Jump to content

It's Official the K-5 is a "Pro" Camera


kfrog

Recommended Posts

<p>To be honest, I never understood why the K10D, K20D, K-7 and the K-5 where not considered Pro? I mean who decides this? In the Canon and Nikon world unless the camera is ''FF'' it is also not considered pro. Heck the D300S is considered semi pro....Is not a pro anyone who makes money at something? If I shot a wedding with my LX-5 and charged $4000.00 for a portfolio of 12 photos would not my LX-5 be a ''pro camera''? Afterall it just made me some cash. Seriously.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I've always considered my K10d a pro camera. It paid for itself, lenses and accessories with the money earned being used.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Bingo...<br>

.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>In the Canon and Nikon world unless the camera is ''FF'' it is also not considered pro. Heck the D300S is considered semi pro</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yep, even though quite a few pros went with the D200 over the D2X back in the day. And until recently (if not still the case) the majority of working journalist were using Canon XXD (10,20,30,40D) class bodies. Not sure how this is shaking out with the 7D class and then the 5D class.</p>

<p>Now lets get into our monthly pro vs non pro thread!</p>

<p>Or, I can summarize a few things and we can save some bytes on photo.nets servers.</p>

<p>1. A pro camera is any camera that makes you money. All cameras are capable of making money, so we can assume that some cameras are merely "better suited" to making you money with longer service lifes and better build quality.</p>

<p>2. Magazines, review sites, and the camera companies themselves need nice clean categories to simplify sales and pricing structure, as well as give you gear envy. They have a singular purpose, sustaining their own existence by convincing you to buy new gear.</p>

<p>3. Who cares!</p>

<p>4. No Pentax doesn't have the lens rental options of Canikon, and this has been discussed over and over. Are we all willing to agree to this? (all together) YES!</p>

<p>5. Nikon and Canon cost more for the support services they offer, so freelance photogs might be better off forgoing the support to gain lower cost equipment upfront, which they can transfer the savings to backup equipment faster negating catastrophic failure. If I can buy 2 cameras and 2 lenses for the cost of 1 Canon camera and lens (which I'm implying offers equal quality), I've reduced quite a bit of the liability of lack of support services upfront. If my camera makes the same amount of money as Canikon per shoot, I can reinvest back into my system for lower cost and continue to bolster my system for on-site/event failure proofing! More money in my pocket, less chance of failure...how is this a losing proposition. It's not, but it doesn't fit into a neat Pro/Prosumer/Entry level categorization that the above use to sell you products!</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Dave,</p>

<p>Most likely they said, "wow, a K-5, thats a pro camera, we should buy a print!"</p>

<p>You know, what Kerrick James told Miserere does seem to stand out to me as these threads pop up. Perhaps we should start a new thread titled, "do people ask you what camera/format you used before deciding to buy a print."</p>

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Lately I've noticed Pentax is getting a lot of coverage what with the silver limited lenses, limited edition silver K-5 and new now k-mount Sigma telephoto lenses. After all that I saw this article and it got me to thinking that Pentax seems to be making a <em>marketing</em> push. Pentax? Marketing? Is it possible?</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Of course it's a 'pro' camera! A 'pro' camera is one that is used by 'pro' photographers and there are at least 3 using the k5 here in the UK,...there is someone using it for candids at wedding receptions,....a bloke who takes pix of people having donkey rides on the beach,...he will be using one this season,...and, finally, there is an estate agent in my own town who uses his to snap the houses he sells!........If that's not pro use then i'd like to know what is!</p>

<p>........It's a shame the k5 still won't reach the requirements of the UK print industry especially since picture agencies have followed suit. Canon have met the need with the EOS 550 which is now a ppular pro back up body, although it's such a nasty camera compared to the wonderful k5. .......Still, perhaps in a few more years.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The standard requirement for UK print industry is that interpolation is not more than 120% to make 300ppi for an A3 reproduction. This is backed up by TIFF 'ideal' size requirements. I'm having to wrestle with this so it's all still a bit hazy for me at the moment as it's taken me out of my knowledge zone a bit! My understanding is that the k5, like most amateur cameras, will not do the business, but Canon has given the 550 (same basic price as k5) the required capability and it is being sold on this requirement to my certain knowledge. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I can hear the Math Police Sirens coming after me and I haven't even said anything yet... But someone please correct me if I'm wrong...</p>

<p>The highest resolution of the K-5 is 4928x3264 (16.3MP pulled from dpreview) and if we're printing at 300dpi... 4928/300=16.43 inches wide BY 3264/300=10.88 inches high.... 16.43x10.88 is a greater area than 11.69x8.25 (A4-ish... I'm rounding to the nearest hundredth on this). If I'm doing my math right... that shouldn't be over 120%, it should be less than 72%... meaning that 100% crop would actually be less information than the 16MP sensor is putting out...</p>

<p>The 550D is reportedly 5184x3456 (18MP pulled from dpreview) and printing at 300dpi... 5184/300=17.28 inches wide BY 3456/300=11.52 inches high. This output is even greater than the A4, meaning even less information is required for "perfect 100% crop" than the K-5....</p>

<p>So... I feel completely derailed... I'm not a mathmagician and my head is spinning.... On the other hand my 6MP *istDS has perfectly wonderful 8x10 output.... so.... please... no one call me a pro unless I'm shooting film that's been drum scanned... :-)</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Could I be wrong here...but hasn't the pixel dimensions of cameras ever evolved over the years.</p>

<p>For quite a while professionals were using Canon D30s (not 30Ds) and 3MP sensors, then 6MP Nikon D1Xs.</p>

<p>Whatever the UK oppression of pixel interpolation is, I say we do what we did 200+ years ago, revolt and send the British back to their island in the north atlantic.</p>

<p>I haven't even mentioned the fact that as sensors have evolved the PPI necessary to provide a satisfactory print has diminished. Yes, with a film scan you needed 300ppi or more for a good print, but digital needed less for quite a while. my local professional print house says that with a recent generation DSLR they can get down to 120ppi and match film prints at 300ppi at identical viewing distances. Are they blowing smoke? I dunno, maybe, maybe not? You can test yourself what your ppi needs to be before print quality goes below your quality requirements.</p>

<p> </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Yes, I have no wish to inflict "oppression" on anyone but, perhaps sadly, I do live in the UK (I realise that is of trifling unimportance to other users here) and have to put up with very superior if polite people telling me that they can't use my files unless I use "sharp lenses attached to a proper camera" Pentax is not of sufficient quality to be considered "proper" for purpose......</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...