Igor, few points...
1. I've had both K-7 and K-5. I even thought that K-7's AF was ever so
slightly better to that of K-5 although it appeared that my opinion was
contrary to the common view on the matter. I thought that my K-7 was
ever so slightly more decisive in low light while my K-5 was just a bit
more accurate.
2. I humbly suggest that you (and we along the way) revisit your
impressions after a month of medium to heavy use. Often initial
impressions fade and are replaced by more experienced ones, simply
because of the variety of shooting situations that you would have
experienced.
3. In terms of low light IQ - K-5 (and its derivatives) are probably
second to none on the market right now except big boys such as Nikon
D800 which is entirely different price league and stuff...
4. I've had a chance to shoot with D700 for quite a bit - including one
wedding where I was just playing with someone else's camera. D700 beats
crap out of K-5. But it has to be 24-70/2.8 top of the lines Nikkor and
rather dim light for crap to start getting beaten out of... Otherwise,
K-5 is pretty darn fine.
Finally, it is very fine photograph and you nailed it in terms of focus
accuracy, exposure, etc...
I am glad you've gotten a great new photographic instrument now - I hope
to see more of your pictures...
On 12/4/2012 4:32 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
I've got a chance of shooting with the new K-5 IIs over the weekend
at a tango festival. This means two things: low light and motion.
I am impressed!
I haven't tried Nikon D800 or D4, but I would truly compare the
experience to that I had with D700 in 2010 in a similar setting.
Since it's been more than 1.5 years ago, I don't remember all the
details, so, I am not sure if the AF performance was comparable
or had more missed shots.
One can say that D700 is more than 2 years old.
It is quite possible that D800 (and quite likely D4) exceeds K-5 IIs
in the capabilities, but those are in a different category price-wise
and size/weight-wise.
I haven't tried the original K-5, so, I cannot compare the AF
performance. But, the AF is greatly improved compared to K-7.
And the low light performance is definitely greatly improved over K-7.
ISO-3200 is good (exceeds ISO-1600 and almost close to ISO-800 of K-7),
ISO-6400 is usable, and even ISO-12800 is acceptable at the level
which is probably better than ISO-3200 of K-7.
Here is just one example at ISO-3200:
http://42graphy.org/misc/tango_IR00058.jpg
(slight LR processing, including very slight NR).
Cheers,
Igor
--
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.
