Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
That was what I feared. So I should go to the gods to pray for mercy, right? And ask if they'll accept my soul in exchange for a K5 with that dinky, little 15mm?
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Testing out a Pentax K5
- Thread starter jonoslack
- Start date
Godfrey
Well-known member
Well, you can choose the much beefier, weightier, more professional looking DA14mm f/2.8 instead ... It's a very fine lens.
The Surgery #2 - Alcatraz 2007
©2007 by Godfrey DiGiorgi
Pentax K10D + DA14/2.8 ED
ISO 400 @ f/11 @ 1.3 sec, Av
Click the image above for a larger version in a separate window.
No reason to use only dinky little lenses.
jonoslack
Active member
I think you'll have to . . . but I guess it won't stop at that 15mm (will it?)
Godfrey
Well-known member
From all reports I've heard and all the results I've seen, the difference is night and day. The K5 is worth saving up for. A lot of people had a lot of difficulty getting results they were satisfied with out of the K7.
I haven't kept up with the Sony models. I've stayed in touch with the Pentax gear because I have a lot of connections to Pentax gear from my endeavors with Pentax USA.
Sorry for not posting images (yet) ...however I now have to say the 16-50 seems to allow to see the capability of the K5 sensor.
Images now seem sharp as those from my D700.
The high ISO (1600 and upward) seems fully usable but definatly more noise than the D700 specially in the shaddows (which I expected and which doesnt bother me, as long as it is good enough for me)
Anyways, I have decided to keep the K5 and now hope that I can resist to buy too many lenses.
Images now seem sharp as those from my D700.
The high ISO (1600 and upward) seems fully usable but definatly more noise than the D700 specially in the shaddows (which I expected and which doesnt bother me, as long as it is good enough for me)
Anyways, I have decided to keep the K5 and now hope that I can resist to buy too many lenses.
jonoslack
Active member
Hi There
Maybe you should stick with what you have?
I bought the K7 earlier in the year, because it pressed all my buttons (small, quiet, weather sealed, primes etc.).
I loved using it, but I didn't like the image quality (at least, the DR / Noise characteristics didn't seem that great), so I just took it all back (5% restocking seemed reasonable).
When I saw the DxO test for the K5, and after playing with the same sensor in a Sony A55, I realised the potential. I think it's a great camera, but it's the sum of it's parts, and I thing that the K7 has a serious part missing! (i.e the sensor).
Steen
Senior Subscriber Member
Nice to watch the present vitality of Pentax, one of the few dedicated optical and photographic companies left. Real cameras like 645D, and K-5, and what's next ...
Enticing The Light has a Pentax K-5 review going for the next month or so. Chapter one is up with introduction, first impressions and the like.
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Anybody here using both Nikon and Pentax? I've been watching Pentax closely for a few years, and the K5 seems to be the perfect entry point. After changing from Fuji S5 to Nikon D300 as my main camera, I'm left with a body that is an excellent machine for producing photos, but that gives me some strange colours, particularly in direct sunlight, even if I shoot RAW only.
Changing brands would be a major operation, so it would be interesting to know if anybody has used the D300 as well as the K5, and how the colours compare. D7000 obviously comes into play as well, but not many have that one yet.
Changing brands would be a major operation, so it would be interesting to know if anybody has used the D300 as well as the K5, and how the colours compare. D7000 obviously comes into play as well, but not many have that one yet.
jonoslack
Active member
HI Jorgen
I can't help really, I did use a D300 when it first came out, but far too long ago to do a comparison.
I guess that the AF on the Pentax will be considerably more lugubrious than the Nikon (seems okay to me though). The old Nikon colours issue used to haunt me (I found it worst in evening light), but lots of people don't seem to recognise it.
Seems to me that if you're looking to ditch Nikon then the Pentax is a bit of a no-brainer, but that if you aren't, then the D7000 (which seems like a very similar camera to the K5) is the obvious way to go.
head and heart stuff!
all the best
I have a Nikon D700 system and the K5.
First imression is that the Nikon colors are a bit more yellowish in skin for example-when I compare DNG vs K5-DNG in LR.
I have not used the K5 enough to give a solid statement on colors, but first impression is that I personally might prefer Pentax colors. I posted a link in the Pentax-lens thread to a thread with many many Pentax images and I do like coors of those. I also read that it depends on the lens line and the Pentax DA lenses draw a little colder vs the FA primes.
What particular problem do you have with D300 colors and how do you process them and in which converter?
Other than that I believe the Nikon 17-55/2.8 ( i used it before with D2x and a D300) is better than the Pentax 16-50, at least at f2.8.
But then Pentax offers more nice primes designed for dx and offering a nice size-quality ratio.
The D300 has more AF sensors in a more usefull position than the Pentax, and while the K5 user interface is veray good for my taste the D300 layout is still better. I dont know about AF accurancy of the K5 yet, but my Nikons (d2x, then D3 then d300 then d3x, back to the D700) were all extremly accurate and reliable. Much better than what experienced with journeys into Canon land (5d, 7d).
I hope the K5 is as good and first impressions are quite good regarding this point.
Pentax offers the 50-135/2.8 - which is half the weight of a Nikon 70-200VRII (excellent lens).
Sorry, I forgot you just asked about the colors.
Steen
Senior Subscriber Member
[off topic]
Jorgen, with regards to your D300 colors try the menu choice Set Picture Control >> D2Xmode1, it's a really nice and accurate color profile.
If you haven't got all the D2Xmodes Optional Picture Controls installed in your camera you can find them here:
[url]http://nikonimglib.com/opc/d2x/index.html.en#os-windows[/URL]
And here's a description on how to download and copy the Picture Controls to your camera:
http://nikonimglib.com/opc/manual/en/opc_win_en_ABF.html
The profiles will work with Capture NX and NX2 and I remember Stuart Richardson once mentioned that Lightroom has these modes as well, see post # 8 in this thread:
[url]http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=141863[/URL]
P.S. is your Nikon D300 A firmware version 1.10 - and is your B firmware 1.10 as well ?
[/end of being so off topic]
Jorgen, with regards to your D300 colors try the menu choice Set Picture Control >> D2Xmode1, it's a really nice and accurate color profile.
If you haven't got all the D2Xmodes Optional Picture Controls installed in your camera you can find them here:
[url]http://nikonimglib.com/opc/d2x/index.html.en#os-windows[/URL]
And here's a description on how to download and copy the Picture Controls to your camera:
http://nikonimglib.com/opc/manual/en/opc_win_en_ABF.html
The profiles will work with Capture NX and NX2 and I remember Stuart Richardson once mentioned that Lightroom has these modes as well, see post # 8 in this thread:
[url]http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=141863[/URL]
P.S. is your Nikon D300 A firmware version 1.10 - and is your B firmware 1.10 as well ?
[/end of being so off topic]
Jorgen Udvang
Subscriber Member
Thank you for your input all of you.
Yes, it's the yellow cast that annoys me, and it can't be corrected with WB alone. I'll try the D2Xmode1 and see how that works. The D7000 is the obvious upgrade path of course, but there are other things to consider too:
- The Pentax lenses are smaller and lighter, and the small primes simply don't exist in F-mount.
- The Pentax has IBIS
- The Pentax generates DNG-files, which means that I can open them with my ancient (CS3) Photoshop. Upgrading to CS5 would be nice, but isn't really needed for my work, and I'm not in the mood to learn more software user interfaces than strictly necessary (Capture NX etc.).
There are other options too of course, and apart from size, the E-5 is a lovely camera. I could even use my GH1 as a backup for that one and mount most of my OM lenses. They also have one of the best walkaround lenses ever designed: the 11-22.
Choices, choices...
Yes, it's the yellow cast that annoys me, and it can't be corrected with WB alone. I'll try the D2Xmode1 and see how that works. The D7000 is the obvious upgrade path of course, but there are other things to consider too:
- The Pentax lenses are smaller and lighter, and the small primes simply don't exist in F-mount.
- The Pentax has IBIS
- The Pentax generates DNG-files, which means that I can open them with my ancient (CS3) Photoshop. Upgrading to CS5 would be nice, but isn't really needed for my work, and I'm not in the mood to learn more software user interfaces than strictly necessary (Capture NX etc.).
There are other options too of course, and apart from size, the E-5 is a lovely camera. I could even use my GH1 as a backup for that one and mount most of my OM lenses. They also have one of the best walkaround lenses ever designed: the 11-22.
Choices, choices...
Also you could try c1 for Nikon which leads to slightly different color.Thank you for your input all of you.
Yes, it's the yellow cast that annoys me, and it can't be corrected with WB alone. I'll try the D2Xmode1 and see how that works. The D7000 is the obvious upgrade path of course, but there are other things to consider too:
- The Pentax lenses are smaller and lighter, and the small primes simply don't exist in F-mount.
- The Pentax has IBIS
- The Pentax generates DNG-files, which means that I can open them with my ancient (CS3) Photoshop. Upgrading to CS5 would be nice, but isn't really needed for my work, and I'm not in the mood to learn more software user interfaces than strictly necessary (Capture NX etc.).
There are other options too of course, and apart from size, the E-5 is a lovely camera. I could even use my GH1 as a backup for that one and mount most of my OM lenses. They also have one of the best walkaround lenses ever designed: the 11-22.
Choices, choices...
Lens choices are indeed quite different. Pentax offering nice high quality primes in small size (limited), on the other side Nikon offers faster lenses (24/1.4 for example, also a better and cheaper 50/1.4) and IMO the better mid range zoom (17-55/2.8) as well as a very nice 18-200zoom.
it really depends.
I find the Pentax offering for dx very attractive. Those lenses are expensive though for primes with max speed of 1.9-3.2.
Today I compared the D700 with 50 and 105 primes vs the K5 with 35Macro and 70 Limited.
Both cameras at base ISO.
IQ:
At f2.8 the Nikon 50 seems to beat the 35Macro regarding sharpness at long distance, at f4.0 the difference is minimal.
The 70 Limited seems to be on par with the Nikon 105DC at f2.5.
What you see is that the ff 105DCC shows clearly less DOF than the 70/2.4 at f2.4.
Color I think I prefer the Pentax slightly.
So yes, regarding blurred background and shallow DOF the ff (as we all would expect) does allow more flexibility.
Handling:
Also shooting both cameras at the same time you see the quite obvious difference in viewfinder size.
Also while the K5 is totally fine the D700 fits even better in the hand.
Conclusion for today:
Some slight disadvantage compared to the D700 in viewfinder and handling, but still very good for my taste
IQ: Same here - The D700 seems allways as good as the K5 sometimes better (less CA, more microdetail) but also here the k5 with the 35 and 70 limited hold up very well and so good that I would not have any concern
regarding IQ.
Those Pentax lenses are so nice and small-I really like those and I find portability quite a bit better with the K5.
The 35macro is a lot of fun. Definatly a keeper too.
The 16-50 which I also shot a little more my sample seems to be softer at f2.8 also in the center. Its fine at f4.0 and faster. I think for now I will give it back and first stay with the primes. I might add a 16-50 in a long term if I will see how much I shoot the Pentax.
Both cameras at base ISO.
IQ:
At f2.8 the Nikon 50 seems to beat the 35Macro regarding sharpness at long distance, at f4.0 the difference is minimal.
The 70 Limited seems to be on par with the Nikon 105DC at f2.5.
What you see is that the ff 105DCC shows clearly less DOF than the 70/2.4 at f2.4.
Color I think I prefer the Pentax slightly.
So yes, regarding blurred background and shallow DOF the ff (as we all would expect) does allow more flexibility.
Handling:
Also shooting both cameras at the same time you see the quite obvious difference in viewfinder size.
Also while the K5 is totally fine the D700 fits even better in the hand.
Conclusion for today:
Some slight disadvantage compared to the D700 in viewfinder and handling, but still very good for my taste
IQ: Same here - The D700 seems allways as good as the K5 sometimes better (less CA, more microdetail) but also here the k5 with the 35 and 70 limited hold up very well and so good that I would not have any concern
regarding IQ.
Those Pentax lenses are so nice and small-I really like those and I find portability quite a bit better with the K5.
The 35macro is a lot of fun. Definatly a keeper too.
The 16-50 which I also shot a little more my sample seems to be softer at f2.8 also in the center. Its fine at f4.0 and faster. I think for now I will give it back and first stay with the primes. I might add a 16-50 in a long term if I will see how much I shoot the Pentax.
ptomsu
Workshop Member
Really interesting!
I also think that K5 plus Pentax lens portability is better than that of the D7000.
Having said that - the D7000 seems to beat the K5 in most respects and actually is cheaper. And as a Nikon shooter it would probably be the consequent step to go - at least for me. Depends of course on the optics one uses, I would go for the 16-85, which is an excellent lens because a friend of mine uses it for pro work and is very happy with it. Adding to that the DX 70-300 (results in 105-450) which is also a great and tiny lens that would be a good combo.
Sure - not what you can get from Pentax
Still confused
Peter,
I think the biggest difference in bulk/weight make the lenses not the body.
Anyways-I dont know yet if m step makes any sense with having so many Nikon equipment-I still enjoy the K5 right now-specially with the 35macro.
The other thing is color where I seem to like Pentax quite good (but as others say probably something one can adjust).
Tom
I think the biggest difference in bulk/weight make the lenses not the body.
Anyways-I dont know yet if m step makes any sense with having so many Nikon equipment-I still enjoy the K5 right now-specially with the 35macro.
The other thing is color where I seem to like Pentax quite good (but as others say probably something one can adjust).
Tom