As a K-5 user, the only place the K-5IIs would really be an upgrade
would be in the area of auto focus. Yes, auto focus on the K-5II
cameras actually works, as opposed to frustrating the hell out of you.
The dynamic range, MP, high ISO capabilities are pretty much the same as
the K-5. It has no AA filter so images are likely to be a bit sharper
bit but, I'm not sure that it's worth the upgrade.
The K-3 is by all accounts the K-5's better in everything except dynamic
range where it falls just a bit short, and loses out just a bit on high
ISO performance, but not by much. Auto focus is supposed to be a bit
better than the K-5IIs, but pretty still close, both it and the K-5IIs
however bury the original K-5 in that area. Oh yes and on paper at
least you'll get about 1 more FPS with the K-3 over the K-5.
The bottom line is that unless you're biggest issue with the K-5 is auto
focus performance, I'm not sure that the K-5IIs would be that much of an
upgrade. The K-3 offers more granularity in selecting auto focus
points, (27 vs 11), has almost, equal dynamic range and high ISO
capabilities as the K-5 cameras and a much greater pixel count.
Now the downside. The larger pixel count is going to tax any computer
you're using for image processing, unless you've got a lot of horse
power to spare, oh and you'll definitely need more SD storage unless you
already have two or three times what you think you need. The K-3 is
maybe 10% larger and 10% heavier, and has a much higher battery drain
than the K-5/II/IIs cameras.
With the larger file size of the K-3 you get a linear resolution
increase of about 22% What that boils down to is if you want to make a
300dpi print, the largest you can make with with the K-3 would be 13x20
vs the K-5, etc., at 10 1/4 x 16 1/2, (those sizes in inches if you want
centimeters you'll have to do your own conversion).
I think that you can pick up a New K-5IIs for a little as ~$650. The K-3
is still selling for about $1,100 to $1,200 at reputable dealers.
What would I do? I don't know. The K-5II I own is already capable of
making more than acceptable prints at 240 dpi that are larger than I can
print for myself, and much larger than I can display on any high
resolution output device that I own, or am likely to, in the near
future. While the K-3 seems to be a great camera I have a hard time
justifying it to myself. On the other hand while I love the K-5II it's
just not that much of an upgrade over the K-5 unless you really need the
superior auto focusing.
On 8/3/2014 9:31 PM, Ralph Turner wrote:
I have been a Pentax user for over 15 years and have accumulated a good number
of lenses and accessories. Normally I an not perplexed about which new Pentax
digital body to buy, until now.
My main use of Pentax gear is for travel photography - small and lightweight
lenses, reasonable sized bodies and accessories. Currently I am using a three
three year old K5 and I would like to buy either a new K5iis body or a new K3.
I do not need the camera for sports or kids and grandkids, just for travel.
So, looking at dynamic range, high ISO challenges, MP, and somewhat the price
-- what body do you recommend and why?
Ralph Turner
--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to achieve
immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
