Originally posted by Richard Spencer For quite sometime I have been drooling over the K-5, there are plenty of reasons for wanting one. There is however one good reason to wait, lack of funds.
Well, this feeling of want is hitting hard today so, a few minutes ago I put the 18-55 WR lens on, set the camera to RAW and ISO 3200 turned around in my chair and aimed at the darkest part of the room. The result you can see below.
The exif is intact on the first shot. The room is lit only by a 40watt bulb and it is hardly bright enough to read (but ideal for viewing the computer screen).
This second shot has been through Noiseware and then slightly sharpened with USM and a small colour correction, both done in PhotoImact12.
I fully realize there are many things on the K-5 that leave the K20 light years behind, but I rarely do sports photography and rarely go has high as ISO 3200 so I reckon the old gal will have to do another season. The thing is, I reckon ISO 3200 has turned out fairly OK. What do you think?
Richard.
Richard, now that the K20D's are being sold at great prices by guys who are upgrading to the K-5 with very low shutter clicks or better yet, you can get a refurbished K20D with lens at ~$499.00, I'm selling my K200Ds and replacing them with K20D's.
I will be getting the K-5, but when prices come down a bit. The reason I did not jump on the K-7 bandwagon is from everything I have read and seen the sensor performance of the K20D is better for high ISO shooting. Granted the K-7 body is nice and the feature set is great, but its the sensor and ONLY the sensor that counts as far as I'm concerned ! Be sure you have the latest firmware also !
IMHO, the K20D is a sensational camera - no, it does not do movies, but its high ISO is very good, especially if you use the newest noise software. I use Topaz Denoise5 and it is great !
No Richard, I would hang on to your K20D.
BTW, I had K10D's and sold them, did not like the higher ISO sensor performance, IMHO the K20D was a major upgrade.
wll