Pentax K-5 dSLR $899 @Adorama

Quote from COTU : If you really look at the the original files for the photos, there is enough noise that I would not regularly shoot at 12800, then again I'm very critical of my T2i at iso 3200. One of your pics zoomed in -> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20950119/K5zoom.tif At 12800, I'm not sure my T2i is much worse though, at least not when comparing to the "king of high ISO" as you say. And no, I'm not saying the K5 is bad at all, I strongly considered the K-r before buying the T2i, and at this price I would have likely gone with the K5. Killer deal with the weather resistant kit lens.

I agree there is not much sense to shoot at ISO 12800. However looking at direct comparison on dpreview one can see that the K-5 output at ISO12800 is much better than T2i (or any other dSLR for that matter).

Looking at the side-by-side comparison on dpreview I can see the difference even at ISO200, at ISO800 it becomes obvious and at ISO1600 it starts to be overwhelming. At least to my eye.

Again, looking at the samples it seems the K-5 is usable up to ISO6400 and it absolutely matches my experience. I do set max limit at 6400 for ISO and if possible try to stay below ISO3200. Looking at T2i samples it seems that it is usable up to ISO1600, then the noise becomes unbearable to me.

It is quite easy to see when you move mouse from ISO100 and up, you will see the K-5 output is very stable up to ISO3200 while T2i output changes noticeably with every step up in ISO.

Bottomline, K-5 does indeed look much better at high ISO than other dSLRs, As you say yourself you are critical of your T2i already at ISO3200 (and it matches my point of view too) while most K-5 shooters do not hesitate to use ISO6400, i.e we start to be critical at ISO12800.

Note for potential K-5 buyers. I've heard ISO5000 hits some kind of a sweet spot for noise.

High ISO performance is just one of the K-5 numerous strong points. I have posted a non-technical review of the K-5 in my blog (see the signature, post titled "Pentax"). Amazon reviews are helpful too, and of course the numerous review websites did review the K-5.

Quote from ivprodigy : Where can I find 6% rebate? mr rebates offers 4% for adorama and 6% for adorama pix, which i'm guessing will not apply to the camera...

sorry missed your post. urlhasbeenblocked lists 6% rebate in Adorama. I haven't checked it though. If you google search for "cashback websites" you will find several cashback website comparison tools, where you can see the range of available cashback %

Quote from vanyagor : I agree there is not much sense to shoot at ISO 12800. However looking at direct comparison on dpreview one can see that the K-5 output at ISO12800 is much better than T2i (or any other dSLR for that matter). Looking at the side-by-side comparison on dpreview I can see the difference even at ISO200, at ISO800 it becomes obvious and at ISO1600 it starts to be overwhelming. At least to my eye. Again, looking at the samples it seems the K-5 is usable up to ISO6400 and it absolutely matches my experience. I do set max limit at 6400 for ISO and if possible try to stay below ISO3200. Looking at T2i samples it seems that it is usable up to ISO1600, then the noise becomes unbearable to me. It is quite easy to see when you move mouse from ISO100 and up, you will see the K-5 output is very stable up to ISO3200 while T2i output changes noticeably with every step up in ISO. Bottomline, K-5 does indeed look much better at high ISO than other dSLRs, As you say yourself you are critical of your T2i already at ISO3200 (and it matches my point of view too) while most K-5 shooters do not hesitate to use ISO6400, i.e we start to be critical at ISO12800. Note for potential K-5 buyers. I've heard ISO5000 hits some kind of a sweet spot for noise. High ISO performance is just one of the K-5 numerous strong points. I have posted a non-technical review of the K-5 in my blog (see the signature, post titled "Pentax"). Amazon reviews are helpful too, and of course the numerous review websites did review the K-5.

After looking at the DPreview comparison, I think the T2i may be better with noise.
Here is the dpreview screen shot. K-5 is left, T2i is right. Top images are ISO 12800, bottoms are ISO 3200. Both sets show the T2i is clearer with the lettering on the right, the womans eyes are clearer and the colors to the left have less noise, at least to me. Great site for people to compare.
https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20950119/compare.tif

Edit-> Looking at the same comparison in RAW format, the K-5 may have the edge, but it so very close that I don't think I would base any decision between the two on it. Interesting.

Quote from COTU : After looking at the DPreview comparison, I think the T2i may be better with noise. Here is the dpreview screen shot. K-5 is left, T2i is right. Top images are ISO 12800, bottoms are ISO 3200. Both sets show the T2i is clearer with the lettering on the right, the womans eyes are clearer and the colors to the left have less noise, at least to me. Great site for people to compare. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20950119/compare.tif Edit-> Looking at the same comparison in RAW format, the K-5 may have the edge, but it so very close that I don't think I would base any decision between the two on it. Interesting.

Personally, I always shoot in raw since this lets me get the most from my images in terms of sharpness, exposure adjustments, color accuracy and noise control. So given many indoor environments have mixed lighting where white balance can be a bit tricky, shooting raw is a must in my opinion. JPEG comparisons just don't hold any value to me...

Regarding using 12800 as being too noisy... I suppose that's subjective and to a certain extent, it's pushing the limits for me also. I suppose if I were a pro, I'd be filtering these shots through denoise (which I have) to filter out as much static as possible, but these were just shots at friends parties and not a paid event for me. Considering some of these shots are at 1/30th and f2.8 @ 43mm, I didn't have much choice as dropping the shutter speed more would greatly increase motion blur due to any slight movement by the subjects. Having shake reduction built in the body helps quite a bit to keep the image decent at lower shutter speeds, but at 1/15th any movement by the subjects will make the images blurry.

Seems this camera major fault is the AF [dpreview.com]. Was this ever fixed with a firmware?

Quote from vagrant10 : Personally, I always shoot in raw since this lets me get the most from my images in terms of sharpness, exposure adjustments, color accuracy and noise control. So given many indoor environments have mixed lighting where white balance can be a bit tricky, shooting raw is a must in my opinion. JPEG comparisons just don't hold any value to me...

I shoot RAW all the time too for the same reasons you give, but RAW data has to be processed in some way before you can see it. The 2 cameras use two different raw formats, and they require two different forms of processing just to see them. You really don't know what the raw data is. JPEG is at least a processed photo of the same format which one can argue is a better side by side comparison of 2 different camera formats.

Another very interesting note for this comparison is that on dpreviews site, both cameras were shot with their default settings. For high ISO noise reduction, Canon's T2i default is a "Standard" Setting. The K-5 has a default "Automatic" setting which allows the K-5 to swing the noise reduction to high as you turn the ISO up. The Canon requires a manual setting change to "strong" for better noise reduction (a setting I normally leave my Camera on). It would be great to see the comparison of the Canon T2i with its "strong" noise reduction setting against the K-5 with its "high" noise reduction setting (likely what the camera does automatically anyways).

Quote from COTU : If you really look at the the original files for the photos, there is enough noise that I would not regularly shoot at 12800, then again I'm very critical of my T2i at iso 3200. One of your pics zoomed in -> https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20950119/K5zoom.tif At 12800, I'm not sure my T2i is much worse though, at least not when comparing to the "king of high ISO" as you say. And no, I'm not saying the K5 is bad at all, I strongly considered the K-r before buying the T2i, and at this price I would have likely gone with the K5. Killer deal with the weather resistant kit lens.

I would have gone with the k5 if it was this price before I bought my Nikon D5100.
The k5 was the camera I wanted, but only settled because amazon had a great deal
on d5100 camera/accessories.

Quote from COTU : I shoot RAW all the time too for the same reasons you give, but RAW data has to be processed in some way before you can see it. The 2 cameras use two different raw formats, and they require two different forms of processing just to see them. You really don't know what the raw data is. JPEG is at least a processed photo of the same format which one can argue is a better side by side comparison of 2 different camera formats.

Using the jpegs to compare against one another is only showing you the camera's processing algorithm to generate a compressed image. It is not a measure of the best image a camera can deliver. I think we agree with that raw images will give you the best picture quality because there is more image stored within that file. This is why I think comparing raw images are the only ones that I consider relevant.

And actually, the K5 allows users to choose between 2 raw formats: PEF and DNG (which adobe claims to be " a publicly available archival format for the raw files").

Quote from COTU : Another very interesting note for this comparison is that on dpreviews site, both cameras were shot with their default settings. For high ISO noise reduction, Canon's T2i default is a "Standard" Setting. The K-5 has a default "Automatic" setting which allows the K-5 to swing the noise reduction to high as you turn the ISO up. The Canon requires a manual setting change to "strong" for better noise reduction (a setting I normally leave my Camera on). It would be great to see the comparison of the Canon T2i with its "strong" noise reduction setting against the K-5 with its "high" noise reduction setting (likely what the camera does automatically anyways).

One interesting feature the Pentax K5 has is that you can set how much NR is applied at each ISO. If you believe, as I do, that denoise works better than the camera does at reducing noise while preserving detail, you can save NR for only high iso settings. For the most part though, I only use the auto setting the camera uses. But some may like the added control/ customization that the K5 allows for.

Quote from COTU : After looking at the DPreview comparison, I think the T2i may be better with noise. Here is the dpreview screen shot. K-5 is left, T2i is right. Top images are ISO 12800, bottoms are ISO 3200. Both sets show the T2i is clearer with the lettering on the right, the womans eyes are clearer and the colors to the left have less noise, at least to me. Great site for people to compare. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/20950119/compare.tif Edit-> Looking at the same comparison in RAW format, the K-5 may have the edge, but it so very close that I don't think I would base any decision between the two on it. Interesting.

You hit an interesting topic here. It will definitely lead us beyond the scope of sclickdeals website of course.

The issue with that particular test you mention have been discussed a lot. To the point that dpreview was forced to redo some of the tests. Bottomline is: the test are (hopelessly) flawed. The K-5 samples are focused on a different plane compared to the T2i shots, which accounts for less "clear" lettering and woman's face (and anything else in the foreground), while you can see the background (such as the playing card) will be "clearer" in the K-5 samples, you can see it very well on the ISO100 samples. The whole issue is even more complicated by uneven lens and settings choice. The lens used in the T2i test is notoriously sharper than the lens used for the K-5 shot (which is a minor thing IMHO compared to different focusing). An extra indicator the test is just flawed can be found by looking at EXIF. The K-5 jpegs are terribly over-sharpened and contrast is set at hard! Even on the ISO100 samples which claim no sharpening. This is an outright mistake which sure can happen when you have to run a lot of tests.

Though of course I brought up the reference to those test first except I was looking at their specific HIGH-ISO test page in K-5 review, where you can also select other cameras to compare. I trust that test a bit more since it is focusing on noise unlike the 3Dstudio scene, where there are just too many factors at play. Of course mistakes found in one test mean any test there may be flawed.

It's not that I blame dpreview or believe in conspiracy theories according to which they favor Canon, the whole idea of this kind of testing is mute. Even the more rigorous test (such as the ones by DXOMark) are not very much relevant to real photography.

I do believe in fact all this pixel-peeping and mesurbating is pointless and all these camera models are close enough to each other, so that those small differences do not matter. I'm sure T2i is an amazing camera and more than capable. Personally I focus on usability much more (and in this regard K-5 is a unique camera too).

Quote from 2devnull : Seems this camera major fault is the AF [dpreview.com]. Was this ever fixed with a firmware?

Most agree the AF problem in certain conditions is real. (The most extensive and authoritative source on it is Falk Lumo). However the situations when this issue happens are quite rare. Of course that depends on the kind of photography you do.

There was a firmware update which claimed to address the issue, however Falk Lumo tests confirmed the problem is still there under some conditions.

With every new firmware released (and Pentax is quite good at releasing timely updates) there are users who claim the problem has been solved, personally I'm skeptical about these reports.

After reading a bunch of threads on this I think:
1. most reported Pentax AF problems are user error (even though some are real)
2. other brands cameras (such as Nikon D7000) have also been reported to have similar problems (and maybe most of them are user error too)
3. It is maybe still true that AF is not the strong point of Pentax and NIKON AF is generally regarded higher.

In my personal experience:
- I rarely encounter the situation when the AF issue happens
- it is easy to work around

It is possible I underestimate the problem though, the above is nothing but my personal opinion.

Quote from COTU : Another very interesting note for this comparison is that on dpreviews site, both cameras were shot with their default settings. For high ISO noise reduction, Canon's T2i default is a "Standard" Setting. The K-5 has a default "Automatic" setting which allows the K-5 to swing the noise reduction to high as you turn the ISO up. The Canon requires a manual setting change to "strong" for better noise reduction (a setting I normally leave my Camera on). It would be great to see the comparison of the Canon T2i with its "strong" noise reduction setting against the K-5 with its "high" noise reduction setting (likely what the camera does automatically anyways).

If you go to the dedicated "Noise and Noise Reduction" analysis page in the K-5 review, you will find exactly that. You can compare noise in different cameras at various settings. This is what I was referring to initially.

At "NR Off" if I move the mouse over different ISO values I see K-5 delivers acceptable level of noise up to ISO6400 while the T2i up to ISO1600, the ISO6400 value for the K-5 matches my real-life experience. Of course it is my subjective interpretation of what I see.

K-5 is great. I just wish Pentax had something like T3i or 5100. At present their K-r appears a bit inferior and the K-5 is lot more. Better in lots of ways but then heavier and more expensive too. I think there may be other buyers like me who would like a $600 body with better image quality at higher ISO than T3i/5100, more cross-type focus but light weight (no auto-focus motor, no pentaprism, slower burst rate and so forth).

pentax lens prices went crazy high couple years ago. don't see much drop as referenced here. Look at prices of 16-50/2.8, 50-135/2.8, 60-250/4... absurd relative to Canon & Nikon.

Quote from seasix : pentax lens prices went crazy high couple years ago. don't see much drop as referenced here. Look at prices of 16-50/2.8, 50-135/2.8, 60-250/4... absurd relative to Canon & Nikon.

The prices increase was probably related to Pentax being bought out by Ricoh. So some people said.