Interesting. I guess I'm not alone in preferring the out of the box skin tones of the k-7 vs the k-5. Sometimes for skin tones the embedded profile on the k-5 is better FWIW. In fact the embedded profile is better for the k-5 than it was th the k-7. Just an opinion.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 4:26 PM, Bill <[email protected]> wrote: > On 19/11/2013 9:10 AM, Darren Addy wrote: >> >> Saw this thread on dpreview: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52547225 >> >> The guy has 3 year's experience with the K-5. His verdict is "There is >> more visible noise at high ISO starting ISO 640. K-5 shots looked >> cleaner. But, man, cropping ability and details of K-3 on top of >> faster and more reliable AF, including now working well enough AF.C, >> are simply amazing. Also metering is much more accurate, handling >> highlights very well." >> >> Some good images of Birds In Flight (BIF) as examples. >> >> I believe that this illustrates why Pentax could very easily come out >> with a Full Frame DSLR that has the SAME MP as the K-3 and it would >> still be a winner: Larger sensor sites would mean less noise (and >> probably better high ISO performance) and so the FF image quality >> would top the K-3 (for presumably more money). However, if Pentax >> takes what they learned from making the K-3 (in terms of AF >> performance, exposure system, high frame rate, and switchable AA) and >> it would be a serious Home Run. >> >> This is the main reason that I think that K-5 and K-5ii owners could >> pretty easily wait for the FF in 2014, rather than hopping on the K-3 >> now. Think of it as putting $1299 towards your eventual full frame >> body. >> > At base ISO, the K3 is as good as the K5, and one of the first things I > noticed is how much nicer the K3 files are to work with in my environment > (YMMV). In the studio K3 files are as nice as the K7 files. I didn't like > the look that I got from the K5 as much as the K7 in terms of flesh tone > rendering. > That my K5 had useless AF didn't enamor it to me either. The K3 is certainly > a big upgrade over the K5 on many, many levels. The K5II is what the K5 > should have been except for the bozoness of Hoya, and I expect the K3 is > more of an MP upgrade than anything else. > Anyone using any of the K5 emulations would do well to consider the K3, > unless there is no or minimal investment in small image circle lenses. I'm > OK that way, I have a good selection of each, but someone who buys a FF > camera does need to think about the new glass he might need if he is > changing format from APS-C. > > bill > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
