[cxdoo]

Hi Elliott


That is a much better photo than what I was able to get on my last visit to aquarium switching ISOs from 400 to 3200. Now you intrigued me to play again with high ISO and see what comes out.
If you did that same shot with K5 @ ISO 1600 would the difference be huge?


Hi Paulh


Heh, I could get similar results with static scenes @ ISO 800. But photos of my daughter's various school and dance performances are invariably blurred or too grainy. And I am not talking about her jumping around (I am not that ambitious ), but standing relatively still on reasonably well lit stage shot from 5-10 m away. Someone more skilled with a better lens could probably get better results; I'll try to shoot in the same ambient with M 50/1.7 when I get it.

[Des]

4) Battery life not really great; if I don't pack extra I usually finish with photography sooner than expected.

Try Sanyo Eneloops. Made a big difference in my K100D Super.

[sam-joseph]

I had a K100D Super, then a K7 and now a K5 II. Each time I've bought the next generation of camera, my old lenses have performed better.
I can highly recommend the K5 II. They're priced well at the moment.

Regards

[cxdoo]

I parted with the money and now I am expecting a K5 II But I still have my doubts regarding high ISO performance of K100DS. Tonight I'll be the photographer on duty at a kids' event so I'll see what I can get with 800/1600.

[elliott]

That is a much better photo than what I was able to get on my last visit to aquarium switching ISOs from 400 to 3200. Now you intrigued me to play again with high ISO and see what comes out.
If you did that same shot with K5 @ ISO 1600 would the difference be huge?

Night an day difference, the K5 doesn't look like that until about 6400, maybe 8000.

You have to get the exposure perfect with the K100D at 800 and higher to get good results, there is a lot less room for error. You can see in my shot that the underexposed areas are very noisy. I can clean that up in post pretty easily though.

[BrianR]

After 7+ years of using a k100d, I picked up a k5iis a little over a month ago. It's a supremely polished machine by comparison, I'm sure you'll enjoy this new generation.

-Read the manual cover to cover. It's packed with customization options. It can now remember the drive mode you were in even after you powered it off. Or not. Your choice. So much more customisation then the k100d.
-The bigger, brighter viewfinder is the bomb, your incoming M50/1.7 will love it.
-The speed is just unreal, especially if you're used to shooting raw with a k100d. The buffer space on a k5iis seems close enough to infinite to me, and 7fps feels like an out of control rocketship.
-Autofocus is now use able indoors (hooray)! YMMV, but it's a massive upgrade.
-The auto dust removal feature seems excellent so far.

-That front control wheel, while awesome, is still getting accidentally bumped by my fingers whose muscle memory expects nothing there.
-If you're a pixel peeper who likes to view things at 100%, keep reminding yourself that the 16mp image is being subjected to more magnification then you're used to.
-I'm also using the two old kit lenses as well as a FA50/1.4 and a DFA100/2.8. Compared to the latter two, the kit lenses felt sad on the k100d. The extra resolution on the k5ii makes the kit lenses feel relatively sadder in my opinion, so don't expect much more detail out of them. However, the k5ii will feel more capable of 'getting the shot' in many instances, or at least making it easier to get (better high iso performance will definitely help). Fast, quality glass is still king, but there's no reason your k5ii shouldn't last you another 7+ years, so there's time to add to your lens collection

For your k100ds, keep it as a back up. Get eneloops as mentioned, preferably with a smart charger. The high capacity XX eneloops are even better if you can find them for a decent price. With the k100d, I am in the camp of not fearing iso 800, venturing into iso 1600 when needed, but only iso 3200 in dire emergencies. I've yet to sort out my iso thresholds on the k5iis, but even at an unfair pixel level comparison it feels at least a stop better, maybe two. In any case, as the iso goes up, hitting the exposure dead on gets more and more important. You also might try your flash in manual mode, it will take more work setting up but not having the p-ttl flashes firing away can make it easier on the subjects.

[paulh]

Congrats on the K5II! I'm sure you'll love it and will see that it's miles ahead of your K100D in almost every way. As I said in an earlier post, I still enjoy my K100 for outdoors settings, where it performs well. For what you're doing, the K5 will deliver much better results, esp in low light/high iso settings. Enjoy

[PentaxScott]

Congrats cxdoo on your new K-5ii. I think youll be pleasantly surprised.

I never owned a K100, but did own a K10, which was released around the same time. While it had a higher MP sensor (at 10 MP) it also has the same AF system and the same low light high ISO pains as the K100. When I jumped from the K10 to my K-5, the difference was more than night and day. The increase in resolution was nice, but it was the high ISO shots and dynamic range that was the most rewarding. I think this image I captured is what convinced me the purchase was well worth it:



This image was captured as the sun was going down. I had to balance the camera on the top of my foot (which was standing in the water, submersing the sole of the shoe) to get at eye level with the frog. It was shot at ISO 6400. In order to get the f-stop I needed (f/11), I also purposely dialed in -1ev compensation knowing full well that this sensor had the dynamic range/latitude to still capture details, and have those details visible when I fixed the lighting in post process. A little sharpening, some minor noise reduction, and a small boost in saturation (to account for the slight desaturation shooting at high ISO) and this was the end result (uncropped).

Comparing this to my K10, even shooting at ISO 800 and purposely underexposing a stop would have given me an image that was full of noise (especially chroma noise and banding) and destroying most of the fine details. If I had tried to shoot the above image with my K10 and a flash, the natural reflections in the frogs eye, and the water would have been eliminated, and the light from the flash would have undoubtedly scared off my subject.

I kept my K10, as its still a wonderful backup body, brilliant at low ISOs, and a great loaner if someone wants to come out shooting with me. However, theres a reason the K-5/ii was such a successful body, and that proof is shown in the thousands of images here on this forum!

[DSims]

I parted with the money and now I am expecting a K5 II But I still have my doubts regarding high ISO performance of K100DS. Tonight I'll be the photographer on duty at a kids' event so I'll see what I can get with 800/1600.

Oh crud, now you're still going to need a new lens!



Congrats on the K-5 II - it's half the solution. And it's a great choice, as it addresses most of the weaknesses of the K-5 (particularly in AF speed, AF capability in low light, and AF performance in different types of artificial light - problems that were only partially covered by K-5 firmware updates).


The K-5 II will really help on your current lenses. But since you're shooting a kids event at night, that normally means poor lighting, so you may find another lens is in order. In the future try the affordable DA50/1.8 and/or DA35/2.4 if it gets you close enough; otherwise a Tamron 28-75/2.8 or 70-200/2.8 could be in order (or, honestly, a used (but still expensive) FA77 is the best in low light - especially for stage events).

In any case, enjoy your new camera - it's a good one!

[savoche]

Congratulations on getting a cracking camera! And what Dsims said.

[cxdoo]

Thx everyone!

I just came back from the event and I am done for today. I'll post a longer reply tomorrow, but in short - I can't get anything that moves even slightly in 800/1600. But even with flash outdoors AF was craptacular, at the end I switched to MF.

[cxdoo]

Phew, time flies.


Yesterday I browsed ISO800+ photos in my Lightroom catalog and was surprised by couple of things:
a) ISO800 where the lighting is not too bad and exposure is well chosen is actually pretty good compared to what I remember
b) I have a few satisfying ISO800 night shots, so it is not completely unusable in low light. However quality of those shots is probably heavily dependent on the facts that the scene was relatively static and I used a tripod.


When it comes to tripod, I was playing with DA 50-200 (long kit lens) one of previous nights and shot the porch of a house in the neighborhood at ISO200 (6sec exposition) and it was rather sharp (well, as sharp as the lens allows, I'm underwhelmed by its IQ on the long end). What would be the recommended ISO in such a setup? Is lower always better quality wise, if the scene is completely static?


Regarding ISO1600 I thought maybe the slowness of my lenses was the main reason why I just can't get anything usable. However that night I tried with Biometar lens at 2.8 and it was comparably crappy to my previous efforts.


I dug out the monster zoom I said I have. In a case slowly disintegrating and under a layer of dust I found Pentax S-M-C/Super Takumar 300mm F4 in a very good condition. Took a couple of shots and wasn't particularly impressed but then it was a dull day here. BTW no wonder I didn't bother too much with it earlier; it's too big to conveniently shoot from hand and you need a truck to carry it around. And focusing from here to infinity takes eternity. Anyway, on a particularly boring day I might try and play with it again. Or maybe take it to the zoo....




@PentaxScott


That is an amazing photo. Based on quality of my photos I'd say it's clearer than anything I got at ISO800 and probably matches K100DS at ISO400. If you don't mind me asking, why did you need f11?


@DSims


Tell me about it I've blown my budget so I am just looking, but a vague idea is to get the Tamron combo 17-50 & 70-200 as general purpose lenses with emphasis on shooting indoors without flash. Then I would fill this with primes at focal lengths I find most convenient.


As I will get WR 18-55 with the camera, can anyone write how does it compare to original 18-55 I have, IQ wise? I need to know on which end to focus my LBA (17-50 or 70-200)

[PentaxScott]

@PentaxScott
That is an amazing photo. Based on quality of my photos I'd say it's clearer than anything I got at ISO800 and probably matches K100DS at ISO400. If you don't mind me asking, why did you need f11?

f/11 Was chosen because I wanted to get as much depth as I could, while keeping the shutter speed (1/100s) at something fast enough to get a crisp shot. As the camera was resting on my foot, even with SR, I didnt want to push it too much slower. As it was, the depth is still shallow enough that there is softening between the eye of the frog and his nose. I took a series of shots at various settings and this one worked out best (with respect to depth, sharpness, noise from ISO, etc).

[DSims]

The DA18-55 WR will have the same IQ as the other DA18-55s, unless you have the very first one which is neither a DA L or the AL II version, in which case it will be a slight improvement.

The Tamron 70-200/2.8 is generally the one which will better meet those action or indoor needs, unless in really close quarters. Even there it may be better at times. Some people don't even need to add any primes to this lens, if they're happy with what they get from it. But there are times when the faster aperture and even the better IQ of a prime is appropriate. This is where it can come down to one's style, taste, and budget. However, according to my standards, primes still help in at least two of these three areas: AF speed, lens speed (wider apertures), and IQ.

[cxdoo]

The camera and the lens arrived both yesterday so after some limited time playing with both let me write down the first impressions. Not many original insights or impressions here but coming from K100DS and kit lenses they might be of interest to people in the same boat.


K5II - unpacking

• it doesn't look big. Actually a casual glance couldn't tell me it's not K100DS (yes, I immediately looked what is written on the body )
• it's heavy. Looks maybe don't say anything but weight does. Specs say the difference is 660g to 560g but I really felt it.
• feels very robust in hands. Like a small tank, in a good way.
• I was pleasantly surprised it doesn't feel much different in terms of ergonomics. There are more buttons and wheels all over the body but the basic feeling is still pretty much the same which I found relieving.

M 50/1.7 - unpacking

• wow, small. Build quality great.
• Did I say small? Finally understand the notion of tacking this on camera and just walking around; no backpack, no bags of any kind.

DA 18-55 WR - unpacking

• ok, it's a new kit lens. Looks different than the old one, feels pretty much the same in hand.

So, after the long 4 hours of battery charging it was time to turn the thing on. I skipped the kit lens and went straight to prime.


K5II + M 50.17 - first use

• lens looks really small on the body and I had some unwanted button presses while focusing (rarely) or changing aperture (more often). Particularly the new location of flash button caused me trouble.
• LCD lighting up when changing settings was slightly intimidating as the amount of information is, well, too much, especially on first use. Much better LCD than on K100DS, by the way.
• Mode wheel push-to-turn button took some time to get used too, but it's a welcome change.
• Viewfinder WOOOOOHOOOO HOLY MOTHER OF GOD WHAT IS THIS to a poor soul like me well worth the upgrade just for this. It's not a dim blurred peeping hole no more it's a window! I can see things! I am not sort-of-sure guessing where the focus is I can actually see it. Big improvement.
• Green button use - would be straightforward and fast if I didn't have to look every time where exactly the button is. Will take some time to get used to it.
• ISO Button - great addition. Would be even more useful on K100DS where you don't really want the camera to choose higher ISO unless absolutely necessary.
• Taking a picture. What, that was it? Fast, much quieter than with K100DS. Of course I was shooting manual, but even so.

Later in the evening I took some shots with kit lens. Tungsten light, dark outside, no flash.


K5II + 18-55WR - first use

• Autofocus works. Yeah, everyone said it, but you don't really understand until you see it. Massive difference. Consequently, much faster to take the picture
• Lens is sort-of usable in low light, i.e. I can take shots I couldn't before and don't have to focus manually. Obviously results from 50/1.7 are much better IQ wise, but now I am fairly confident a faster zoom (like Tamron 17-50/2.8) combined with good autofocus and high ISO will allow me to take shots I didn't even attempt before.

On the computer

• RAW files much bigger, highest quality JPEGs of comparable size to K100DS RAWs. Gonna need USB 3.0 card reader...
• Luckily I already have a powerful PC (i7/8Gb RAM) so I haven't noticed delays in Lightroom when importing/viewing photos.
• Wow that zoom goes to subatomic level; had to adjust the zoom level of zoom-in to be similar to K100DS photos
• As above, pixel for pixel this looks softer than K100DS photos. Once zoom level is adjusted, they look more three-dimensional.
• I like colors from K100DS better, but I have yet to shoot in daylight so maybe it's too early to judge.

Additionally, I tried shooting with flash to see if I'll have any issues. I don't remember if I ever upgraded firmware of the flash and K5II is still on v1.00. Everything worked fine.


So to sum it up; I was most impressed (as in better than expected) by the:

• viewfinder size and clarity
• autofocus
• high ISO IQ

I expected and got:

• build quality
• speed of operation
• many more buttons
• better LCD
• weather sealing
• meh kit lens

I didn't really care too much about (at this point):

• more pixels
• video/microphone

I didn't look into but I plan to:

• HDR

I was underwhelmed by:

• nothing so far (kit lens doesn't really count as I didn't expect much from it)

If I find some time this weekend I am going to do some comparison shots with both cameras and see what the difference really is, not just how it feels.


Cheers!