[lesmore49]

I also didn't want a camera much larger than my K10D and purchased the D7000.

I find it way more comfortable to hold one handed.

No dslr is perfect, nor is the D7000 but it does a lot really really well.

I have just covered the French Bouldering Climbing Comp in Reunion and took over 500 shots at ISO 2000 -6400 without the auto af assist light and it never missed a beat while using the 16-85 and 70-300 combo.

I shot in jpeg - the Auto1 AWB is really very very accurate in all sorts of lighting - I could display the native jpeg on a 24 inch monitor without having to do ANY noise work even after applying a smidge of sharpening - the only pp I had to do.

On a side note I was looking at ultra sharp pics taken at 1/25 sec @ 16mm later on and realized I had been shooting with vr turned off - so you definitely don't need ois or vr unless going down to 1/8 sec.

But shooting with at 300mm with lens based vr is a far better experience than a lens without or in body ois

The 16-85 and 70-300 are really exceptional consumer zoom lenses.

The movie mode is really great and I shot a lot of clips of very good quality - the autofocus does quite a good job during movie recording too

Reading the latest Popular Photography. They rate the Pentax K5 as a 4.5 (out of 5)...the Nikon D 7000 as a 4.

The Pentax 12-24 is also rated by PP...best in class. The DA 300 is well known for very high quality.

[Aegon]

PopPhoto is hit or miss. Usually miss.

They derided the DA15 for having a metal cap with felt lining, saying that they couldn't figure out the purpose of the felt. Then they applauded a Leica lens for having a metal cap with felt lining.

Obviously the felt keeps the metal from pinging like a bell.

The point is that they don't know what to look for in the first place, and they get caught up on irrelevant quirks rather than substance.

Another fine example: their review of the Sigma 70-200 gives it an excellent SQF score with exemplary sharpness and contrast, but the "not hot" blurb says the lens is optically never better than average. Which is it? Excellent or sub-average?

That said, I'm sure the K-5 is worthy of praise. I just don't think that PopPhoto reviews deserve credence.

[lesmore49]

PopPhoto is hit or miss. Usually miss.

They derided the DA15 for having a metal cap with felt lining, saying that they couldn't figure out the purpose of the felt. Then they applauded a Leica lens for having a metal cap with felt lining.

Obviously the felt keeps the metal from pinging like a bell.

The point is that they don't know what to look for in the first place, and they get caught up on irrelevant quirks rather than substance.

Another fine example: their review of the Sigma 70-200 gives it an excellent SQF score with exemplary sharpness and contrast, but the "not hot" blurb says the lens is optically never better than average. Which is it? Excellent or sub-average?

That said, I'm sure the K-5 is worthy of praise. I just don't think that PopPhoto reviews deserve credence.

I see...don't agree with someone or a publication, then it must be a lack of credibility.

You've swayed me with your argument.

[twilight_samurai]

I see...don't agree with someone or a publication, then it must be a lack of credibility.

You've swayed me with your argument.

I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or not..

But in order to be considered a credible reviewer, consistency is important.

[RyanW]

I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or not..

But in order to be considered a credible reviewer, consistency is important.

Exactly. And if you look at the many ads in Popular Photography, it isn't hard to see it's in their best interest to please some of the big players. I guess in that vein the K5 must be something to rate so highly.

Myself I put much more stock in user experience type reviews done by knowledgeable shooters. Reid's reviews for instance and others.

Technical reviews are helpful, but just like the spec sheet of a stereo speaker gives no indication of how it actually sounds, many of the tech specs of our cameras give us little idea of what the images look like.

In general I think the populist photography mags and their ilk are much like the bodybuilding magazines of today. They aren't there to teach you much about bodybuilding, but rather to convince you that you need supplements. Most popular photo mags exist to induce gear lust. Because of that, I won't pay for populist photo mags, they are not much more than looking through a catalog of camera gear, yet I have to pay for it. B&H sent me a two inch thick catalog for free.

I subscribe to B&W, Lenswork, View Camera, Aperature and the like. Much better signal to noise ratio. Some of those magazines will give what camera the photo was shot with. I'll go out on a limb here, of the articles that state it and it is a digital cam, probably 50% or more of the photos are not shot by current generation cameras. You see a lot of D200, D60, D40, 40D, 20D, 5D classic, and so on. That proves to me that the latest is not needed, kind of at odds with what the populist photography mags indicate. Sure it's nice, but not necessary to take excellent photos.

[geauxpez]

All well and good, but the quoted comment (and the thread topic for that matter) was neither about the K-5 or Pop Photography. Dylansalt answered the posed question perfectly.

All that said, do I think that the K-5 is probably a lovely machine? Yes. Did I buy one? Nope. But that falls under another thread topic.

Cheers to all...

[lesmore49]

Exactly. And if you look at the many ads in Popular Photography, it isn't hard to see it's in their best interest to please some of the big players. I guess in that vein the K5 must be something to rate so highly.

Myself I put much more stock in user experience type reviews done by knowledgeable shooters. Reid's reviews for instance and others.

Technical reviews are helpful, but just like the spec sheet of a stereo speaker gives no indication of how it actually sounds, many of the tech specs of our cameras give us little idea of what the images look like.

In general I think the populist photography mags and their ilk are much like the bodybuilding magazines of today. They aren't there to teach you much about bodybuilding, but rather to convince you that you need supplements. Most popular photo mags exist to induce gear lust. Because of that, I won't pay for populist photo mags, they are not much more than looking through a catalog of camera gear, yet I have to pay for it. B&H sent me a two inch thick catalog for free.

I subscribe to B&W, Lenswork, View Camera, Aperature and the like. Much better signal to noise ratio. Some of those magazines will give what camera the photo was shot with. I'll go out on a limb here, of the articles that state it and it is a digital cam, probably 50% or more of the photos are not shot by current generation cameras. You see a lot of D200, D60, D40, 40D, 20D, 5D classic, and so on. That proves to me that the latest is not needed, kind of at odds with what the populist photography mags indicate. Sure it's nice, but not necessary to take excellent photos.

Pentax very rarely advertises in Popular Photography. Can't recall the last one and I'm a subscriber.

[Digitalis]

I use a Nikon D3, D300s - and i'm looking closely at the nikon D3X as a high resolution back up(or fill-in) for a pentax 645D

Nikon's ergonomics are remarkably similar to pentax so I have very little difficulty switching between cameras.

[geauxpez]

So far the biggest "issue" I've had is directly where Pentax had its lens release button, Nikon has its stop down button. Nikon's lens release button is on the other side of the lens mount.

[Digitalis]

So far the biggest "issue" I've had is directly where Pentax had its lens release button

the only issue I have with switching cameras is that Canon who for some reason prefer to put the power switch on the back of the camera, even Leica managed to emulate pentax a nikon with their power switch. The different positioning of the lens release buttons can be confusing at first, but it quickly becomes second nature.

[RyanW]

Pentax very rarely advertises in Popular Photography. Can't recall the last one and I'm a subscriber.

That's what I mean. I'd expect more glowing reviews for Canikon from them due to the dollars being spent.

[lesmore49]

That's what I mean. I'd expect more glowing reviews for Canikon from them due to the dollars being spent.

That's what I thought you meant and I agree.

In fact PP recently tested the Pentax 100 WR Macro and gave it an absolutely glowing report also. They indicated that the Pentax 100 Macro lens bested the Canon Macro .

I hear the old saw about magazine tests only giving the nod to their advertisers all the time and all I can say that in the case of Popular photography it certainly doesn't seem to be the case at all.

In fact...given that Pentax rarely advertises in PP...I should be surprised..if I went by some of urban myths that seem to be fostered by some ...that PP even test Pentax products.

But they do....the last issue alone tested the K5 and the new Pentax 35 mm.

Kudos to PP.

Les

[Arpe]

I own a D300s now! Got it yesterday, struggling with the settings, esp. the shooting banks

Could be that I'm too used to Pentax, but the menu system is overly complex to me.

The focus, compared to a K-7, is definitely faster on the Nikon 70-200 though, compared with the screw Sigma 70-200, and quiet of course.

472 page manual!

[geauxpez]

Oh wow -- that and the 70-200 -- it's like a workout regimen compared to the K-7! Yeah, the menu system seems like topics were mixed up in a bowl and dumped into the camera, not necessarily done with the best of logic or ease of use in mind. BUT, learning curve aside, write back in a week after you've played with it.

[Arpe]

Heavy and big is right! My biggest bugbear with switching.

I do intend doing a review and comparison, but I may wait a while until I've shot a few games with the new stuff. Club rugby season starts in a couple of weeks here. I may have to use the monopod sideline now!