On Oct 31, 2012, at 5:31 PM, Mark Roberts wrote: > John Francis wrote: > >> I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the idea of the K-5 not being a >> worthwhile upgrade from a K10D. > > Ain't that the truth! The K20D was a significant upgrade from the K10D > in terms of image quality and AF. The K-7 offered little image quality > benefit over the K20D but improved menus, controls and general > operation. The K-5 was a big improvement on the K-7... and a quantum > leap over the K10D.
You do realize that a quantum change is the absolute smallest possible change? If I were in the market for a new body, I would not hesitate to get a K5-IIs. The K-5 is an amazing camera, and the IIs seems to correct one of its major shortcomings. If it takes them a while to make the successor to the K5 family, and to get it right, I'd rather they took their time and got it right. Lets face it, in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, the K-5 has nothing to be ashamed of in terms of image quality. I don't think that there's a camera that out does it for less than twice the price. It will be very interesting to see how the IIs scores on DxoMark. -- Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
