K5 for low light photo's or do I need to go FF

[Sittingsolo]

Thanks Kym for the links. I am trying to decide whether to get the K5 which I have lots of lenses for already or go full frame with Canon or Nikon. I love pentax but I wish they made a full frame.

Mod note - posts moved from K-5 review thread - which is why they are slightly out of order.

[Kym]

Thanks Kym for the links. I am trying to decide whether to get the K5 which I have lots of lenses for already or go full frame with Canon or Nikon. I love pentax but I wish they made a full frame.

What will 35mm sensor give you specially (as in the photography) the K-5 cant?
Are you a pro wedding / fashion 'tog?

Changing brands is very expensive.

[Tommo1965]

a larger viewfinder would be good, also better low light with a 35mm size sensor, but FF bodies are huge.. that's a big thumbs down for me. the K7/K5 is a very good size, very 35mm film size bodies

[Sittingsolo]

I actually take photos of bands for a living. I do mostly studio/outdoor shots for band promotions at the moment, but I am starting to do alot of live shots at night when they perform on stage so I need a camera for low light. I am just wondering if the K5 will do the job. My collegue uses a Canon 5d mark II for low light band photos and she thinks that the K5 won't do a great job. Your right when you say changing brands is very expensive but I may have to. I am just trying figure it all out as I would really like to just get a K5 body and use the lenses I have. Does anyone know how good the K5 is in low light? I would love to see some sample shots.

[Sittingsolo]

I take photos of bands for a living. I do mostly studio/outdoor shots for band promotions at the moment, but I am starting to do alot of live shots at night when they perform on stage so I need a camera for low light. I am just wondering if the K5 will do the job. My collegue uses a Canon 5d mark II for low light band photos and she thinks that the K5 won't do a great job and says I need to go full frame (D700 or 5D markII) I am just trying figure it all out as I would really like to just get a K5 body and use the pentax lenses I have. Does anyone know how good the K5 is in low light? I would love to see some sample shots if anyone knows of an done in low light.

Cheers :beer_mug:

[ameerat42]

I couldn't answer you directly, and I don't want to downgrade the 5D-2's capabilities. But I pulled back a vague memory of a recent read (I read it on a Sigma forum about what they were doing in a Pentax forum).... Anyway, take a look at this as well as any other replies. Am. (Sorry 4 the indirect link.)
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1027&message=36823762&q=pentax+camp&qf=m

[JM Tran]

what lenses do you have currently for the Pentax system? Thats the most important question first

[Kym]

I've moved the posts from the other thread here as the question should be in one place ;)

[Kym]

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/%28appareil1%29/676|0/%28appareil2%29/483|0/%28appareil3%29/629|0/%28onglet%29/0/%28brand%29/Pentax/%28brand2%29/Canon/%28brand3%29/Canon

The 5DII will give better low light performance - but at a MUCH higher cost. ($1,500 vs $3,000)

[Lance B]

The D700 will give you even better low light ability, but again at a higher cost than the K-5.

If you are on a budget, the K-5 should do the job admirably but if you can afford it, the D700 and the associated pro grade lenses will more than likely allow you to get the shots easier. It all depends on cost.

I have both Pentax and Nikon gear. I have the K-7 and associated top flight pro lenses and also the Nikon D700 and associated pro grade lenses and the Nikon would always be my choce for low light and AF speed over the K-7. The K-5, however, has improved it's high ISO ability to the point where it is near that of the D700, but it is the pro lenses of Nikon that shine through for AF speed, especially in low light. Having said that, I am sure that the K-5's IQ results will be excellent.

[xjjohnno]

I'd say the K5 will cut it for live band work.
Low light pics in the CBD. A couple at F2 can't remember the frame rat, ISO was probably 3200.
http://www.xjgarage.org/photos/november2010/slides/KFYV0347.JPG

http://www.xjgarage.org/photos/november2010/slides/KFYV0356.JPG

http://www.xjgarage.org/photos/november2010/slides/KFYV2176.JPG

http://www.xjgarage.org/photos/november2010/slides/KFYV2165.JPG

[Tommo1965]

check out this site and compare the bodies that you are looking at..Id say the 5dII is just a tad better at the mid to high ISO..say 3200-6400...but at extreme ISO the k5 pulls of a better job......id have to say looking at the results on the imaging resources site the side by side comparision is very close...certainly close enough to keep the pentax lenses you have and buy a cheaper K5 body...the 5D II is just not that much better to warrant the change....but if you have a DA * 50-135 going cheap if you swap over...then swap over and Ill grab it from you..LOL

*removed - members with under 50 posts are not allowed to promote other sites : see the site rules : Admin*

[Ozzi Paul]

There are some great images from the K-5 on the Pentax Forums site, shots taken at pretty high iso settings that look like they were taken at lower settings. Pretty impressive I think. :th3:

[TOM]

what lenses do you have currently for the Pentax system? Thats the most important question first

:th3: Spot on....no good chasing high ISO performance when you're only going to throw a zoom on the front. Start with the fast glass, which you may already have, then look for better ISO if you still think you need it. As you do this for a living, then you could justify the big $$ outlay for the glass more than most, and it's deductable.

[doombaj01]

Hi sittingsolo. Here is a shot from the K5 at ISO 1000067384

[K10D]

I take photos of bands for a living. I do mostly studio/outdoor shots for band promotions at the moment, but I am starting to do alot of live shots at night when they perform on stage so I need a camera for low light. I am just wondering if the K5 will do the job. My collegue uses a Canon 5d mark II for low light band photos and she thinks that the K5 won't do a great job and says I need to go full frame (D700 or 5D markII) I am just trying figure it all out as I would really like to just get a K5 body and use the pentax lenses I have. Does anyone know how good the K5 is in low light? I would love to see some sample shots if anyone knows of an done in low light.

Cheers :beer_mug:

This guy does bands and concerts. He uses a GX20. Just covered James Blunt.

*removed - members with under 50 posts are not allowed to promote other sites : see the site rules : Admin*

I have a D700 and D7000, not bought for low light shots. These were taken with my K7 and a Sigma 17-50 OS HSM:

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m38/GaryCatterick/Pentax%20K7/Rockobeach.jpg?t=1298192219

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m38/GaryCatterick/Pentax%20K7/Sunsetscafe.jpg?t=1298192640

http://i100.photobucket.com/albums/m38/GaryCatterick/Pentax%20K7/jetty2.jpg?t=1298192695

The K5 performs better than the K7. Glass is also important, yet not a show stopper.

*removed - members with under 50 posts are not allowed to promote other sites : see the site rules : Admin*

Best regards