[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Granted the K10D sample was processed in ACR and the latter in Raw Therapee.

That can explain a lot. Raw Therapee produces very interesting results on Pentax RAW images. At 100%, the images processed with it looked to me as if they were painted - I could see artifacts that resembled brush strokes. I decided to stop looking at other converters than the Pentax DCU software after that. I think it's really hard to beat the Pentax software at extracting the information out of RAW files.

[JohnBee]

I think it's really hard to beat the Pentax software at extracting the information out of RAW files.

Dammit you just gave me something new to try.
I haven't looked at the Pentax software since I set-it down following the purchase of the K100!

I'm going to install it and see how things look

[JohnBee]

I think it's really hard to beat the Pentax software at extracting the information out of RAW files.

Wow I must really suck at using Pentax DCU 4 because I really didn't do well with it.

Here's my first attempt(probably pathetic);


Anyways, I'm hoping someone can clearify, though in the meantime, wow... is the Pentax DCU UI so horrible(gasp). I sure hope Ricoh will pick-up on these types of things and make them better.

[pinholecam]

By MF, do you mean film or digital.
If digital, sorry, K5 is not close, though it does have better DR than many MF cameras at this point in time.
If its against film done with a flatbed scanner (Epson V500, Canon 9000F), yes, I think its a match even against 67. Don't know about lab scans though, since I eliminated that option from my mind due to costs. I shoot with a Mamiya RB 67


K5 offers more MP if you need cropping.
The noise is fantastically fine grained.
AF is significantly more decisive and faster.


If you want to compare images. Try the Imaging Resource site :
Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page

[pinholecam]

Anyways, I'm hoping someone can clearify, though in the meantime, wow... is the Pentax DCU UI so horrible(gasp). I sure hope Ricoh will pick-up on these types of things and make them better.

Yes, its a horrible UI riddled with bugs.
Hope they come up with a new one or just bundle us a ACR next time

I have had the K10D with an MZ-S, 645N and 67. Scanned 120 including the latest Ektar on a V500. Sold all the film gear, went to K20's, sold the K10, now have two K-5s and a K20 in case of repair transit. Buy the K-5.

Nothing wrong with the K10. The extra resolution and DR on the K-5 is worth it. I do need the extra ISO, increased FPS and the quiet shutter. Its simply a better tool.

I shoot manual, could care less if the meter works, don't shoot video and have no idea how to use Live View. In 4 years I've never shot anything but DNGs and mostly live in Camera Raw.

I visited neighbors today who have a 16x20 print in their living room made a few years ago with a 67. The latest 16x20 is in Mom's office and was shot with a K20. Either way, they memorable photos of their kids. Just upgraded my main PC and CS3 to CS5. Both are better. Same deal, just a tool.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Wow I must really suck at using Pentax DCU 4 because I really didn't do well with it.

Here's my first attempt(probably pathetic);


Anyways, I'm hoping someone can clearify, though in the meantime, wow... is the Pentax DCU UI so horrible(gasp). I sure hope Ricoh will pick-up on these types of things and make them better.

Interesting. This does look better with Raw Therapee. I used default settings with both a year or two ago and I wasn't happy with the results I was getting from Raw Therapee - either they improved their algorithms or I didn't figure out how to use it well in the first place. The images I had tried were different too - nature stuff, not labels.

At least I now noticed that there is a newer version of DCU than what I currently have. I'm downloading it now. Maybe I'll try Raw Therapee again one of these days.

[J.B.]

If you stay at 100 iso with the k10 I have rescued some shots that were almost 4 stops under and still got great results.
I am sure anything higher then 400 the k5 would really be in a class of it's own.

cheers

I own the k10, K20 and the k5. I have yet to get the level of quality out of my k5 and K20 that I got out of my k10. When I look back at groups of photos not knowing what pentax I used, in virtually every case the highest quality photos always come from the k10 for some unknown reason. I know the k5 has the updated bells and whistles that I have found very useful but as far as superior image quality, in my case the k10 wins every time. Does anyone know why that might be? I'd like to know.

[Nicolas06]

Let's be clear:

K10D: 10MP with low pass filter
K5: 16MP with low pass filter
K5-IIS 16MP without low pass filter.
K-S1: 20MP without low pass filter.
K3: 24MP without low pass filter.
Latest Samsung APSC (as expensive has entry level FF): 28MP without low pass filter

Nikon D600-10 (FF): 24MP with low pass filter
Nikon D800E/D810 (FF): 36MP without low pass filter

Pentax 645Z (MF): 51 MP.

If you really want the resolution and provided your lenses are good enough(*), and you are interrested in sharpness, like you said MF sharpness, for sure this is not the K5 to buy.

This is an MF camera of course that is quite expensive. You have 5 time the MP, 2.3 the resolution.

K5 vs K10D is 60% more MP, only 25% more resolution.

If you are after resolution K5 is not very logical choice. Keeping K3 mount this should be K3 or maybe K-S1. This is because thoses are the camera that bring you the most resolution in the Pentax K-mount familly. K3 resolution doesn't give you MF resolution but many would say at low iso it get low FF resolution and that already a great jump.

If that's not enough the next logical step is a 36MP FF like the D810 or why not the Sony A7s to reuse your K-mount lenses... in manual focus.

You K10D is old I would also wait a bit to see the next mid-level Pentax camera is. Prototype have been shown, but not yet the specs. Should be available for spring.

But I just wanted to clarify. You are after resolution? That's K3 or maybe K-S1 with current Pentax K-mount offering. You are after MF resolution, there no APSC camera that will acheive that... Get an MF camera or if that's too expensive, get an FF camera that go near to this resolution.


(*) Your lenses need to be high quality primes. Legacy high quality lenses would do 24MP let say 35mm and up, this is possible. Bellow 35mm I would say you'd need a modern lense. 36MP on FF already it would be safer to assume no legacy lense or only a few would matches, and only at their best apperture.

[Kerrowdown]

I own the k10, K20 and the k5

Let's be clear

Hey guys... the OP originally posted this thread back in June 2011, so I think any decisions may well have been made by now.

[Nicolas06]

Hey guys... the OP originally posted this thread back in June 2011, so I think any decisions may well have been made by now.

haha sorry, didn't figure out it was a digging of history of the forum.

For sure choice for high resolution is much different now !

[john5100]

I think the image quality of the K10 at low ISO is tough to beat. The K5 should have it all over the K10 everywhere else though.

K200D (same sensor at ISO400)

Bald Eagle by John Rudolph Photography, on Flickr

K200D ISO1100

Chihuly Glass by John Rudolph Photography, on Flickr