 35 mm. DFA 645 55/2.8 and Sigma 30/1.4 render about the same images (both using a cropped sensor). The DFA 645 is much lighter and about same size. However, this entire consideration misses the entire point. A 645D is built to turn studio light or daylight into upmost resolution and dynamic range. Where an f/2.8 lens may still deliver 80 lp/mm, it will be hopeless for an f/1.4 lens to deliver the required 160 lp/mm to compete. And the sensor will be too small to have a large enough potential well to store all those electrons for high dynamic range. Therefore, the usual APS-C vs. FF "argument dynamics" doesn't apply to MF. Because light simply is at ample supply. BTW, in this situation, the K-7 is a much better camera than K-x. May be a point of interest in this K-5 discussion

03-12-2010, 05:46 AM	#128
philippe Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Flanders Fields Posts: 463	Originally posted by falconeye Actually, K-7 and 645D have identical electronics. Identical down to the two main processors, buffer memory, 4 channel read-out DACs, HDMI and 921k LCD drivers... ...BTW, in this situation, the K-7 is a much better camera than K-x. May be a point of interest in this K-5 discussion With this knowledge, what must or can be done to make a better APS-C camera than the K7? A FF being not for the near future… The supposed K5 could be better then the K-X, but has it to be of a lesser kind than the K7? When the effort of designing a new camera is done anyway, why not make an ‘improved K7‘ and leave the medium quality role for the somewhat doomed K7?

03-12-2010, 07:29 AM	#130
elkarrde Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Zagreb, Croatia Posts: 387	Originally posted by falconeye DFA 645 55/2.8 and Sigma 30/1.4 render about the same images (both using a cropped sensor). both f/1.4 on APS-C sensor and f/2.8 on cropped 645 sensor deliver approximately the same DoF - equivalent to f/2 lens on full 35mm film/sensor frame. or, to add more formats to the mix - equivalent to f/4 6×7 lens, equivalent to f/1 FourThirds lens.

03-12-2010, 04:05 PM	#131
julia Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Shizuoka-ken Posts: 130	... make sure it has a dedicated AF assist beam (like K-7), so I can replace my K-x.

03-12-2010, 05:38 PM	#132
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	whatever it is, please have a battery grip!!! i couldn't care less about high ISO low noise performance, so I'd rather it not have the K-x sensor. If I shoot high ISO i WANT noise because pentax DSLR's make it look much like film. That is something I love about my K200d and hate about the K-x. Everyone dwells on high iso performance way to much IMO. First it was DR, and all everyone here cared about was how the K20d had less DR than the competition. Than later everything switched to high iso noise, as if we shoot above 800 all the time. Granted there are a few of you that do, but Im willing to bet a LARGE portion of us shoot at 800+ ISO EXTREMELY rarely. Me included Therefore give me a camera with a great base ISO performance, with a high resolution sensor around the K-7's, battery grip, assist light and personally I say lets keep the AA's. It works great having a bunch of eneloop duracell clones that i use in my flash and camera. If im not using the flash and my camera dies bam I have more ready on hand. If those are dead finding AA's is relatively easy and cheap My 2 cents.

03-12-2010, 05:49 PM	#133
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	I suppose if anything it'll be like the K200D.

03-13-2010, 06:31 AM	#134
dande Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Hungary Posts: 58	Originally posted by yeatzee whatever it is, please have a battery grip!!! i couldn't care less about high ISO low noise performance, so I'd rather it not have the K-x sensor. If I shoot high ISO i WANT noise because pentax DSLR's make it look much like film. That is something I love about my K200d and hate about the K-x. Everyone dwells on high iso performance way to much IMO. First it was DR, and all everyone here cared about was how the K20d had less DR than the competition. Than later everything switched to high iso noise, as if we shoot above 800 all the time. Granted there are a few of you that do, but Im willing to bet a LARGE portion of us shoot at 800+ ISO EXTREMELY rarely. Me included Therefore give me a camera with a great base ISO performance, with a high resolution sensor around the K-7's, battery grip, assist light and personally I say lets keep the AA's. It works great having a bunch of eneloop duracell clones that i use in my flash and camera. If im not using the flash and my camera dies bam I have more ready on hand. If those are dead finding AA's is relatively easy and cheap My 2 cents. So you are basically saying K-7 with AA batteries? Anyways, I really agree with you about the high ISO stuff. It's like when you hear that the K-7 has lower high-ISO quality than the K-x, and suddenly it becomes the worst camera ever produced by Pentax. C'mon! It's so rare when you need more than ISO800, and in this case, the other cameras aren't crystal clear also (quick story, I was told that the 1D Mark IV has outstanding High-ISO performance, and yes, it indeed has. But when I was shown a couple of pictures shot in ISO 3200, I wasn't that amused. I was expecting crystal clear base ISO style photographs). Especially when you are shooting in RAW there is no incredible differences.