K7 to K5

This has probably been asked before but is it worth changing from a K7 to K5? ie is the frame rate and auto focus that much quicker and the ISO that much better at higher settings?Many thanks,ops Peter

yes it has been asked many times.
my answer is this... if you have to ask "is it worth it?"... then the answer is probably "No".
If you came up asking "I'm repeatedly losing shots to slow af, and noise and slow framerates, and need a better camera... is the k5 significantly better for sports and low light?" then the answer would definitely be yes.

It is worth it particularly on the high iso and dynamic range front. But I suppose you have to ask yourself how much these things are limiting your photography at present, and what new body Pentax might bring out next. And then you need to think about the cost. If you tend to shoot on sunny days and don't do any post processing, it might not be worth it, although there still would be some improvement. If you shoot low light and like to play around with lightening shadow areas etc, it probably would be worthwhile. The improvements in speed and focusing are far less dramatic than the new sensor as far as I can tell.

Thank you for your comments,after trying out the K5 with various lenses i think that i am going to purchase a faster lense and stick with the K7.

What's your current fastest lens?

Have Pentax 16-50 DA* f2.8 Pentax 50-135 DA* f/2.8 Sigma 150-500 DG APO HSM Tamron 90 f/2.8 macro.Thinking of getting Pentax 60-250 DA* f/2.8 to replace sigma 70-300

Ahhhh OK.

I think you'll find the Pentax 60-250mm is F4
If you do find a F2.8 let me know cos I want one

If you find yourself having to use those fast lenses wide open all the time, a k5 would give you a few more stops to play with. That would give you some more creative control.

The K-5 performance really means you can use slower lenses in situations unheard of before.

I've always loved my Sigma 135-400, but at f4.5-5.6 I really had to wait until good light to use it hand held. It's really come into it's own.

I should have spotted the mistake with

"Thinking of getting Pentax 60-250 DA* f/2.8 to replace sigma 70-300"

A DA* 60-250 f/2.8 would be fantastic!!!. The shallow DOF at 250 would be amazing!!!

The difference between the K7 & K5 was like night & day for me. Not only the low noise high ISO (the K7 is just tragic in comparison, I'd rarely go over 400 with 800 usually tops), and not only the expanded DR or the incremental changes in a number of other areas but the fact that in essence it has made all my lenses faster by being able to use those higher ISOs I'd never dream of using before. If you only have a couple of lenses then maybe more glass is attractive however if you have a few then you'll find more advantages to buying the K5.

I used to go out shooting with both the K5 and K7 side by side but I became so frustrated with the K7's high noise (yes, yes I know there are ways to get around it in a fashion, but not in all situations) that I sold it.

Great quote that will go down well with current K7 owners.

May need clarification.

Best regards

To be fair on Frogfish it's obvious what he means.

No one would claim a camera would increase a lens's light gathering capability.

I'm more than happy that the K-5's stunning increase in higher ISOs performance has allowed me to use ALL my lenses in situations where noise would render the image sub-standard

In terms of the use of the word "tragic".... When I was a K20D/K10D owner I didn't have a problem with anyone saying the K20D/K10D had an ISO performance tragic in comparison to the K-5. I realised they were right and it encouraged me to sell sell all my wives and grannies in order to get a couple.

Saying one thing and meaning another leads to misunderstandings, rather like the old "my 300mm lens is now a 450mm lens on this body" misconception.

You’re correct about the obvious as we both know his intent. There are those that do not and really would take it literally.

But prior to the K5, when there were cameras out there that already had very good high ISO performance you did without it. That to me, as a photographer, makes no sense at all .

I missed the K20 and bought the K7, chances are, I will probably buy the next offering after the K5 (personally hoping that it will be FF). Whatever it is, I will not be putting down Pentax's previous offerings.

As to the OP's question, if you need faster AF, high ISO and want to stay solely in the Pentax camp, then yes it's worthwhile.

Best regards

I have gone straight from the k10 to k5, so no experience at all with the k7. I must say that the constant issues with speed of focus I have had in the past have ruined thousands of potentially good shots I have taken. With the new autofocus system in the k5 I shouldn't have these problems any more. So to answer your question overall, I think yes, I would surely go for the k5 mainly due to this new auto focus system.