> I know you were. The thing that, frankly, bugs me the most about your > criticisms, in particular, is that they come from someone who has no > personal experience with Pentax bodies since the K-7. What you cannot > know, from personal experience, is that Pentax "leapfrogged" the > competition in the APS-C world, in the metric that is important to > most people (Image Quality, even at higher ISOs) when they introduced > the K-5. In your mind, apparently it didn't happen. In fact, it has > been only relatively recently that anything APS-C has even come close > to SURPASSING it. And as they do, Pentax appears to be raising the bar > yet again with the K-3. (I'm not one of those people who just has to > have the latest/greatest of everything, but I'm happy to see that > after their ownership change and all of the wondering by the Pentax > faithful that the company "answers the bell" with so strong of a > product - according to the specs.
And I say, so what if I didn't own a K-5? Whether I've owned a K-5 or not has not been the basis for my camera purchasing decisions. You make numerous claims about it's superiority yet I can figure you haven't actually picked up the competition and examined the output scientifically. What criticisms? Not of the K-5. I've never said the K-5 is an inferior camera in it's class. In fact by all accounts it's excellent in terms of high ISO. It seems to me that you take statistics and statements that are in reality a 'splitting of hairs' and then make grandiose statements like 'Pentax "leapfrogged" the competition in the APS-C world, in the metric that is important to most people (Image Quality, even at higher ISOs) when they introduced the K-5'. dpreview writes in it's K-5 review: The Pentax K-5's noise reduction does a remarkably good job and is pretty much on par with the best performing APS-C camera in low light that we've tested so far, the Nikon D7000 (not that much of a surprise as both cameras are built around the same sensor technology)... Generally the differences in high ISO performance between the APS-C models of this latest generation of digital SLRs is fairly small. The K-5 uses a slightly more contrasty tone-curve than the Nikon D7000 but in terms of detail the difference between the two cameras is marginal. dxomark: gives the K-5 sensor a score of 82 and the D7000, a score of 80. The K-5 is clearly better, right? dxomark goes on to write: Sensor Overall Score is logarithmic. A 5-point difference on the scale corresponds to a gain or loss of sensitivity of 1/3 of a stop. So the difference in real terms is less than 1/6 of a stop. Luminous Landscape explains: Don't get hung up on score differences of only a few points: 5 points is roughly the smallest visible difference in actual photos (DxO says it is equivalent to 1/3 stop). The measurements themselves appear to be repeatable in DxO’s lab to within one or two points Those and other reviews lead me to believe that the statement "Pentax leapfrogged the competition" is inaccurate and exaggerated. The reality is that the IQ between the K-5 and the D7000 at least, is almost identical and if one does have an edge it's likely invisible to the eye. Pentax leapfrogged their prior model, and the prior generation of sensors, not the competition. > I realize it remains to be seen if the K-3 delivers on what its specs > promise, but if you can name another APS-C camera ( that has been > announced today) that comes out in front of the K-3 even if only in > specs, I think we'd all love to hear it. If you can't then the K-3 > will become the APS-C front-runner. It will have gotten there by > leapfrogging the competition. Nothing wrong (at all) with Bill's > choice of words and thus nothing to react to, unless you have a > (severely dull) axe to grind. That's plain ridiculous Darren. If I can name another APS-C announced TODAY? What about tomorrow? I don't think the K-3 leapfrogs the competition. It's merely the newest Pentax model, to be followed by newer models by others, and by Ricoh (Pentax). If leapfrogging is something to be proud about then we might as well admit it doesn't really matter because you know how the game works. > Aside: If the switchable AA filter thing works as intended, it will be > something that Nikon and Canon *can't* easily replicate - since they > don't have sensor movement as part of their current design. Sony > might, some day. I frankly see that feature as a footnote that would not enter into a purchasing decision. > I sincerely hope you are happy with your D800E and your Sony NEX-7. > They are both fine cameras and I understand your rationale for > choosing them (very valid, IMHO). But what I truly don't get is why it > makes you happy to urinate in the Cheerios of those who still like > Pentax products. What does that do for you? More than anybody on this > list, I'm sure that I've gained the most from your leaving Pentax for > Nikon/Sony. I've gained your Bigma, your DA 16-45mm, and a BG-4 grip. > I'm much obliged. You're welcome. That was Cheerios? I thought it was your beer. :) You seem to take my statements as a personal insult and they're not intended that way. I think it's great that Pentax has the K-3. There's nothing wrong with liking Pentax products. After 13 years in film and then 10 in digital I got tired of waiting for them to catch up in the APS-C arena. As for the K-5, as I've explained before, it was too late. If it had been the K-7 I might have felt differently, but as it was, I was tired of waiting, and I'd still be waiting for FF. Tom C. -- 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.
