K5IIS V CANON 6D

Hello, I have a K5 at the moment and am considering switching to a Canon 6d, my reason being that I have photos -mainly landscape-on a pod site and am conscious of the need for very high image quality due to the size of some of the products on offer. I've read a lot of posts about the excellent image quality from the k5iis but as the canon 6d is full frame and has had fantastic reviews logic tells me that it's the way to go. I'd rather stay with Pentax though as I don't particularly want to have to start again with Canon lenses.I'm looking for any advice available. Thanks

Easy decision, stay with the Pentax and don't be sucked into believing that full frame is better than APS-C.

We don't cover other marques as such on Pentax User, but what I can tell you is that full frame offers very little advantage over the K-5 IIs. Photographers make some beautiful landscape images from the Pentax DSLRs and lenses, so the only limitation is our own inspiration and skill. ePHOTOzine and dpreview (and others) carry lots of comparison tests and reviews.

A solid tripod will offer an increase in quality with any camera. Which is very bad news for me as I hate carrying solid tripods....

Thanks both for quick replies. Funnily enough John I've been looking into getting a tripod which is more stable but won't break my back when I'm out and about and I've just about decided on the one to get. This would tie in nicely with what you say and with getting the K5IIs , which I've read particularly repays the use of a good tripod . And allow me to continue using my lovely 15mm and 50-135mm lenses

Check this out
Choose the same image at the same ISO then click on the image in each window to view large, you can compare the same piece of the same image side by side on your own monitor by moving the scroll bars, then you decide....

Quite interesting comparison between the 2 cameras ... I only did ISO 3200 but there is a clear difference imo. Saying that the Canon is double the price so I would expect there to be.

The Canon is very good in the upper ISO levels, but it is also virtually twice the price.

I think the comparometer uses camera JPGs. I know I can get far far superior red cloth results using their RAW files with the K-30.

I'm usually pleasently surprised how good my lenses are when I use the tripod...!!

One of our members, marklj has gone from Pentax to FF (Nikon D800). You can peruse his Flickr images and see which ones are shot on the K5, and which on the D800, and whether you think it makes any difference.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/mark_lj/sets/72157625604427157/

I've just had a look and even the ones shot on the humble Kx look pretty excellent to me! However Mark seems resolute that the D800 improved his images.

it is indeed. I've got ISO51200 on the 6D and find it compares to between ISO6400 and ISO12800 on the K-IIs.


Bear in mind I was told only recently, when comparing the K-5II and K-5IIs that actually looking at pictures taken with sensors isn't enough to make any proper comparisons between them. Apparently you actually have to own the cameras in question before being qualified to make judgement. Gulp.

Anyway, never mind the Canon 6D, if the next Pentax DSLR has the same kind of performance as the 6D I'll be pimping Miss Smeggy out in order to buy a couple.

Not own, but at least try for yourself. There's a very good reason for this, basically you don't know what limitations there were on the shots published. If you do it yourself you do.

In addition, it does take time to get to know the foibles and limitations of any camera, and of course whether or not what it can do gels with what you want it to do.

I would surmise that with your gritty style that the K-5 IIs might suit you very well, but we may never get to know.

I'm not talking about the features of the camera, the ergonomics, etc, where of course handling the actual camera is important, but the technical performance of the sensor. You don't need to own said cameras to compare the out of the sensor at various ISOs.

These comparison databases aren't useless ( unless they provide results politically incorrect for some ), they are very useful and very popular and I think it's great that Imagecomparion.com and DPReview amongst others go to great lengths to take out all the variables except one so peopel can make a valid comparison




The K-5II would indeed suit my style as I don't spend a lot of time considering shots and the more accurate and speedy AF it has over the original K-5 is something that would help me.

The K-5IIs offers nothing for my style of shooting though. The extremely tiny increase in detail wouldn't help my shots at all. It would neither handicap them either of course and if all future Pentax DSLRs came sans the AA filter than I wouldn't see that as a problem. It's just there's nothing in the IIs to warrant spending the extra money over the II for me.

But you can't argue it both ways, on the one hand saying that reviews are not to br trusted and on the other that they are scrupulously undertaken. The politically correct thing is a total red herring as it doesn't exist.

Still, no point in going over the same ground time after time.

I now have the sensor in question without AA filter in the form of the GR, so we shall see how that pans out in due course.

I'm not talking about reviews and the opinion of the reviewer, I'm talking about just the pictures taken with the camera. So no not arguing it both ways at all.


In regards to "politically correct" I'm referring to what's politically correct to those justifying their purchase. Sorry if that wasn't previously clear