Upgrading from K20D to K5 - is it really worth it?

I too have been considering upgrading from the GX20 to the K% but wasn’t sure if it was worth it. The photos above may have just swayed it for me. The higher ISO performance looks fantastic and would suit some of the things (in door low light shots of friends) I like to do.

I may have to start reading all the reviews of it all over again…

Another GX20 owner here that's been putting off an upgrade, though I have been looking a bit more recently.

Can I ask what people think of the autofocus on the K5 as this is something Pentax have always had a bit of a kicking for.

Ta.

edit - I don't think anyone has mentioned it yet unless I'm being blind!

The K20D was the best camera I had ever had, I could not see any reason to upgrade to the K7 As I am not really bothered with Video filming.
But when the reviews of the K5 came out, The better sensor and better noise control made me drool so much I got one and kept the K20D as back up and for the odd occation when I didn't want to jave to change lenses, but soon realised I really love the K5 ( exccept for the Memory card slot cover locking action which is a step backwards) so I Traded in the K20D for a second K5 Yummy Yummy.

There is a common concensus here, and I can only add to it. The K-5 is a massive leap over the K20D in just about every aspect. Noise, low light, AF, build, viewfinder etc etc.
I now have my K20D as backup for theatre shots and event work, the K-5 is my primary body, as it has been for over 12 months.
In fact apart from jobs, the K20D hardly gets a look in now.

It is a wonderful wonderful camera.

In 4 years of gig photography with the k100d, GX20 & the k-x I managed just one jump shot, in my first day shooting with the k-5 I nailed 3, thats the difference for me.

This with the k-x




The shots below with k-5 and the so called slow focussing DA* 50-135mm. Notice sharpness & lack of blur, I think you would have to be really really really lucky to get shots like these with the k20d or GX20..

I agree Gary but I doo see a lot of extra light in the K5 shots which helps AF no end. I'd say your Kx was pulling its puddings out for you.

Either way, kit matters and having kit fit for purpose is what it's all about.

Bear in mind I use the above terms in context with regards to the type of images taken and it is not meant to deter those of us with K10's etc.

Best regards

Guys like Ed Colver managed it in the 70's with manual focus and film, so despite the impressive pics (seriously, they're great) you may have to make your point clearer.

If you're trying to say that the K5 just 'gets out of the way' and lets you fulfil your photographic intentions with ease, then I agree. Compared to the K20D it has faster AF, better metering, and a generally more responsive nature. In dynamic shooting situations you rarely feel you're waiting for the object in your hands to catch up with what your brain is asking it to do. It's a superb photographic tool in a very small form factor - this last bit is an important differentiator for Pentax.

In more 'considered' photography these advantages are largely negated, so the *istD/K10/20 remain perfectly valid and highly competent tools.

I have no regrets getting a K5. Upgrade from K20D great, but use my K20D as a back up or with a different lens. Wouldn't dream of selling the K20D though. Actually I wouldn't consider getting rid of my istDS either. It's smaller and lighter-good for travelling. If cash was a real problem I'd just be happy with the K20D, and wait for a K6 or K7 or....
Cheers
bb2

Well I take that as a "Yes" then - Thank you to everyone for their comments - particularly DrOrlofs photo comparison, Prsjnbs comments about the viewfinder and Cabstars AF comments/photos regarding AF are the final bit of convincing that I needed.

I also had the offer of trying out a K5 from a local PU member (Thank You again)

In the next few weeks (a couple more Classified Ad sales) I will get myself a shiny new K5 - to go with the DGB4 grip I purchased (speculatively) a couple of weeks ago

The low light performance of the K-5 is amazing it works in light
that K20D could only manage to produce very grainy shots

This was taken in the kitchen late in the day with just windowlight
(about 8ft away) and a small bulb on a wall fitting. I had to rely on
the green/beep indicator for focus confirmation the light was that bad.

f/2 at 1/5th 100ISO that's poor even for room lighting, but the
K-5 can handle it OK




K-5 with Tomioka 55mm f/1.2 lens
at f/2 x 1/5th sec. Tripod.
Available light. Dark January 2:30pm
Straight from camera Jpeg slight crop/sharpen.
AWB

RAW would allow more highlight/shadow preservation.

And with the K5 you managed to get all the toes in too

As for Lennys question and others who have joined in with his desire to upgrade, all I can say is ditto to everything previously said by others.

Now just get your hands in your pockets and disturb the moths, you will not regret it. The K5 is a little gem and a joy to use.

Have to agree with the last few posts and offer some more balanced opinion for the OP...
Remember you are on a Pentax site full of Pentax geeks (a compliment all )

The K5 is the latest with all the modern trimmings of the marketplace, improved ISO, FPS, autofocus, and back screen (with live view).

You WILL NOT see an eye popping, jaw dropping difference in image quality.

The Dynamic Range is great, but when the scene requires you will still prefer using bracketed images and blending the exposures or going for full HDR image.

The ISO is outstanding, but if you carry a tripod anyway.....

Will I still be using Noise Reduction software? - Yup

All the debates regarding changing brand or going Full Frame are just as valid with regard to upgrading to the K5. Its the photographer, the technique, lens and the conditions which make eye popping images, not the camera body.

If you need the fastest FPS and need to shot moving objects in low light conditions the K5 is your best/only Pentax option.

If money is not an issue, again, get the K5.

What I like best is not any of added gizmos (I would prefer a K5 'Light' with only basic 'film body' dials that only shoots RAW ), it's the form factor, the feel in the hand, the noise it makes, the big screen, and the way it strangely just inspires.

My GX10 will never, ever, be sold though

Exactly even in daylight my gx20 couldnt focus on an artist jumping!!

Yes the k-5 just allows you to do the job, without becoming a hindrance. When using the GX20 the af took that long to focus that by the time the shutter finally clicked the artist had already landed on the ground. Yes I agree photographers in the 70s where making great jump shots with mf however this is the 21st century and the tools are now available to do this a lot easier

I still like using the GX20, particularly with long lenses, the weight and size balance better I think.

All the Pentax digital cameras are good, just variations of speed of use as technology progresses, I certainly agree with others who say ultimately it is the photographer, however modern equipment does help enormously...

In my opinion, it is. A friend asked why I'd ordered a K5d and I replied that I'd be happy with a new K20d but I couldn't get one. I was wrong. The K5d is a fantastic camera for me. Dynamic range is great, high ISO is a whiz, it foceses faster and more accurately in low light than my K20d. I doubt I'll use it much but the live view actually works. I even like the electonic level. Not that I always use and and not that I now never have to level a horizon but if I have the time, I use the level.

I am absolutely delighted I made the switch. The only complaint I've read has to do with movies and if I wanted movies I've buy a movie caemra. I wish I cuold get a K5 without movie mode. Actually, I'd like one without all the JPEG menus, too.

While I do not doubt the many advantages of a K-5, having used one extensively on a wedding shoot, people are unfairly characterising the K20D.

First, the K20D has better ergonomics and build. The doors are more solid. The SR switch is present. The K-5 has the LV button in a freaking annoying place. Etc.

Second, the K20D takes better low ISO images. I prefer the quality of ISO 100 and the images seem more robust under manipulation. Even at higher ISO the difference is not as great as some make out.... though quite significant. In my tests, corrected and noise-reduced images from the K20D suffered only one stop in comparison with the K-x. Believe me, this was not what I expected! And as I owned two K-x bodies at the time I was a bit miffed. (I have not been able to do extensive tests with the K-5 but it's only a little better than the K-x in this regard, by all reports.)

I never use AF for critical shots, and never would with any camera. I know where I want focus to be sharp; the camera does not. In fast-moving scenes it's quicker to refocus manually than change the focus point or any other action. It's only in easy cases I use AF and the K20D does the job just fine.

Definitely buy the K-5 if you have the money. The higher dynamic range and quiet shutter are two major advantages. But a K20D or K10D will do a great job for the money.