Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: tetsuo77 on November 18, 2010, 07:59:18 am
-
Hye dkoons and the rest of people interested in the Pentax system.
In full disclosure, some stuff to remark.
I do not have any kind of affiliation with Hoya, nor Pentax in any of its iterations.
Your mileage may vary depending on what do you expect of the SYSTEM, as opposed to lenses or bodies.
I chose Pentax for a professional standpoint but I do not sell images taken with them: it is for Design and Architecture research purposes, where some of the Pentax system characteristics are very well matched to that kind of photography. Hence, it is not my direct intention to sell or shoot professionally on a controlled environment. I still use the very old *istDS, which suits my shooting needs perfectly. Most importantly, I do not have to learn how to use it.
Bodies and system
The digital Pentax bodies have two sensor manufacturers:
Sony [*istD, *istDS, *ist DL, K100d, K110d and their iterations] 6mpx. Sony 10 mpx [K10d, K200d, Km-K2000]. Sony 12 mpx [Kx, Kr]. Sony 16 mpx [K5].
Samsung 14mpx [K20d, K7]
Overall, both of them have different characteristics: the Samsung sensors have better detail retention when postprocessing, and can easily match the detail of other sensor producers with the same pixel density, but pale in comparison if your ISO goes further than 1600 if compared to Sony or Canon sensors.
Weather sealing: Most of the pentax bodies can withstand weather problems better than other systems. My *istDS has withstood heavy rain with no problem, even when the lens was not sealed. But beware it is ocassional rain, not continuos downpouring. K10d, K20d, K200d, K7 and K5 are fully sealed, and do very well even when shot by a sea wave.
Autofocus system: below par in speed, but above par in accuracy. The Pentax SAFOX implementation is remarkably slow when compared to speed demons, but it is much more accurate, as it double checks the AF sensor infomraiton. Plus, K7 and K5 do take into account colour shift for the AF implementation.
White balance accuracy: in my experience, the Pentax white balance is by quite far the most accurate of them all. It does better reflect the light temperature of any given scene than the lightroom white balance. But, they are not driven to get the most photogenic light. Just the most accurate light for that scene.
A shame Pentax has lost the DOF preview switch on the lower cameras. It worked like a charm on the lower models.
Heft: Pentax bodies are hefty. Not heavy, but have a certain heft. They feel "dense".
Hyper modes: Quite difficult to explain, but remarkably easy to use. The hyper modes are constantly "on" on the bodies unless you specify not to have them. They are very useful on the Av, Tv, TAv and Iso preference modes. What they do [the best explanation I ever found]:
When Pentax brought out the Pentax Z-1 / PZ-1 in the early 90′s, they had re-thought the way a camera’s exposure modes should to be implemented, in a most inspired way. They had the usual range of exposures modes we all know, such as Shutter Priority (Tv) and Aperture Priority (Av). But Program mode became Hyper-Program; and Manual mode became Hyper-Manual. Sure this sounded gimmicky, until you handled the camera and realised what they achieved.
Hyper-Program worked like Program mode, except that if you dialed the shutter button, it would immediately change to Shutter Priority (Tv), as you change to specific shutter speeds. Similarly, if you dialled the Aperture dial, then the camera instantly changed to Aperture Priority mode (Av), as you set the aperture. No need to switch mode dials on the top of the camera. You just turned either the aperture dial or shutter speed dial to change between the modes at will. And if you wanted to return to the usual Program mode, you just hit the * (star) button. Intuitive and simple. (And no, this is completely different than Program Shift.)
Hyper-Manual worked a similar elegant magic in how you controlled the camera’s manual exposure mode. Let’s say you rely on your built-in meter in this scenario. If you use any other camera in manual exposure mode, you have to dial the shutter button and aperture button to get to the correct combination for proper exposure. With Hyper-Manual, you just hit the * button, and the camera entered a combination of settings for you, depending on where you pointed your camera. This combination of settings could be according to a Program-mode line, or according to the shutter speed your camera happened to be at; or the aperture your camera happened to be at. (This was set deeper in the menu according to your preference.)
Let’s say you knew you’d be working at f2.8 .. then you’d just hit the * button and the appropriate shutter speed was entered for you. Perfect for working with the camera’s spot-meter. If you’ve ever tried to spot-meter with a long lens on your camera while hand-holding it, AND looking at your metering display .. then you know how tough it is. But with Hyper-Manual mode, you just hit the * button while looking precisely where your spot-meter is aiming. Much faster. You just hit one button with your thumb, and you’re set.
Now, should you decide you have the correct exposure, but want to change your shutter speed or aperture, then you hit the Exposure Lock button, and change either the aperture or shutter speed .. and the other setting will follow in relation to the metering value that was entered.
With any other camera, let’s say you have 1/500th @ f2.8 but you want 1/200th @ f4.5 .. then you’d have to turn both dials by the same amount of clicks. But with Hyper-Manual mode, you lock the exposure combination, and just change the one dial. Either one. Doesn’t matter. [Nevil Niekerk]
Nowadays, it is the green button the one which does the magic, or the star in the older digital bodies such as the *ist series.
A problem with the system is modern lens avaliability. Cosina has dropped the K mount [not a good sing, in principle, for reasons stated below], and Sigma and Tamron implementations are very slow to appear but for consumer grade zooms.
Tethered shooting is achievable with difficulty.
Navigation through menus is easy and straightforward, with no fancy graphics.
Shutter is quite quiet.
Buffer is usually on the lower side of the competition.
They usually tend to underexpose in order to prevent highlights blowing [and stated as such on the user manual: the exposure is usually 0.5 EV below the right exposure, standard, not to have highlights problems].
And, you can´t show-off having a Pentax: they are not cameras, they are tools [except the flashy Kx and Kr colour combination, which actually is a smart decission: broader market and they look like toys].
The worst handicap is on-store avaliability. Not to worry on big cities, but very tricky for regular size cities. They are very difficult to see on consumer retailers, as opposed to Sony, Nikon and Canon bodies.
And body stabilization.
Some of the bodies can use AA batteries [a must for me].
Lenses and Flashes
The K mount was born as a Zeiss-Asahi collaboration. But Zeiss retracted, and as it was supposed to be a universal mount, it was free of royalties. That is the reason why you now can get that amount of exotic lenses with the K mount, including russian optics. They didn´t have to pay for the mount blueprints.
As said, there are not too many lenses to choose from. But everything is perfectly scaled within the Pentax branded lenses, with no real duplicates or versions to confuse. A broad selection of lenses does not indicate a good selection of lenses. Even the very long lenses can be obtained via personal order to Pentax [they still manufacture the A* 600 mm on order], or adapting 645 or 67 lenses with the propper adapter, sold by Pentax.
It is a very vertical system, not horizontal. Meaning that you can climb up the ladder in lenses with a 35mm mount into 67 mount lenses of the same brand, but very difficult to get good lenses with other brands [moreover, Tokina and Pentax have now the very same parent company, Hoya].
Flashes are very tricky [or Flash Units]. Pentax uses a propietary metering system from the *istDS on [the *ist DS had dual metering system for flashes]. P-TTL is the standard, and that very much reduces the choice to Pentax heads and some Sigma and Metz heads.
So,all in all, it is a good system with some caveats, mainly regarding marketing and brand knoweledge. It is very satisfactory if you are looking for a system as a tool, which renders very neutral images but for some lenses [the FA Limited are very "characterful"]. They are reliable, but slower than the competition. Being slower does not mean they are less responsive. They are perfectly addecuate, specially when using manual focus lenses, where the slowest part of the system is the photographer.
My best advice is not to buy them based on specs, but try them on shops with your own card, and compare the results at home. Handle them, see if you´re familiar with it, how you feel them and how ready they are when your brain goes "click!".
-
I appreciate the input. The lack of availability of pentax is a bit like buying left handed archery tackle off the shelf. Where I live UPS and the internet are my connection to the rest of the photography world :) I have been saving for a full frame DSLR, and have some time to go,but, want to make a smart purchase. again thank you for your help. Dan
-
To be honest, I do think that, apart from the Sony SLT 55 for video recording, there is no other better professional APSC level body out there better than the K5 right now, taking the whole system into consideration.
No, the Nikon D7000 is more of a Canon D60 competititor for the built it presents: the magnesium allow body is partial [as opposed to the fully high grade alloy of the 7d, d300s, K7-K5, Alpha 700 and E5], weather gasketing is partial as well, and apparently the PRIME engine is quite superior to the Nikon Imaging engine, as shown in the Kx, Kr and K5 over their equivalent Nikons with the same Sony sensor.
Sony, though, has got a very good product as well with the SLT 55, if you are well avare of the need to have a constant +.5 EV compensation due to the Pellix mirror light loss.
They aren´t flashy, they´re just there [which is a very good quality for camera equipment].
And I forgot about two quite important facts:
-it is very difficult to achieve the "digital liquid" look of some Canon RAW files straight from Pentax cameras. It does not mean, by any regard, that the detail is not there [quite contrary, the Samsung Sensor Pentax bodies have an amazing amount of detail retation capability].
-ALL PENTAX BODIES RETAIN THE SCREW DRIVE TO FOCUS THE LENSES. Nikon lost it for the lower class bodies [3100, 5100, some expected the 7000 to loose it as well]. That helps you use autofocus lenses from the early 80´s on [from the F series on].
Fredjean: so you did have the DA* 200 F 2.8, right? or is it the 60-250 F4 [which, in that case, you either are rich, or gave a kidney on lease].
Most importantly: Pentax bodies allow yourself to explore and try very many different things with just buying an M42-Pentax to K mount adapter [they are sold from 5 dollars on]. Explore not only how good a lens is, but how BAD a lens is, and you´ll find your creativity up there. Zenith´s Industar lenses are a blast, as the Chinon Fast-Fifties, and they are dirt cheap. Try Yashica, Rokkor, Contax, Hanimex, Samyang, Vivitar [but avoid the current Vivitar lenses, do not go further than the Komine, Kiron, Olympus, Tokina or Tamron made Vivitar lenses], Sears, Honeywell, Jupiter 9, Jupiter 11.
Broken, tinging lenses [Sigma has quite some brown tinging lenses out there], true pancakes [Tessar type pancakes].
You have fifty years of fully compatible Fast Fifties ranging from 1.2 to 4 aperture.
Try the now obsolete 135 lenses.
Or the "soft focus" lenses, which are a blast, and have a very eighties feeling to them. There are at least 3 soft focus lenses in the Pentax History lineup.
-
No, a modest A 200mm f4.
I'd like a FA 200mm F2.8 ED but...
By the way, how do you recognise the super takumar 50mm 1,4 serie 2? from the first serie?
-
Yep, kidneys are not that well paid, are they?
;)
And, dkoons, that is a very good example of what the Pentax system allows you to buy: a good tele for quite cheap.
-
Yep, kidneys are not that well paid, are they?
;)
And, dkoons, that is a very good example of what the Pentax system allows you to buy: a good tele for quite cheap.
Well paid? are you kidding? all the profession is in flame. No I'm not badly neither very well paid but the thing is that I really don't invest that much in the Pentax for the moment.
-
Focusing rings are different. Slightly wider on the series 2.
No cosmetic differences.
-
How do the m42 mount lenses compare with the K and others? I went through my stuff. I have the Super Takumar in 50mm 1.4 and 28mm 3.5
Would they be a fair test on a K5? the first two rental sites I looked up didn't have any Pentax cameras.
Part of my problem is when I used large format, I bought Dagors and Kodaks instead of the newest Nikons and such. Maybe I go too much for the romantic
-
How do the m42 mount lenses compare with the K and others? I went through my stuff. I have the Super Takumar in 50mm 1.4 and 28mm 3.5
Would they be a fair test on a K5? .......
The M42 Takumars you mention are superb (although I favor the 55mm f1.8 ). There is a thread on FM forums devoted to the use of Takumars, although mostly on Canon bodies
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/910305/0?keyword=takumar#8583985
-
Thanks for the link. the discussion is over the 2 cameras I am considering. Dan
-
The M42 Takumars you mention are superb (although I favor the 55mm f1.8 ). There is a thread on FM forums devoted to the use of Takumars, although mostly on Canon bodies
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/910305/0?keyword=takumar#8583985
I don't really understand the discussion that much, to be honest. They are very different cameras. Nevertheless, what it really shows is that very few people have actually used modern pentax lenses.
However, I do understand the o.p.: it OS very weird that such a compact system can deliver, and still dwarf in size comparison. Which is a very important factor for landscapes. Else, ask Bernard Languiller in this forum. He stitches (beautifully, I must say), and hikes with a 35 mm Nikon.
Het legend, nog een keer.
-
I strayed off onto a forum covering the merits of the K5 vs the 5D mk 2
-
I swapped out of Canon and into Pentax for my dslr kit and my only regret is that I bothered with the big C to start with. Why?
- Colours are so much more natural, especially skin tones
- Exposure is so much more consistent, if relying on Auto I tend to use Tv and dial in an extra 2/3rds of a stop. 90% of the time the job is right, this is on a K10 as opposed to the old 30D which never achieved anything like that. Perhaps the big Canons are soooo much better, but I'm not convinced after listening to some dissatisfied users.
- I seem to have to spend an awful lot less time sorting the images out in PS than I used to, often I can go straight to web if they are just event gallery shots.
_ Nice compact lenses and bodies that are sealed against the elements. The amount of dust and cr*p in the air at an oval race meeting makes this feature essential.
All the pictures on this site ( http://www.tipperarymotorspeedway.ie/index.htm (http://www.tipperarymotorspeedway.ie/index.htm) ) were taken with the K10, I hope to be upgrading to the K5 in the near future if only for it's three extra stops of sensor sensitivity. Will I then need vast zoom lenses to get the low light level or action shots? Not at all and all those guys bedecked with several hundredweight of glass will start to look a little foolish.
-
what lenses are you the happiest with?
-
I only have two-
18 - 55 which I used here today- Clare Motor Club (http://www.justinseye.com/Galpics/Ennshwwb/index.htm)
50 - 200 Upon which most of the racing shots were taken.
I also have a Sigma 24 - 135 which as yet I haven't found a use for.
It would be nice to have a 300mm and perhaps something wider at the other end but to be honest I'd struggle to justify either at present.
-
I ought to also mention that I do have a few M42 mount lenses including a Takumar f2 55mm on my first serious SLR, a Pentax ESII but as yet I haven't got round to mounting them on its digital successors.
Two further reasons for loving my current Pentax -
Bike Race (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2qOQkY6nHI&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL)
Tipp Show (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S16fdZm4f0o&feature=BF&list=UL9tgsrfK03mo&index=13)
Bearing in mind that Youtube clips the shadows dreadfully.
-
thanks for the help and the links. If I fool around and not buy until march, I will probably get real torn on what to buy if more new cameras come out! One plus, reading and shopping around is cheaper. ;)
-
I'll certainly be sticking with Pentax and their lenses, not because of the gimmicks but because they produce the sort of images I want and that is the most important feature of all. Good to hear that I'm not the only fan of the make and it always amuses me (or used to) when somebody on the Pentax forum suddenly decides to upsticks and switch to Canon, and it usually is Canon, because of an extra knurl on a knob or a stop on some fancy lens. Nice work if you can get it I guess!
-
At this point it would be easy to go with pentax because I don't have that much invested. About anything out there will be a step up from a Rebel D300 in terms of noise at higher ISO and such. The lack of MTF or much on the lenses is what gives me pause, plus I want the detail from a full frame sensor, and can't afford a medium format. If I wasn't so lazy I'd just stick with my 5x7.
-
Being a Pentax and Canon user, I'd like to point that the real reason one could swich to Canon is not because of fashion. If you are not pro, why would you need to swich to Canon or Nikon D3?
But what Pentax does not have today, is a full system of pro camera+optics+accesories.
Canon has features that really need pros, their gear distribution is examplary, accesories are made by a huge amount of manufacturers.
Full frame is not really an option for pros except some niches like journalism (1DMK4).
AF from Nikon seems to be 1000 years-light better, that is why a lot of sport photographers are using the D3,
Low light capabilities of the FF sensors has nothing to do with what the very good Pentaxes can offer. Take some pics in a dark church with your K5 and take the same pic with pushed isos with a full frame camera and the differtences are not subtle but real.
Canon is full of pro optics that are lacking in the Pentax line.
When and if Pentax goes Full Frame, wich current optics will be suitable? very little indeed.
There are some artifacts in video that are resolved with the 5D2. Video is also very basic. Accesories are expensives.
So Pentax, yes, great, I truly love it, but...it just depends on where your needs are. I use my Pentax for the fun with manual vintage optics, but I do not use it in lands of the 1D or 5D s. It simply does not compeat. IMO.
If there are no Pentaxes in the studios or stadiums it is for a reason.
-
Being a Pentax and Canon user, I'd like to point that the real reason one could swich to Canon is not because of fashion. If you are not pro, why would you need to swich to Canon or Nikon D3?
But what Pentax does not have today, is a full system of pro camera+optics+accesories.
Canon has features that really need pros, their gear distribution is examplary, accesories are made by a huge amount of manufacturers.
Full frame is not really an option for pros except some niches like journalism (1DMK4).
AF from Nikon seems to be 1000 years-light better, that is why a lot of sport photographers are using the D3,
Low light capabilities of the FF sensors has nothing to do with what the very good Pentaxes can offer. Take some pics in a dark church with your K5 and take the same pic with pushed isos with a full frame camera and the differtences are not subtle but real.
Canon is full of pro optics that are lacking in the Pentax line.
When and if Pentax goes Full Frame, wich current optics will be suitable? very little indeed.
There are some artifacts in video that are resolved with the 5D2. Video is also very basic. Accesories are expensives.
So Pentax, yes, great, I truly love it, but...it just depends on where your needs are. I use my Pentax for the fun with manual vintage optics, but I do not use it in lands of the 1D or 5D s. It simply does not compeat. IMO.
If there are no Pentaxes in the studios or stadiums it is for a reason.
I have been reading this thread with interest. I am at that point where my main camera, a 5D, is wearing out after years of hard use. I don't have a lot of lenses, and most would sell for good prices if I were to switch. So I am taking some time to consider options.
I am in two photographic worlds. At work photography is part of my profession - both the making of and the use of images. Personally, photography is a deeply valued creative activity. At work we have Nikon and Canon, the latter being relatively new to our team, mainly because of the 5D2 video. We have shot some TV ads with this gear.
So this post resonates with me. Assuming that the Canon and Nikon gear is easy to use, reliable and has good output, the pro depth and backup is important at work. My teams travel the world, and we need stuff that works, and which has support.
The K5 has attracted my attention at certain levels. The weather-proofing, the IBIS, the reasonable range of basic lenses, and the legacy options. The latter has become of interest to me since purchasing a GF1 and experiencing some great older lenses.
I am more than delighted by the output from my 5D. For the landscape photography I love so much, and some of the portraiture I am starting to enjoy, the FF does, to my mind, offer advantages. So I will want FF, and I will want the level and range of glass I currently enjoy, as well as the range of supporting tools.
A new camera is unlikely to make my images better. It may offer some more opportunities. So I am not in a rush to move on unless my 5D really falls apart. But I have pretty much rules out the K5, in spite of seeing attractions. A Pentax FF might see me reconsider, but it's only a might.
I am more likely to look at a D700 successor or 5D3.
-
I do understand your points, which WERE true until very recently, and were the result mainly of serviceability and, truth to be told, brand hype. But then, it came the 645d, and excuses are starting to seem bit.banal, to be honest. Only stuff to put you off: service and video capability, and speed for sports. The big d is as bulky as the canons and Nikons are, and on a studio environment not really a problem. You still can use the vertical lens system for it. Think something more similar to the LEica solution, but being able to use the biggest lenses all throughout the system.
-
My initial concern on the Pentax was in lenses. After some suggestions on this list, I realized what few lenses I need. I once had a 35mm sigma with a 28-105 zoom, we bought it at the birth of our son and used it so much that the pop up flash was about "smoked out". I used only a 80mm on my Hasselblad for the first 3 yrs and did fine. My real issue was what to buy to obtain the quality I had in medium format film. Secondly was a knee jerk reflex when I price the FF cameras. I appreciate the input on the pentax system, now the hard part is deciding if a crop sensor will suffice, or if I will kick myself for not going FF. Dan
-
I was in the studio yesterday doing portraiture with the Mamiya and ZD back. This has produced some excellent results for me in the past but it is slow and unreliable in operation so I switched to the K10 which fired away on the button producing images that were quite acceptable but much more consistently and an awful lot quicker. No doubt as large prints they will not compare to the Mamiya which is not a problem in this particular case and indeed in very few cases nowdays. So does anybody want to buy my beloved Mamiya kit whilst I spend the money on a K5 and just a couple of extra lenses instead?
Attached photo is one taken on Pentax
-
I currently have four camera systems, and I'm determined to get down to one or two. I travel a lot, and compactness is important. I tried Leica, but it's not working for me, and I'm going to sell it off. And the fact is, I'm tired of dragging my Nikon system around -- the D3 and the D300 are great cameras, but for what I do, there's not much that can't be duplicated by the K-5, which I've had for a couple of weeks now. The biggest problem with Pentax, IMHO, is the lack of a flash system as sophisticated as Nikon's. If I were a company like Hoya, I'd find a way to make the Pentax (accidentally?) compatible with the Nikon flash system...I suppose if you need huge fast glass, then you'd also need to go to either Canon or Nikon, but that's way more specialized than anything I will ever need. I guess the ultimate answer is to understand what you need, and then buy to that standard, and that's what I'm trying to do.
So the K5 (which has really fine high-ISO abilities and enough resolution for my style of printing) will compete with the Panasonic m4/3 as my camera of choice: I have a GH1 and a GF1, with several lenses (most recently added the 100-300) and I'm looking forward to the GH2 this spring. If the GH2 is as good as Michael has said it is, I may leave the Pentax behind, too. But I do like the Pentax; it's compact, handy, and has exceptional image quality. IMHO, it's right there with the D3 in quality, and it's much easier to move around the county. I have a fairly complete system in the overhead bin right now...
JC
JC
-
Begs the question that with an iso of 12800 are vast'n'fast lens going to go the way of dinosaurs? I guess the two big boys will still make them for those who like a bit of bling.
-
Begs the question that with an iso of 12800 are vast'n'fast lens going to go the way of dinosaurs? I guess the two big boys will still make them for those who like a bit of bling.
I tend to agree. I was using the Pentax K20D (I've been Pentax since my Yashica died in 95) for a couple of years and I quite enjoyed it, but the K-7 was sort of disappointing and I was seriously considering a brand switch to Nikon or Canon, with a strong consideration for the 5D mark II. Then Pentax announced the K-5 and it looked interesting, but I was still considering the switch. Then I started seeing images from it and the idea of a switch stopped there. This was an APS-C camera that was approaching the output quality of a full frame, with top notch high ISO capability, all packaged in a camera body that I already knew I loved. So, I bought it, knowing that Henrys would take it back if reality didn't live up to the Internet, especially if I was then looking to buy a more expensive option.
Then I shot this:
(http://www.grumpyjohns.com/files/gallery/180/07.jpg)
ISO 20,000. Well, the K-5 is something you can pry from my cold, dead, hands. At least until Pentax tops it, anyways. As for fast glass, I'm now less worried about it as a result, though I haunt Craigslist for the old, and excellent, Pentax lenses that appear there every now and then. I'm just an amateur and if I can squeeze this out of the K-5, I'm all good, I don't need a monstrous lens just get an additional stop or two of light.
-
The K10 is also remarkable in how it deals with mixed lighting, the photos in this gallery are pretty much straight from the camera. I was using a Metz as well but relying as much on a high iso as I was flash to preserve colour and atmosphere. If the K5 can also do this at much higher sensitivity, as it would appear to do in your photo spqr, then I most certainly want one to!
- Pallas Players (http://www.justinseye.com/Galpics/pnm/palply1.htm)
-
The K10 is also remarkable in how it deals with mixed lighting, the photos in this gallery are pretty much straight from the camera. I was using a Metz as well but relying as much on a high iso as I was flash to preserve colour and atmosphere. If the K5 can also do this at much higher sensitivity, as it would appear to do in your photo spqr, then I most certainly want one to!
- Pallas Players (http://www.justinseye.com/Galpics/pnm/palply1.htm)
I know what you mean, it was that kind of result that convinced me to make the jump from the K20D before the new year. That shot I took was without flash too, though I obviously had to do noise reduction and sharpening in post processing, it cleaned up very well. Personally, I found the K-5 to be a huge jump from the K20D and I found the K20D to be a solid upgrade from the K10D, so I think you'll find that if you make the move, it's a very worthwhile one.
-
For what it's worth, dpreview ( http://www.dpreview.com/ (http://www.dpreview.com/) ) has it's full K-5 review available.
They score it a lintels higher than the D7000. :o. :)
Your mileage may vary.