Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-03-2014, 12:56 PM   #16
Veteran Member
LeeRunge's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 310
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It sounds like you're the kind go guy who would like an D4s or the cheap guy's version, a Sony A7s... one being $6.5k and one being $2.5k. There are times in birding when it would be great to have 6400 ISO performance.. to achieve high shutter speed for freezing action... but these cameras are pricey. Also the 645z should be awesome, if you can find a long enough lens. But from what I understand from the wedding guys, there are more than a few wedding guys carrying a couple D4s cameras for everything but the formal images, where they may go to something more high res. There are options out there, they just aren't cheap. And for birders, the ability to crop is very helpful. They really don't have the perfect camera for us yet.

I probably would have bought an A7s, except, that for landscape I would want the A7r, and I'm waiting to see what Pentax comes out with as an FF, but, so I just live with the compromises my K-3 presents, although in a perfect world I'd own a D4s and a 645z. IN actual fact, I'd never carry them. And the odds of Pentax coming out with something high ISO are pretty slim. It's definitely an expensive specialty item in other brands.
The D4s would be awesome, but I think I'd rather use a A7s for the compact size. I take a lot of photo's at night or dawn/dusk as I work overnight hours a lot. The A7's are very attractive, I'm just waiting on the lens lineup to pan out, or the Pentax FF to appear. One thing that I like about the A7 is the evf. I have that on the x100s and it's much much better for low light use. EVF looses during the day but win's at night.

And a 645z would be pretty nice for landscapes haha. Lottery ticket...where are you!

---------- Post added 12-03-2014 at 12:58 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
as noted The XT1 Fujis will have similar performance - so will the XE2 I have both and they are really close to one another due to firmware updates. (I've been blown away by how flexible mine are in low light - of course 1.2 and 1.4 lenses don't hurt )
I've thought about the RX100iii as a Point shoot but lean towards the X100T or the new Pana LX100 - both a little more money but with better sensors

I've mentioned before that If I were starting from scratch I would look very seriously at the XT-1. Fuji has a really nice lens lineup with a few key high end zooms coming to round it out very soon. I don't think it's worth the switch if you have Pentax gear but a good option if your starting in APS-C.

12-03-2014, 01:24 PM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
QuoteOriginally posted by LeeRunge Quote

I've mentioned before that If I were starting from scratch I would look very seriously at the XT-1. Fuji has a really nice lens lineup with a few key high end zooms coming to round it out very soon. I don't think it's worth the switch if you have Pentax gear but a good option if your starting in APS-C.
The switch was made easy for me as I had a lot of gear stolen so I funded it with State Farm money. at least most of it, I my remaining Pentax Digital kit (k7/14/18-55wr/35/grip) to someone just yesterday to fund a few more items (no high end zoom though just a couple of cheap kit zooms for my wife to use on one or another of the bodies). Still have a film body and a bunch of MF lenses. May sell on my medium format kit to fund a good UWA or the coming 90mm no rush though it will take some time to master all the new stuff.
If it wasn't for that I would be slowly upgrading things
12-03-2014, 01:57 PM   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by LeeRunge Quote


I've mentioned before that If I were starting from scratch I would look very seriously at the XT-1. Fuji has a really nice lens lineup with a few key high end zooms coming to round it out very soon. I don't think it's worth the switch if you have Pentax gear but a good option if your starting in APS-C.
The irony is that new XF 50-140/2.8 zoom coming out is massive compared to the DA* 50-135/2.8.
12-03-2014, 02:16 PM   #19
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
QuoteOriginally posted by IchabodCrane Quote
The irony is that new XF 50-140/2.8 zoom coming out is massive compared to the DA* 50-135/2.8.
in part because it has to accommodate in lens stabilization, in part the extra 5mm (which makes a 5mm difference on the filter as well in this case)
It will be interesting to see performance though - the design is quite different
Fuji 23 elements in 16 groups w 5ED and 1 SLED element
Pentax 18 elements in 14 gr with 3 ED no SLED

Also at the extended end (135 vs 140) there may be differences in how true it is to the claimed length as all zooms are inherently off in this area.

It is a monster though (paired with an XT1 and grip I'd betting almost the same size and weight as a K3 grip 50-135 combo (without doing the end research) No one said MILC were tiny when you slapped a big zoom on them.
I really think they are at their best with primes under 100mm , for anything else I think a DSLR is a better form and function.

12-03-2014, 03:38 PM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,418
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
in part because it has to accommodate in lens stabilization, in part the extra 5mm (which makes a 5mm difference on the filter as well in this case)
It will be interesting to see performance though - the design is quite different
Fuji 23 elements in 16 groups w 5ED and 1 SLED element
Pentax 18 elements in 14 gr with 3 ED no SLED

Also at the extended end (135 vs 140) there may be differences in how true it is to the claimed length as all zooms are inherently off in this area.

It is a monster though (paired with an XT1 and grip I'd betting almost the same size and weight as a K3 grip 50-135 combo (without doing the end research) No one said MILC were tiny when you slapped a big zoom on them.
I really think they are at their best with primes under 100mm , for anything else I think a DSLR is a better form and function.
The 50-140mm also has 3 linear AF motors in it for exceptionally fast AF. The 50-135mm has SDM....Slow Drive Motor......
12-04-2014, 07:12 AM   #21
Veteran Member
LeeRunge's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 310
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
The 50-140mm also has 3 linear AF motors in it for exceptionally fast AF. The 50-135mm has SDM....Slow Drive Motor......
Fixing the lens motors would improve AF speed greatly. The DA* lineup should be upgraded to something on par with Canon USM given the prices.

I'd like to see a few faster primes as well. Fuji's making me jealous.
12-04-2014, 08:23 AM   #22
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,781
We think of it as lens motor speed but it's more than that. The K-3 already has faster AF than a Nikon D7100, and probably most other APS-c cameras. I'm thinking the AF system in the faster Canons and Nikon are probably worth more than a K-3 given the cost of those systems. The question is, if they speed up the lens. will the camera start to miss focus. Just from my experience with my Sigma 70-300 on a K-3, I can say at ƒ6.3, that lens will miss focus. It goes right by the point in focus without a blink, sometimes I have to focus manually then use AF. I suspect, faster focusing AF would be great for 2.8 lenses or faster, but would be a nightmare for slower lenses. Now we are running into the small camera company thing. Canon and Nikon can beef up their AF systems to handle this kind of stress. Pentax really isn't in a position to come out with a $3000 AF system on a $6000 camera. If everyone of us who should buy it did, they still wouldn't have enough sales to justify the investment. They pretty much have to try and excel in other areas.

So long story short... faster AF is only an option on fast lenses with expensive AF systems. I doubt faster AF will even function on slower lenses. And faster glass on a K-3 will probably already be excellent on a K-3, which has one of the most light sensitive AF systems out there.

But just to agree with your point, there's no excuse for SDM lenses being as slow as they are. The AF system can handle more speed. The star lenses should be able to take advantage of that. Especially since the Sigma 70-200, the only lens that really did take advantage, is no longer produced in a Pentax mount.

Last edited by normhead; 12-04-2014 at 08:44 AM.
12-05-2014, 10:54 AM   #23
Veteran Member
LeeRunge's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 310
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
We think of it as lens motor speed but it's more than that. The K-3 already has faster AF than a Nikon D7100, and probably most other APS-c cameras. I'm thinking the AF system in the faster Canons and Nikon are probably worth more than a K-3 given the cost of those systems. The question is, if they speed up the lens. will the camera start to miss focus. Just from my experience with my Sigma 70-300 on a K-3, I can say at 6.3, that lens will miss focus. It goes right by the point in focus without a blink, sometimes I have to focus manually then use AF. I suspect, faster focusing AF would be great for 2.8 lenses or faster, but would be a nightmare for slower lenses. Now we are running into the small camera company thing. Canon and Nikon can beef up their AF systems to handle this kind of stress. Pentax really isn't in a position to come out with a $3000 AF system on a $6000 camera. If everyone of us who should buy it did, they still wouldn't have enough sales to justify the investment. They pretty much have to try and excel in other areas.

So long story short... faster AF is only an option on fast lenses with expensive AF systems. I doubt faster AF will even function on slower lenses. And faster glass on a K-3 will probably already be excellent on a K-3, which has one of the most light sensitive AF systems out there.

But just to agree with your point, there's no excuse for SDM lenses being as slow as they are. The AF system can handle more speed. The star lenses should be able to take advantage of that. Especially since the Sigma 70-200, the only lens that really did take advantage, is no longer produced in a Pentax mount.

This may be true. Another point on AF speed, while I had my 7d, the 17-50 with USM was a fast focusing lens, substantially more the the DA*. On the other hand the Tamron superzoom I also had was quite slow, really the same as the Sigma 18-250 I have for the Pentax now. If you were comparing a 7d with that Tamron and the Pentax with the Sigma the speeds would be very close. I guess what I'm trying to say is not everything is lightning fast AF in Canikon land. You have to pay lots of money to get the faster USM lenses that take advantage of that AF system.

Anyone out there had a Sigma model that was as fast as a Canon 17-50 2.8? It would be interesting to see a comparison of a fast third party lens on a 7dii and K-3.

12-05-2014, 01:29 PM   #24
Veteran Member
LeeRunge's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 310
Original Poster
I was testing the low ISO on the K3 and my other camera's to see how it looks, honestly I think something may be wrong with mine. It's looking worse than my K5, very soft in all photo's. I thought is was a lens issue with the 18-250 then I took some side by sides with the DA*, this K3 is mushy.

1/50th F16 ISO 100 RAW Sunny day at noon. Using the DA* 60-250. Shake reduction off and on a tripod with a delayed release.

12-05-2014, 01:33 PM   #25
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,168
I can't look at the exif data but it doesn't look like both cameras were set up the same (contrast etc) it looks like they are using very different settings. Contrast is a big part of perceived focus. that said the focus does look off on the left on top of the softer settings. Getting an accurate comparison is a bugger IMO
12-05-2014, 01:42 PM   #26
Veteran Member
LeeRunge's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 310
Original Poster
Same settings, both in RAW at 250mm. The K3 exposes brighter than the K5 at the same setting. I'm seeing this across the board on my DA* 16-50 and the 60-250 which are the best lenses I have. The K3 is overexposing when the meter says it's exposed. The images look like washed out versions of the K5 that have been blown up larger. I would have though the lack of AA filter would have been a boost to resolution but it's not looking like that at all.

I disabled the SR function on both and they are on a tripod with a delayed release so no shake, also no wind to shake it. Both are manual focused to eliminate that which was done in live view zoomed in very carefully.

---------- Post added 12-05-2014 at 02:14 PM ----------

Heres another set

200mm 1/50th F11 ISO 100 SR off, tripod 12 second delay. Body switched while lens was on tripod, focus exactly the same for each.





12-05-2014, 02:15 PM   #27
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,781
I'm having the opposite problem, no PP, cropping to 1080 pixels only, so right off the camera , shot in raw, 2 second delay DA 36 ƒ2.4 shot at ƒ5.6 on both cameras and ISO 100, the K-3 is razor sharp, I don't seem to be able to get the K-5 to focus... possibly not enough light as it's almost dark here. The focus confirm appears to be on the lettering on the handle in both cases.



12-05-2014, 02:21 PM   #28
Veteran Member
LeeRunge's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 310
Original Poster
I'm thinking something's not right with mine. It *should* be outresolving my K5. I would expect more from no AA filter and 24mp.


Note I'm not PP anything in these RAW's. They are strait from the cards into Lightroom and then set grabbed with a screenshot tool. Those are manual focus, so AF has no input and the DA 60-250 has a collar sleeve tripod mount which I used. So basically I focused and switched body's with the same settings.


Should I return this one? Still looks mushy when PP. Maybe the DA* cannot resolve 24mp? I wish I had a supersharp prime.


I added some black, reduced exposure 3/4th's of a stop and added sharpness to both, same settings on each. I usually run minus a third to half stop of EV on Pentax's to avoid overexposing clouds and highlights.



Last edited by LeeRunge; 12-05-2014 at 02:33 PM.
12-05-2014, 02:29 PM   #29
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,781
If it just came and you can, I'd go for an over the counter exchange... this is when you need a sales person at sales counter to help you out. It's sure is nice to have another person to verify your decision, look at everything and make sure you haven't done anything stupid. But mine are virtual the same histograms, so no difference between the exposure on the K-3 and K-5 one is .6 second, one is .8 the K-5 is definitely softer, and the contrast etc. appears to be pretty much identical. It definitely looks like you have some kind of problem.

Give em a few seconds, I''l run it on my DA*60-250.

Last edited by normhead; 12-05-2014 at 02:34 PM.
12-05-2014, 02:38 PM   #30
Veteran Member
LeeRunge's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Utah, USA
Posts: 310
Original Poster
I don't think I missed anyting but I'm a human.


I'm not trying to bash the K-3 at all, just worried mines not quite right. It's new, just arrived from Adorama this week. I guess I just expect it to outresolve the older K5 with an AA filter. I'm loving everything about this camera except for the sensor right now.

Thanks for checking against your K5, I'm curious to see the result. I'm pixel peeping to get a feel for the differences, normally I don't worry about the 100% magnification as you generally never look that close at a photo.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
advantage, camera, comparison, days, dr, dslr, exposure, image, images, iso, k-3, k-5, k3, k5, lens, light, look, night, noise, pentax, pentax k-3, performance, rx100, shutter, tripod, x100s
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Black & White K-5 IIs ISO 6400 Eric Auer Post Your Photos! 3 11-14-2013 10:07 AM
K-30 ISO 6400 shots treebeard Pentax K-30 & K-50 14 09-25-2012 03:44 PM
Photos: K-5 at ISO 6400 AND ISO 12,800 PeterKBurian Pentax K-5 2 01-07-2011 07:01 AM
K-5 vs K-7 First ISO performance testing (ISO-6400) starscream Pentax News and Rumors 95 09-25-2010 07:02 PM
K-5 ISO 6400 developed sirluke Pentax DSLR Discussion 24 09-23-2010 10:57 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:41 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top