Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Alas, the K-5 has been given to ffordes in Scotland, to be sold. Together with a few primes.

The reason is simple weight, and bulk. As we get older , the wife and I, the weight of ome's camera system becomes a bigger and bigger issue. That combined with the fact that newer, smaller, and lighter, cameras outrun the K-5 easily, except maybe at extremely high ISO.

The desciding factor was the arrival of the wife's Olympus OM-D E-M5. And partly the V1 I own myself. The V1 is small, very portable, and takes excellent pictures with the two manual zooms I have for it (10-30 & 30-110), which are so small that I can carry them in my shirt pocket, if I had the inclination to do so. According to Photozone.de these two zoom lenses are among the sharper there are on the market. Add to that the TF1 adapter that makes it possible to use normal Nikon lenses with it (I'd recommend the 70-300, kit zoom, that on the V1 produces excellent results). As the sensor on theV1 is so small it uses only the center of the full-size lenses, thus even fairly cheap lenses can give stunning results.

On the K-5 I can mount my Sigma 150-500, and get excellent results with photographing birds, my main hobby just now, but is quite a load. In full format terms it equals a 750mm lens, while the tiny Nikon 70-300 equals a 816mm lens on the V1. With the V1 (using standard Nikon lenses, like the mentioned AF-S 70-300 G) focusing isn't stellar, but neither is the K-5! With the Series 1 lenses the V1 is stellar, but not quite as stellar as the wife's OM-D.

The V1, with 30-110 (roughly equalling a 80-300 zoom on the K-5) , you have a camera that fits in a jacket pocket, with better performance than almost any combination I can think of with the K-5, at a fraction of the weight, as the camera with the 30-110 lens weighs less than the K-5 itself!

But shooting birds in the air is a tricky business with V1, while the wife's OM-D it is a delight, as it focuses lightning fast, even on moving objects, like flying birds. So what is a major challenge with the K-5, is so very easy with the Olympus.

So for now on we'll use the remaining K-5, and remaining lenses and stuff, for wide shots, as we as yet haven't very many lenses for her OM-D. But the remaing heavy lenses will eventually be sold, as will the K-5, before it value on the market reaches zero - the UK retailer has hundreds in store, and now the K-30 will soon arrive, cheaper and with better, faster, focusing!

So soon we'll be travelling with a light camera kit, faster,and far lighter, than the one we've been used to carry around!

We also own two NEX-5N, by the way, that handles the remaining Pentax lenses excellent in manual mode.

On our way home after a lovely month in the UK,

Tord & Ann-Christine

Tord, it's great that you like your current cameras. It does seem indeed that the K-5 was not the right camera for you. I just don't understand why would someone need that many cameras at all (other than satisfying the GAS like many of us). Why own both the V1 and the NEX-5n?

Very interesting, sir! I too, increasingly feel the weight of the K-5, and am researching a "travel" system such as the Sony NEX-7 (with Zeiss 24, plus K-to-E-mount Adapter)! This way, my existing superb Pentax DA* and FA Limited optics can be used as well. I looked at the Oly system, but fear that the smaller m4/3 sensor would not meet my Image Quality standards, as can be seen at high quality photography, Total Quality Photo Home, Stock photography, Event Photography, web design photos, digital images for advertising.
Good luck!
Steve

Steve,

I love the 5N with the FA lenses, and a few older ones we have (a K 400/5.6, for instance), but I never got to love the FA31. The 1.8/24 Zeiss lens is the one I use most of the time, though - simply superb! I'll probably upgrade my adapter, so a Novoflex one, so that I can operate the aperature on the DA lenses (still got the DA21 & 40, 55-300), and my Tamrons).

What has really been shocking is the picture quality of the OM-D: in my book it surpasses the K-5 with a wide margin. Our own tests show the Olympus beating both the K-5, and the NEX, both through a good sensor & processor, and vastly improved anti-shake. The images in RAW is a bit oversaturated, and possibly over-sharpened, but better than the K-5's with a fairly wide margin.

And it is not just us that has come to this conclusion. If you go to DPReview's studio test, you can compare the three, and for good measure, the K-01 (you can choose any four you like, as long as they have been tested). Look in the shades, look at the high-lights, look at high ISO, and low: the K-5 is never the winner, occasionally the K-01 is, but the overall winner is the OM-D, no doubt about it! At medium high ISO, to my eyes, the NEX rivals the OM-D, but not other-wise.

Actually, the K-x seems better, most of the time - sigh.

So a superzoom on a OM-D would be a great travel kit, or the V1, with the two 'kit' zooms - even lighter and less attractive to thieves and robbers. In low light the V1 isn't the champ, though - more like the ol' K-7I used to own!

The reason I bought the K-5 was because it was so light and the lenses are tiny compared to my previous camera the Canon 1Ds.

Steve, it was the image quality that really turned the tables! I first got the decidedly nice, light and practical NEX-5N, but the choice of lenses isn't very great, so I use it with the Zeiss 1.8/24, and that's really great, and I think resolution-wise it is slightly above the K-5, and almost as good ISO-wise. The real surprise is the OM-D, as the number of sharp shots is close to 100%, due to its extremely nice antishake. And pixel-peeping it is sharp as a camera of much higher resolution. Probably the base sharpening is higher than on the K-5, but that can easily be fixed later.

We have a hadful of lenses for the Pentax left, but the big Sigma doesn't deliver any more than the tiny 70-300 does on the V1, that is at times superb results, but the V1 has much less focusing problems than the K-5+Sigma 150-500, and that longer (relatively) focal lengths.

So, the V1 is close to the perfect travelling camera, and the OM-D is perfect for difficult shots, say of flying birds at close range, which you can shoot with ease in AUTO mode! That's not quite possible with the V1, but Steve Huff thinks it is faster than the OM-D, as long as you use series 1 lenses. And he might be right.

My wife's favourite lenses for her OM-D are the Panasonic 20, the Sigma 30 (also available for the NEX!), the Olympus 45, and the longer Olympus zooms: 14-150 & 70-300. The 12-50 lens that came with the camera has motorpowered zoom, and is not bad that either, although not a favourite, yet.

Take care, and lower your camera load, before you tire totally!

A few samples: Red kite | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Very interesting, Tord! I shall indeed research the OM-D EM5 more, but I'm still quite intrigued by the NEX-7 and Zeiss 24 combo! Thanks again!

Thanks, Steve!

I love my NEX-5N, and I only use my Zeiss 24, I can tell you that! The NEX-7 needs more light for perfect results, as the sensor, due to the smaller pixels, is noisier!

All the best,

Tord

Not according to this site

DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

Or this one

Side by Side Comparison: Digital Photography Review

I know what you say SHOULD be true, but sensor development, especially Sony sensor development is moving at a fast pace at the moment. What the above sites show seems to hold up in my own very unscientific tests (just take an image in a dimly lit shop and pixel peep). The Nex 7 was noticeably less noisy than the (actually quite noisy) Nex 5. Neither were as good as my K5, though the Nex 7 came close enough not to matter too much, and so it should at the price they're asking for it.

Chris

I know that the sensor in the NEX-5 is a generation, or more, older than NEX-5N's. 5N has a sensor & processor combo that outperforms the K-5, at all but the very highest ISO!

The very latest NEX, the F3 seems even better at high ISO!

Very interesting, Tord! Well, current finances dictate that I must stick with K-5 and pentax system for a while. So, I decided to sell a few good Pentax lenses for others in a slightly different focal length range, namely, 8-16 (Sigma) and 17-70 (Pentax). Though I'd love to expereiement with the Zeiss 24 on the NEX, that will have to wait. As for the Oly EM-5, the body (and Olympus lenses) intrigue me, but I really don't think going to a smaller m4/3 sensor is the way to better image quality, especially in prints larger than 16x20. Just my opinion. Thanks!

That's roughly the way we're going, the wife and I: For short focal lengths the remaining K-5 (and SFX & K-x) will be useful, as for now, as means to keep weight down. For medium length the OM-D is champ (say 30-300), above that the V1 rules the skies! Longer, older, Nikon lenses have no anti-shake, of course, so handheld is out of the question, but up to the cheapish 70-300 the VR lenses are OK, price-wise! And very useful, handheld!

We've sold a few Pentax FA lenses (and the 18-55 WR) to finance other lenses, and one of the K-5s. I think it was a good decision - the next might be sold as well ...

A good example what can be done with a V1, at ISO 3200; https://picasaweb.google.com/105346544097654687067/2012_06_16LaTaurinenseAPi...eat=directlink

Well, I have a K-5, but for some time I have considered buying a Canon 5D III to get better image quality, dynamic range, metering, and low light capability. But to get the zoom range of my current 18-135 lens with the 5D with decent image quality, I would need to carry two lenses, a 24-70 or 24-105 plus a 70-200, and this seems too heavy. So I will probably stick to my K-5. I am a bit old, 68 years, so burdens should not be too heavy. I have a compact Canon G1X too, which I use for street photography and as "carry everywhere camera", but the K-5 is better.