[Reptilezz]

Hey guys

So im thinking of getting a pentax as my first dslr camera. Im leaning towards pentax because im really impressed with my friends *ist D he got given for christmas. Unfortunately for me i have to save up my own money by christmas if im gonna get a k5iis.(ps im on $300 so still $700 to go :/) So can someone please explain the difference between the ii and the iis as i want my money to be spent in the best possible way. Also for a first lens is the tamron 18-200 or sigma 50-200 ok? Im going to do bird photography every week end. Im moving up from a canon powershot IS2 ...or something like that.. will the image quality be much better?

Thanks in advance, Reptilezz...

[Adam]

The sharpness of the K-5 IIs is slightly better than that of the K-5/K-5 II as it doesn't have an antialiasing filter in front of its sensor. This means that with very sharp lenses, you'll be able to get out-of-camera photos with more clarity. This has a trade-off, however, as having no AA filter means that there's an increased risk for moire artifacts in your photos. In practice, filterless cameras really don't do that much better than traditional ones, and since the K-5 IIs is otherwise identical to the K-5/K-5 II in terms of noise performance and dynamic range, usually the output will be the same. More info can be found here: Pentax K-5 II / IIs Review - Introduction - PentaxForums.com

If you're looking to get your first DSLR, then I would say get the original K-5 for $699. It's basically the same camera for a lot less. You could also look at the K-30/K-50 if you use live view a lot.

Pentax K5 K-5 Digital SLR Camera Body, Black 14748

[Reptilezz]

Thanks adam, i only use the live view when reviewing my images, so can you only see the difference between the image sharpness when fully cropped? Also is the k5 series auto focus capable of catching birds in flight?

[usmcxm35]

The k-5ii has a more advanced autofocus system than the k-5.
With enough light, the difference is negligible, its only when things dim down the k-5ii has the advantage.
I could get more keepers on a Nikon with more AF points than I can with the k-5 or k-30. Your mileage may vary.

[Reptilezz]

So for bird photography the iis or ii is the best? As its my first dslr i think ill go through the hard yards to choose the right one but in the end what ever i get ill be happy with

[civiletti]

Feathers can produce moiré, so you might be better with the K-5ii.

[jatrax]

So for bird photography the iis or ii is the best?

I don't think you will see much difference unless you are using high end glass. Removing the AA filter on the IIs does increase sharpness slightly but unless the lens being used is already capable of more than the k-5II is delivering then there will be no noticeable difference. You may check the reviews of the lenses you are looking at here: Pentax Lenses by Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, and more - Reviews and Specification Database - Pentax Lens Review Database

Neither is what I would consider a good 'birding' lens. Both are general all-purpose zooms and are too short for most birding applications. Go here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/lens-clubs/55946-300mm-plus-lens-club-dis...ng-lenses.html for some good information and bird shots.

Pentax is not noted as being a great bird in flight camera, other companies make AF-C systems that will track better. For 'birding' in general, the k-5II is a great camera but maybe not the best if your primary interest is BIF. You should think about how much of your time will be spent at BIF and how much with general photography.

[Reptilezz]

I pretty much only wildlife photography as thats what im interested in. Ive never actually got a photo of a BIF but when my friend came over yesterday we were trying to shoot a grey fantail when it was catching little moths. I know it may not be the best camera for birding but as a first camera is it a good choice for wildlife photos.
Thanks

[goubejp]

For bird photography, 200 mm is too short; you should consider 300 mm at least - Pentax DA55-300 can make the job - for big birds. For the tiny, shy birds in europe 500 to 600 mm is required. Price difference between K5ii and K5iis is not justified by the slight increase of sharpness you will notice only with premium lenses. Consider either a K5 or a K30 and prepare to save money for a 150-500 sigma zoom.

[Reptilezz]

Ok ill look for a 55-300 and ill get a ii thanks for everyones help

[Class A]

Ok ill look for a 55-300 and ill get a ii thanks for everyones help

Wise choices.

The Tamron 18-200 isn't a great lens. The Pentax/Tamron 18-250 is better.
However, for your bird shots, my recommendation is the Pentax 55-300 as well.
If at any point you are able to invest more money, the Sigma 100-300/4 EX or Pentax 60-250/4 provide better IQ.

Regarding the K-5 IIs, you made the right choice already, but if you get second thoughts again, you may want to check out my post about "The Pros and Cons of Omitting a Bayer-AA-filter".

[Francis]

Echoing the point that 200mm is too short for birding.

I went on a photo workshop recently with my longest lens (old Pentax 18-250mm). 250mm was not nearly enough so I went ahead and purchased a Bigma for next time.

Fast glass and teleconverter would be a good way to have a multi-purpose set. I've been wishing that SIGMA would release (for Pentax) the 120-300 f2.8 which has a good rep with other mounts.