Alright, the K-5 has finally arrived on my doorstep, and after a week of shooting it in different scenarios, I thought I would share some of my real world impressions of the camera. I won't do things like imaging or autofocus tests because frankly I don't really know how, I'll just try to give an idea of how the camera handles.
I also thought I'd share some photos from different scenarios to give you an idea of what they look like. If there are flaws in the images, it's probably more my fault than the camera :)
Autofocus
First blush test
Definitely a bit quicker and more certain than the K-7, although I wouldn't want to say just how much so without a formal test. It was interesting that it would go in streaks for me as I focused on random things throughout the room, focusing instantly say 7 out of 8 times, and on the eighth time hesitating a little bit before locking on.
This held true when I went downstairs in the basement to shoot in the most terrible light I could think of (in other words, ISO 12800 got some use). In this light, with the AF assist light off (to handicap it further) the autofocus hesitated a little more, still focusing nearly instantly on some targets where the contrast was clear, other times hesitating but eventually locking on with good accuracy. In these situations, center point focus helped quite a bit. So I'd say improved low light focus, but not necessarily perfect yet. To be fair, I was trying to push the autofocus to its limit, and I'd really prefer not to ever have to take photos with lighting that bad.
The only time in the past week where I really struggled was during a wedding dance when they turned the lights completely off and my flash infrared focus wasn't working. Then again, I don't expect AF to be that great in total darkness.
Continuous autofocus
I never really used this before owning the K-5, so I can't say how much of an improvement this was over previous cameras. I can however say that it is useful enough that I have used it a ton in my two sports shoots I've done in the past week. This, along with the improve high ISO performance, has made shooting sports more fun. To put it in practical terms, I feel like I can use my skill trying to get a good shot, rather than devoting my efforts to fighting the camera while trying to get a good shot.
Liveview autofocus
Not perfect yet, but definitely much improved over the K-7.
The Shutter
The shutter is butter. That's the phrase that popped into my head after taking my first shot with the camera. Actually, the first phrase that popped into my head was "Whoa, that's quiet!" Even quieter than the K-7, a claim which I was doubtful about before I tried the K-5. This, the machine gun fast 7 FPS, and the snappy autofocus really give the impression of an awesome picture taking package.
The Buffer
The limited buffer can be annoying when trying to shoot high ISO RAW rapidly. This certainly is not a camera for Spray and Pray hold down the button lovers who also demand the abililty to shoot in RAW.
However, for my purposes, if the reduced buffer in a trade for increased image quality, I'll take trade. For my purposes I don't need to do that style of shooting that often at all. Also, when I tried shooting sports with JPEG, the buffer never was an issue for me even when I did hold the button down.
High ISO performance
This has all been thoroughly documented, so I won't go into it much here. All I can add it how much more I feel I am able to do with this new high ISO capability. It's not a panacea -- I still had to use my flash some (with mixed results) at the wedding. But in the last week alone I've used it so many times in bad lighting situations -- a wedding in a barn, an indoor gym, a night football game -- where the K-7 would have been a struggle to use.
Low ISO performance
Requoted from another thread:
This is going to be anecdotal and only comparing the K-5 to the K-7, but...
At low ISOs I have noticed that the K-5 renders fine detail, like hair for example, a bit better than the K-7. The K-5 also really seems to reward nice lenses when they are stopped down with some extra resolution boost. I also think the K-5 has a weaker anti aliasing filter than the K-7, which makes for sharper looking photos before post processing.
All this said, when I shot a wedding with the K-7 and K-5 this weekend I had trouble telling the two cameras apart when I was looking through my shots that I took in good light. In fact, the difference was more apparent based on what lens each camera was using, a K-7 with the DA* 200 looked like a K-5 with a DA*200, while the two cameras using different lenses looked very different. When I did the same thing with high ISO photos, it was very clear even from small resolution previews that the K-5 was and is the better performer, especially at ISO1600+.
Video
Haven't played with it much yet. The 1080p quality video looks good. The High ISO should be nice for keeping Gain down.
Some photos from the week.
The wedding
ISO 1000, 16 mm, f/2.8, with flash
ISO 6400, 200 mm, f/2.8 no noise reduction
ISO 1600, 16 mm, f/2.8
ISO 1250, 50 mm, f/4
Mitt Romney at rally
ISO 4000, 200 mm, f/2.8
Some sport shots, both at 200 mm f/2.8 ISO 6400
 |
