K5 versus the GH2

[shadzee]

I've been shooting with Pentax (film and digital) for ever !

Just before the 5DII came out, I sold most of my Pentax gear to go with Canon. I sold all my limited lenses and kept only the irreplaceable (A-50/1.2 & A*200/4 macro). Even sold my FA*80-200/2.8 which is close to irreplaceable as they come. Just kept the K20D and LX for the lenses.

But, I could not pull the trigger. Canons are just too big ;-)

So I bought the GF1 and a GH1. I LOVE the GF1/20mm kit. I take it every where, and I've made many wonderful images with it. I sold the GH1 after the GH2 was announced, and since it had a virgin firmware and could be hacked, I sold it for way more what it was worth.

But the IQ is just not there, compared to my K20D. And, I love to have a good OVF.

Now I'm torn between the GH2 (which seems to have better IQ), K-5 and X100. I'm struggling to choose between;

- GF1/GH2 kit (7-14,20,45,14-140)
- GF1/K-5 with 3 lens kit (15,35,77)
- 5DI / X100 kit (would have to part with my irreplaceables)

At this moment I prefer the GH2 over K-5, but I've yet to see the X100 in person. So I wait... ;-(

My favorite camera in use is the Pentax LX with the 50/1.2 lens. I LOVE the big finder, and the mechanical controls (hence waiting for the X100).

This thread is very intriguing for me, and interesting to see how people compare the K-5 & GH2. Most of you have not used the Pentax for long. I have bad news for you; Once you get used to the interface, and understand how the camera works, you would never go back to Canon and Nikon. Pentax DSLRs are truly developed for photographers, and after a while you'd wonder why the other brands operate the way they do ;-)

References: Pentax LX & Pentax A-50mm F/1.2

 

[jonoslack]

HI Sam

- GF1/GH2 kit (7-14,20,45,14-140)
- GF1/K-5 with 3 lens kit (15,35,77)
- 5DI / X100 kit (would have to part with my irreplaceables)

erm . . . Canon 5DI? or do you mean K-5 with X100?

I spent a happy hour with an X100 last week - it was a gorgeous thing, but I found it rather fiddly - seemed to me that one really didn't need that number of different options.

This thread is very intriguing for me, and interesting to see how people compare the K-5 & GH2. Most of you have not used the Pentax for long. I have bad news for you; Once you get used to the interface, and understand how the camera works, you would never go back to Canon and Nikon. Pentax DSLRs are truly developed for photographers, and after a while you'd wonder why the other brands operate the way they do ;-)

As well as Leica (really my main system) I've been shooting Sony with the A900 (since it came out in autumn 2008 and the A55 - but I had always wanted a small, solid, weathersealed camera since I'd parted with my Olympus E1, and the Pentax fits the bill perfectly, so I got one.

I had a K7 for a month last summer (I sent it back because I didn't think the IQ was up to the lovely body), and I've had a K5 since October - I agree with you about the interface, it's splendid (actually, the old Minolta interface with the Sony is quite good too).

I did have a G1 for a while, but couldn't love it (probably because it felt like a plastic toy, which shouldn't matter, but did).

all the best

 

[markwon]

Oh how I disagree.....

I own the GH2 and my K-5 arrived today. I knew before I bought it, that I would like the K-5....and I do. It just feels right.

That being said, I feel the GH2 is a wonderful camera.....a joy to use. Primarily the difference for me is the ability to use adapted lenses and the have the articulating /magnifying EVF for precise focus. I can mount lenses that have no rivals....if need be, hold the camera at waist level and cradle it while I take the shot.

I'll never get out of the m4/3 format....it's just too much fun.

What I do see (and only after one day) is that the K-5 will replace my FF + APS-C Canon's.

R

Rich, I guess it's already happened Glad to hear that you are enjoying the K5! Looks like the "Cannons" will need a new home soon.

 

[Rich M]

Rich, I guess it's already happened Glad to hear that you are enjoying the K5! Looks like the "Cannons" will need a new home soon.

Yes....I'll be taking pics this weekend of various lenses/bodies to put up for sale.

I was bummed to read about your back-focusing issue with the FA77. Hope you resolve it successfully.

R

 

[markwon]

Yes....I'll be taking pics this weekend of various lenses/bodies to put up for sale.

I was bummed to read about your back-focusing issue with the FA77. Hope you resolve it successfully.

R

Rich, I still need to test the lens in a more controlled setting but here are my preliminary observations:

1. On a tripod with AF set to spot, the focus is accurate 5/5 times. With SR off.

2. Handheld, when locking focus on a small object or small part of an object, the AF seems slightly off. This can also just be user error. I'm still not at home with the bulky body, coming from the GH2/GF1

3. I've also realized that I'm not used to so much CA in images, coming from my ASPH Leica lenses and CA controlled via software, Panny bodies and lenses. Sometimes the heavy fringing and CA makes the AF seem off.

I get the impression that I was jumping the gun on this. Partially because my Sigma 17-50 DID backfocus. With the 77 it seems to be a combination of user error due to unfamilarity with the camera, heavy CA from the lens, and an occassional AF error (which is understandable to a certain extent).

In conclusion, unless I find something very strange in the next week or so, I'll just keep the lens. BTW--all this is using the K5 fine focus adjust settings set to OFF.

I would still recommend the lens. It draws beautifully!

 

[Amin]

I am all the more pleased with the K-5 AF because I was expecting problems, having to use microadjustments, etc. The thing is just bang on perfect with my one lens (DA70). It's rather shockingly able to pin the AF on an eye hiding behind glasses in a way that I've never been able to do with any other camera-lens combo. My previous best combo for this was D700 and AF 85/1.4, but the Pentax is more consistently able to do it.

 

[jonoslack]

I am all the more pleased with the K-5 AF because I was expecting problems, having to use microadjustments, etc. The thing is just bang on perfect with my one lens (DA70). It's rather shockingly able to pin the AF on an eye hiding behind glasses in a way that I've never been able to do with any other camera-lens combo. My previous best combo for this was D700 and AF 85/1.4, but the Pentax is more consistently able to do it.

Great Amin - I've found the focusing to be great as well . . . as long as you understand that the actual area is larger than the spot (but you had to understand that with the D700 too!)

I've reset my camera to no adjustments, and it's working just fine.

 

[Armanius]

I was messing around with a Tamron 17-50 yesterday night, and like the Sigma 17-50, the thing was front focusing at low tungsten light. I then did the firmware 1.03 upgrade, and it was better. But it still required a -10 adjustment to get the Tamron compliant.

 

[vincechu]

Wow this thread is a really interesting read. The thing I really liked when reading this thread is seeing how everyone has their individual needs and how their camera choice reflects this. No matter what choice everyones made I still think they're both very fine cameras - my personal opinion is that we've gotten to the point in technology where all new DSLR's have great IQ, its just picking the feature set or handling which suits you.

I used to have the G1, then d7000, and now finally the K5. The G1 was perfect except lowlight performance. The D7000 had the IQ but I just didn't like the look of the photos from it (had a weird yellow hue) and the grip imo was really uncomfortable. The k5 overcame my dislikes of the d7000, gave me weatherproofing and access to a range of small primes with high IQ. My favourite thing about the K5 is the ergonomics, it fits my hand perfectly and good button/menu access.

However what I really miss is the tilt/swivel screen and the light weight of my old g1. I'll definately return to m4/3 one day and I'm waiting for the rumored "pro" olympus or panny's to come out, the panny 25mm 1.4 and a fast zoom, until then I'm with pentax. Tho my brother has m4/3 gear i can 'borrow' :toocool:

Finally, I'm glad this hasn't turned into Pentax v Panny flame wars, which would have happened else where - gotta love the atmoshpere here

(where's the grouphug smiley when you need it?)

 

[iiiNelson]

Wow this thread is a really interesting read. The thing I really liked when reading this thread is seeing how everyone has their individual needs and how their camera choice reflects this. No matter what choice everyones made I still think they're both very fine cameras - my personal opinion is that we've gotten to the point in technology where all new DSLR's have great IQ, its just picking the feature set or handling which suits you.

I used to have the G1, then d7000, and now finally the K5. The G1 was perfect except lowlight performance. The D7000 had the IQ but I just didn't like the look of the photos from it (had a weird yellow hue) and the grip imo was really uncomfortable. The k5 overcame my dislikes of the d7000, gave me weatherproofing and access to a range of small primes with high IQ. My favourite thing about the K5 is the ergonomics, it fits my hand perfectly and good button/menu access.

However what I really miss is the tilt/swivel screen and the light weight of my old g1. I'll definately return to m4/3 one day and I'm waiting for the rumored "pro" olympus or panny's to come out, the panny 25mm 1.4 and a fast zoom, until then I'm with pentax. Tho my brother has m4/3 gear i can 'borrow' :toocool:

Finally, I'm glad this hasn't turned into Pentax v Panny flame wars, which would have happened else where - gotta love the atmoshpere here

(where's the grouphug smiley when you need it?)

It helps when so many people own or have owned both. Most people understand a camera is a tool and preferences are 100% subjective.

 

[vincechu]

I was messing around with a Tamron 17-50 yesterday night, and like the Sigma 17-50, the thing was front focusing at low tungsten light. I then did the firmware 1.03 upgrade, and it was better. But it still required a -10 adjustment to get the Tamron compliant.

Armando, I read over at PF that the new firmware 1.03, has mixed results. For some it fixes completely, whilst for some it improves things.

I was just lucky that my k5 has no AF issues (though my 31ltd needs +3 correction, which was a bit disappointing)

I guess this is one reason why m4/3 is better in one aspect, live view CDAF doesn't have any BF/FF issues (i think?)

 

[vincechu]

It helps when so many people own or have owned both. Most people understand a camera is a tool and preferences are 100% subjective.

+1 perfectly said, especially the second part

 

[jonoslack]

HI Vince

my personal opinion is that we've gotten to the point in technology where all new DSLR's have great IQ, its just picking the feature set or handling which suits you.

I couldn't agree more.

I used to have the G1, then d7000, and now finally the K5. The G1 was perfect except lowlight performance. The D7000 had the IQ but I just didn't like the look of the photos from it (had a weird yellow hue)

Really? - still? - Peter said that was all sorted now, but it was why I sold my D3 / D700 and all those lenses and moved into Sony 2.5 years ago!

Finally, I'm glad this hasn't turned into Pentax v Panny flame wars, which would have happened else where - gotta love the atmoshpere here

Great isn't it - well, most of the time :ROTFL:

 

[Amin]

I guess this is one reason why m4/3 is better in one aspect, live view CDAF doesn't have any BF/FF issues (i think?)

Yes, that's correct Vince. Live View on the K-5 should likewise have no such issues with BF/FF.

The other thing about having a live view CDAF system is that focus shift is a non-issue. Leaving some uncorrected spherical aberration can make bokeh more pleasing but causes focus shift with PDAF systems. Not so with CDAF :thumbup:.

 

[jonoslack]

Yes, that's correct Vince. Live View on the K-5 should likewise have no such issues with BF/FF.

Quite right - it's really good on the K5, but it's important to change it to CDAF, as it defaults to phase and clatters around with the mirror. It's a pity that it's not tilt/swivel, but you can't have everything.

 

[Armanius]

Armando, I read over at PF that the new firmware 1.03, has mixed results. For some it fixes completely, whilst for some it improves things.

I was just lucky that my k5 has no AF issues (though my 31ltd needs +3 correction, which was a bit disappointing)

I guess this is one reason why m4/3 is better in one aspect, live view CDAF doesn't have any BF/FF issues (i think?)

At this point, I don't think problems that I'm seeing are K-5 related. Rather, it's lens related.

For example, the Sigma 17-50 was front focusing on some testing under low tungsten light. On the same test, the FA100 WR was not. After I did upgraded to 1.03, the FA100 was still not front focusing, and the Sigma was still front focusing. Changed to about -5 on the K-5, and it solved the problem.

Then I did the same test (post 1.03 only) on the Tamron 17-50. It needed a -10 to fix the focus.

All tests on phase detect OVF auto focus.

If I use CDAF in live view, focus was always spot on.

 

[raist3d]

Amin just a note on your GH2 comparison- I do find the K-5 does have significant more DR than the GH2 but you need the subject to show this or play with the RAW. The shot you shot, the GH2 can also do.

Note: I am not saying the GH2 is bad. For the sensor size it has, it's very competitive and the best micro or 4/3rds sensor out there right now by a notable margin.

- Raist

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Interesting thread. I have stayed away from the K-5, partly because of the distributor in this country, but there will be a new one soon, so I was thinking about it for a while. Then I went upcountry with the GH1 and the D300, only to find that I preferred the EVF of the Panasonic to the OVF of the Nikon. If somebody had suggested that a year or so ago, I would probably have had him shot

The sensor of the K-5 is better than the one on the GH2, but on the other hand, the GH2 sensor is much better than the D300 sensor which was SOTA for crop cameras, more or less, only 3-4 years ago (even the E-5 runs circles around the D300, except probably for DR).

So for me, the K-5 is the never ending temptation, but the next camera for me is the GH2 plus 100-300 and 14-35/2.0 (SHG 4/3 lens). Then, I can sell my Nikon gear and see if I miss the OVF enough to buy a K-5. But I don't think so. I even suspect that I would prefer the K-5 to have an EVF :ROTFL:

 

[iiiNelson]

Interesting thread. I have stayed away from the K-5, partly because of the distributor in this country, but there will be a new one soon, so I was thinking about it for a while. Then I went upcountry with the GH1 and the D300, only to find that I preferred the EVF of the Panasonic to the OVF of the Nikon. If somebody had suggested that a year or so ago, I would probably have had him shot

The sensor of the K-5 is better than the one on the GH2, but on the other hand, the GH2 sensor is much better than the D300 sensor which was SOTA for crop cameras, more or less, only 3-4 years ago (even the E-5 runs circles around the D300, except probably for DR).

So for me, the K-5 is the never ending temptation, but the next camera for me is the GH2 plus 100-300 and 14-35/2.0 (SHG 4/3 lens). Then, I can sell my Nikon gear and see if I miss the OVF enough to buy a K-5. But I don't think so. I even suspect that I would prefer the K-5 to have an EVF :ROTFL:

Maybe the Sony A55 is for you then.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Maybe the Sony A55 is for you then.

Hmmm... now you start to sound like Jono :ROTFL:

Tried it, but like the ergonomics of the GH2 better, and the really good lenses for A-mount are big and made for full frame (no Zeiss 16-50mm f/2.x).