Daydreamjay, if the lens will not focus manually either, then you have a fault somewhere.

Maybe there is a misalignment of either the position of the sensor, or the position of the focussing screen. I suspect it's the focussing screen, because if it looks in focus through the lens during a manual focus test, then it should be in focus on the sensor (they are at the same focal distance).

Although there are lots of reports of 'front focussing' K-5's, and indeed mine exhibits this very slightly in low light (in comparison to another DSLR I own), the images are still in focus, whereas yours seem to be seriously out of focus every shot by your reports. Maybe you should have it sent back to Pentax for re-alignment. It would seem the best thing to do at this stage.

Have a go with the colour setting set to reversal film, and turn on highlight correction, & shadow correction to medium. In reversal film, use Ex sharpening, put it up to a higher setting. White balance for the shoot.

You should get some pretty punchy results.

The full size images don't look particularly noisy to me. In fact the noise looks well controlled. There is a big difference between the 'control of noise' by a camera's internals, and 'no noise at all', which is like the holy grail.

All digital cameras will exhibit a degree of noise, even FF ones at higher ISO values, particularly in areas where the exposure is at the edges of that cameras dynamic range, but it's the level to which the cameras processor deals with that noise that gets it a good reputation. The K-5 jpg engine controls noise very well, but doesn't produce images with 'no noise' as is often cited by careless sales people and shoddy reviewers. In tests the K-5 did slightly better at controlling noise than the D7000 for instance, even though they share the same sensor. How you perceive that noise is key. Some cameras exhibit noise much like film stock... i.e grainy, which is seen as being pleasant to many, whilst others try to smooth it out, which looks great at a distance, but may result in loss of detail. Usually, the further up the class of camera you go, the less 'dramatic' processing you get. That's why often a £300 DSLR will turn out punchier results straight out the camera than a £1500 one. Both your shots look really fine to me. A quick edit in PP software, dealing with levels, colou cast, sharpening and then some final noise reduction will produce a significant leap in the images appearance. What you have to remember that the K-5 is capturing a lot more information than the K20D, and dealing with it differently. In its class of cameras, PP is expected, so the in camera processing is less heavy in it's normal colour shooting mode (Bright). If you shoot RAW, you might even feel the images look even worse to start with. One thing I have noticed with the K-5 is the low level of final sharpening in comparison with some other DSLR's. This in my opinion is a really good thing, although not so good if you want to use your images straight out of the camera.

I just did a very quick test between an Olympus E-620 & my Pentax K-5, dim light, a sheet of ukulele chords shot from a 45 angle. I was using a DA 18-55 WR on the K-5, and a 14-42 ED on the Olympus, so both were the supplied kit lenses.

Exposure was f5.6, 1/50sec at ISO 1600 - metered same on both cameras. Auto-focussed using central spot on same line of chords, set frame up identically. Both cameras had no trouble finding the focus.

Getting similar results to OP with the Pentax, every shot front focusses slightly. The Olympus was spot on every shot. I don't have access to any really fast lenses, so the issue is pretty negligible at f5.6. I don't have access tonight to any other DSLR makes, but will try this next week when I'm back at work where we have some Nikon D90's.

You have a fair point here. In the days of 35mm film SLR's we had massive magnification in our viewfinders and split screens, and focus matte areas. it was pretty easy to manual focus in very dim light. Apart from my Olympus E-1, and a colleagues FF Canon thing, every DSLR I've used is like looking through a distant window, and makes manual focussing much more tricky. You can get a split screen for Pentax, made by Katzeye, which could help for accurate manual focussing

link

Hi Darren, any chance you could post one of the duck images with the exif data. We could take a look at your shooting data then, and judge what might be happening?

The image is very dark, maybe up to a couple of stops under-exposed in some areas.
In multi-segment metering, even if the water was bright, the main area of the image is the grass, and no modern camera light meter would be that fooled.
In spot metering, the duck has bright grey plumage which might cause the rest of the image to be darker, but the ducks plumage would be correctly exposed, which it isn't, so it's not that.
In averaged metering, the camera would have definitely not under exposed with a scene with limited EV range, so there must be something else at play here.

hope to be of help

Hi Darren, there are a number of ways to set up the metering in your camera, so the exposure you get may vary depending on those settings. I'm sure more experienced Pentax users will help with specific camera settings (I have only had my K-5 for a week), but here is a really basic but quick rundown on assessing what exposures you might need when out with your camera (any camera).

1. Choose an ISO value to suit the lighting conditions
Bright light/mid day/summer etc - lower value like 100 ISO
Overcast/cloudy/indoor lights etc (most of our light in UK) - higher value such as ISO400 or ISO800
Dimm lighting/after sunset/dimly lit interiors - high value ISO such as 1600 or higher

2. When metering, a camera judges the exposure based on an average grey value to try to get an equal exposure between shadow & highlight, but will often be fooled by large expanses of dark or light areas. It sounds like your shots were exposing for the highlights in your scenes, so your images are dark in the areas you wanted exposed correctly. An expanse of grey winter sky will do this for instance.

Try to shoot with your camera in 'P' mode, and when taking an exposure use the exposure compensation function of the camera. I don't have a K-r so you will need to check your manual for how it operates, but basically, dialing in towards the + value will allow you to expose for the shadow area (as your original shots are too dark), and as each shot will vary, try taking a few shots of the scene and adjust it half a stop up at a time until you are happy that the exposure is right for your subject and not the predominant lighting..
Keep practising this, and carefully examine the results. As you get more experienced attempt to judge each shot, and expose for the subject. You will soon develop a knack for knowing what to set the exposure for.

There is some really good articles on the net on exposure. Here is a good starting place, on what is known as 'the zone system'

link

Good luck

It might just be that you are yet to get to know your new K-5. It takes a while to learn how it needs setting up for any given shooting situation. I'm having the same issues as you, but gradually learning how to make it perform, and just started to see the results I expected. To be honest, Iv'e been here before, having jumped from Nikon film to Nikon DSLR, with another hop over to Olympus DSLR's before the K-5. In each case, first times out with the camera was not very productive, and the images were pretty dire. Just stick with it and you will soon find the way with your new camera.

If you are happy with the results from your K-X and your only limiting factor is your own photography learning curve, then I would say you should stick with the K-X.

.....But, on the other hand the K-5 is an amazing camera, so I understand your question. Maybe you need to ask yourself what would you do with the K-5 that you couldn't do with the K-X? Do you have a purpose for it that your K-X couldn't handle? What are you primary goals for needing it?

In my case I bought one to complement another DSLR I still use regularly (not a Pentax), and mainly because of the following.

I can use it outside in all weathers
I can get better images in low light at high ISO
I can configure all manner of colour/tone/style in the K-5 menus
It is ergonomically very comfortable
It can fire off at 7fps, which is good for sports/nature
It is very quick and responsive when changing settings (proper buttons rather than menus)

What I wish it could do is shoot at a variety of aspect ratios as my other DSLR does, but all in all, it complements my other camera very well, and was a worthy purchase, (the £90 cashback was a nice incentive too).

Thank the Lord for Manual focussing. I think the issues outlined in the report would be the last reason ever to switch brands. The K-5 excels in all other respects.