Fun with the Pentax K5

[jonoslack]

Jono, that shot of the cat at ISO6400 is very impressive. hard to believe how much of the color/saturation is maintained.

Thanks Mark and Jim
Hard to believe what a pain it is to wash up all the cutlery again every time she does it!

But you're right - 6400 on the K5 is not something to worry about.

all the best

 

[Sapphie]

Lee

 

[Rich M]

Thanks Jono, Carl, Jim, Vince and Mark....

First impressions on the 200/2.8.....I really love it. It's very sharp (although needed a +5 AF micro-adjustment). It is not THAT heavy. (It's about the same size as the Canon 200mm prime)
Nice bokeh. It's whisper quiet.....especially compared to the screwdriver drives AND it's weather resistant. You wouldn't know it but was very windy when I took those shots, so once I got the shutter speed up, it acquired focus very quickly and accurately.

I continue to be amazed by the picture quality of the K-5. Both of those shots are uncropped, largely unedited and unsharpened.....in fact the only PP done on the RAW files was to reduce the saturation in the shot of the Brownea macrophylla flower.

When I first got the K-5, I thought it would replace my 7D (it did.....now sold). Now I am thinking it will also replace my 5DII. Having attempted shots like that before with the 5DII, I know that the highlights would have been completely blown out.

Will wonders never cease......

R

 

[Braeside]

Jono, the cow shot is brilliant, and I like the Land Rover comp as well.

I'm stumped about your M8 photo. What's the deal?

It ain't an M8 - Also see the serial number - a collector's item.

If it's in the way Jono ... I'd love to put it to use

 

[scho]

Lee

Lee,

Beautiful high key whites with the K5+43.

 

[Rich M]

Lee,

Beautiful high key whites with the K5+43.

Lee......I agree with Carl.....beautiful.

I was wondering what lens you shot that with.....the 43 is a nice lens.

R

 

[Sapphie]

Thanks Carl, really appreciate it. And to the K5's credit that was ISO 1250. Amazing ...

I keep finding myself on the verge of going the Panasonic GH2 route and always pull back - because I look again at the K5 shots and realise that they are the some of the best pics I have so far taken digitally. So this time yesterday I wanted GH2 (to complement the K5), now I want a Pentax 21mm and 35mm macro!

The great thing about this forum is that I know that I still have a lot to learn, especially from seeing the great shots that you guys are posting.

Lee

 

[Sapphie]

Oh, and one more thing, the biggest issue I have now is that, since getting the K5 I have run out of hard disc space ...

43mm, using it more now than I have in the last 25 years ...

Lee

 

[raist3d]

Indeed! The fruits photo really shows the depth of the colors. Was that with the DA21? Any digital filter or film profile used?

No digital filter or film profile. Just open in Aperture or Mac OS X preview, a bit of sharp and done.

- Raist

 

[benroy]

200/2.8 just arrived...took it over to the garden for try-out...not as heavy as expected...balances well on the K-5...shot at ISO 400 and shutter speed of 1/500...nice color rendition...AF surprisingly quiet.. AF accuracy?

Roy Benson

 

[JMaher]

Roy - it looks sharp enough.

Jim

 

[woodyspedden]

200/2.8 just arrived...took it over to the garden for try-out...not as heavy as expected...balances well on the K-5...shot at ISO 400 and shutter speed of 1/500...nice color rendition...AF surprisingly quiet.. AF accuracy?

Roy Benson

Roy

Were these handheld or tripod mounted?

Woody

 

[benroy]

Hello, Woody. I'll be 80 next birthday and I'm still hand-holding...each year, however, for the past few years, the shutter speeds have increased exponentially. Even with the K-5's IS, some of the pics from yesterday were off...and it wasn't due to AF. I went out early this AM with shutter speed of 1/800...all shots were AF and most were keepers.
I'll upload some tonight.

Roy Benson

 

[Rich M]

Even with the K-5's IS, some of the pics from yesterday were off...and it wasn't due to AF. I went out early this AM with shutter speed of 1/800...all shots were AF and most were keepers.
I'll upload some tonight.

Roy Benson

Roy .....in addition, I found with mine that I needed +5 fine AF adjustment. The difference in sharpness was startling.

R

 

[Sapphie]

Now I have just gone and ordered a GH2. Why???!!! At least I will be able to contrast and compare for myself. Why do pics on the computer always look 'better' some time after they have been taken? Maybe they are still 'developing' ...

K5 + 18-135:

I just can't see the GH2 matching this ...

Lee

 

[ashwinrao1]

Old and in the way . . . . . .
or much loved and going nowhere - depends how you look at it.

all with the 18-135

these two at 6400 ISO

It's the kind of thing which looks fine . . . . . as long as you don't own the barn

Fascinating, Jono

I see an M8, well worn, with a low sn and M9 top plate (based on the OOF renderings at the top of the image). Is this the prototype M9 that you tested ahead of the release of this camera?

Best,
Ashwin

 

[jonoslack]

Nothing like a well work camera Ashwin

Lee - the Cafe Sol looks like the place to be . . . but if that's the west country, then the name must be hope rather than observation :ROTFL:
On the other hand I'm right with you on 'developing' photographs.

Speaking of the west country - I managed to get an hour on the beach the afternoon before we left to come back home. The light was not wonderful, and these two guys were doomed to poor pictures:

I still find it hard to understand why they would be using tripods in that kind of light with an SLR - but hey, whaddoIknow!

These were all taken with the 18-135

all the best

 

[Rich M]

I just can't see the GH2 matching this ...

Lee

Lee.....I like my GH2....but it wouldn't do well with a scene like this with so much DR.

R

 

[Rich M]

I still find it hard to understand why they would be using tripods in that kind of light with an SLR - but hey, whaddoIknow!


These were all taken with the 18-135

They were obviously professionals.

The 18-135 is such a nice little lens. I don't know why it gets bashed so much in discussions. I guess because it's not a f/2.8 :ROTFL:

R

 

[scho]

Now I have just gone and ordered a GH2. Why???!!! At least I will be able to contrast and compare for myself. Why do pics on the computer always look 'better' some time after they have been taken? Maybe they are still 'developing' ...
Lee

You are incorrigible Lee No one else on this forum would ever think of making such an impulsive camera purchase :ROTFL:
Looking forward to your GH2/K5 comparisons.

Speaking of the west country - I managed to get an hour on the beach the afternoon before we left to come back home. The light was not wonderful, and these two guys were doomed to poor pictures:
I still find it hard to understand why they would be using tripods in that kind of light with an SLR - but hey, whaddoIknow!
all the best

Looks like the gent on top was photographing the one below :loco: You were photographing both so who was shooting all of you? :ROTFL: