[rbefly]

Whether Ricoh decides to upgrade the K-5 (II, IIs) or not, it doesn't make much sense to drop it from the lineup at this point.
Here's why; People camera-shop for features and...you guessed it, price.
Going by Adorama's current pricing (and likely B + H's, since they're usually about a nickel apart) the BODY ONLY prices are;

K-3 - $1,297
K-5IIs - $997
K-5II - $899
K-50 - $697
K-500 - $597 (this one is an exception to the 'body only' pricing above. I can only find it bundled with the kit 18-55mm).

If you remove both the K-5's from the list, there's a huge hole in the lineup, with the K-50 at $700 and the K-3 at $1,300.
Just going by a price range lineup, it makes sense to have a model with upper-tier features but not quite K-3 specs, in the $900-$1,000 bracket. Right now, the K-5II/s fits that spec very nicely, IMO.
At least until a suitable replacement is ready to release, or shortly after.
Ron

[bvg]

I do not think so. Ricoh's photo-department has limited capabilities and three APC-S cameras is just enough.

[aleonx3]

I think it is a good idea to keep the production running of the K-5IIs as some of us would prefer a less mega pixel sensor body; some minor enhancement (such as viewfinder and Prime engine) to the K-5IIs would be great too.

[RonHendriks1966]

The K-5 III is currently on the shortest straw in the contast. Is K-3 the way to go?

[Waratah]

I'd like to see the k5II and/or IIs retained. I think that level camera has a lot of appeal to a new starter with money.

Don't spend resources on minor upgrades to k 5

Spend resources on marketing the k3, updates for the k3, and more lens (esp a 18ish to 80ish DA* (doesn't change external volume a la 50-135) and a 100-300 f4 (if they can't put a gun to Sigma's head and get theirs back on the shelves.)

[RonHendriks1966]

Well since we now know that working with hi-iso the K-3 wont beat the K-5, the question is: Would you now see a market for an updated K-5 iii with the 16mp sensor and the electronics from the K-3?

Maybe even switching to 12-bit RAW, just to make the machine faster.

K-3 RAW files are starting from 29 MB (base iso) up to 36 MB at iso 6400. The K-5 ii makes RAW files around 22-24 MB at high iso, while the K-01 stops at around 15-16 MB.

So a K-5 iii with 16 megapixel and 12-bit RAW could be like twice as fast in digesting images then the K-3 can.

[Chris Mak]

Well since we now know that working with hi-iso the K-3 wont beat the K-5, the question is: Would you now see a market for an updated K-5 iii with the 16mp sensor and the electronics from the K-3?

Maybe even switching to 12-bit RAW, just to make the machine faster.

K-3 RAW files are starting from 29 MB (base iso) up to 36 MB at iso 6400. The K-5 ii makes RAW files around 22-24 MB at high iso, while the K-01 stops at around 15-16 MB.

So a K-5 iii with 16 megapixel and 12-bit RAW could be like twice as fast in digesting images then the K-3 can.

Yes, I would like Ricoh to continue the K5 series very much, so a K5III(s) with especially the best (at release) possible AF and metering would be great, but DO NOT make it 12 bit raw!! That's for entry level cameras. I do a lot of PP from raw with the K5IIs and 14bit raw is the way to go.
I don't know if Pentax will be able to still get the (old or a newer version) 16mp Sony sensor, and it will probably keep the video specs down, but keep the higher video for the K3. I'd rather the K5 series maintains its extraordinary capabilities as a stills camera.
Nikon doesn't only make 36mp FF cameras. There's a valid reason for 16mp Apsc.
Chris

[tabl10s]

Should Pentax come with an update for the Pentax K-5 II in spring to make the cameraline more complete? As off now there are 4 dslr's in line with K-500, K-50, K-5 II and K-3. Pentax could drop or fase out the K-5 II, but could also run the line off 4 camera's (maybe topping it with a FF K-1).

K-5 III

• Keep the current body from K-5 II and the D-GB4 grip.
• Keep the 16 megapixel sensor.
• PRIME III processor.
• Safox 11 AF-module.
• Framerate of 7 fps with the 100k shutter.
• One SD card.
• USB 3.0 port instead of USB 2.0
• New 86k RGB metering system.
• Sensor only with AA-filter.
• Videospecs from K-3, but no headphone jack.
• Pentaprism as in the K-5 II.

I think that would be a great camera in line-up. Basicly only updating the electronics inside with the PRIME III, Safox 11 AF-module, new metering system and USB 3.0 port.

Do you think this would be a good idea for expanding the camera line-up or just be a bad way to undercut the K-3 market?

Having the '3's diopter adjuster dial would be nice along with it's improved capabilities.

[fs999]

And perhaps 50 ISO starting point

[romeck]

Yes, would be great!

[RonHendriks1966]

Yes, I would like Ricoh to continue the K5 series very much, so a K5III(s) with especially the best (at release) possible AF and metering would be great, but DO NOT make it 12 bit raw!! That's for entry level cameras. I do a lot of PP from raw with the K5IIs and 14bit raw is the way to go.
I don't know if Pentax will be able to still get the (old or a newer version) 16mp Sony sensor, and it will probably keep the video specs down, but keep the higher video for the K3. I'd rather the K5 series maintains its extraordinary capabilities as a stills camera.
Nikon doesn't only make 36mp FF cameras. There's a valid reason for 16mp Apsc.
Chris

I think the video limitation for the K-5 is due to the PRIME II engine, so upgrading to the PRIME III would make anything possible for video, sinde the sensormodule inside the K-5 is capable off spitting out lots off data.

[disco_owner]

Everything you've said sounds great but I might like to add to that , dual sd card slot , with tethering capability , a closeable hatch for long exposure shots , a panoramic assist in firmware update. Im always having to throw a towel on the ovf to stop light leaking into the mirror box. A dedicated water proof remote with replaceable batteries sold with the camera, not seperately.

[Heie]

Should Pentax come with an update for the Pentax K-5 II in spring to make the cameraline more complete? As off now there are 4 dslr's in line with K-500, K-50, K-5 II and K-3. Pentax could drop or fase out the K-5 II, but could also run the line off 4 camera's (maybe topping it with a FF K-1).


K-5 III

• Keep the current body from K-5 II and the D-GB4 grip.
• Keep the 16 megapixel sensor.
• PRIME III processor.
• Safox 11 AF-module.
• Framerate of 7 fps with the 100k shutter.
• One SD card.
• USB 3.0 port instead of USB 2.0
• New 86k RGB metering system.
• Sensor only with AA-filter.
• Videospecs from K-3, but no headphone jack.
• Pentaprism as in the K-5 II.

I think that would be a great camera in line-up. Basicly only updating the electronics inside with the PRIME III, Safox 11 AF-module, new metering system and USB 3.0 port.

Do you think this would be a good idea for expanding the camera line-up or just be a bad way to undercut the K-3 market?

I never posted about it, but I couldn't help but think that when Pentax released the K-3, they should have done it like the K-5 II and IIs. The difference between those two is the AA filter. Now, that will never be an issue again. This time, make the K-3 and K-3x different only in resolution. Same body as the K-3.

So in effect the only difference is the K-3 is what it is today, and the K-3x uses everything the same but instead has the K-5 IIs sensor (16mpx, 14-bit Raw). That would allow one of two options.

Before I get to those two options, let me do some quick (probably slightly off) math.

24mp x 8.3fps x 23 shot buffer = 4581.6

If nothing in the K-3x would have changed, that would include the buffer, so 4581.6 is the total volume of our fixed buffer.

Option One: 16mp x 23 shot buffer = 12.45fps (!)

Option Two: 16mp x 8.3fps = 35 shot buffer (!)

Everything else is 100% constant between K-3 and 'K-3x' except for resolution, allowing the ultimate APS-C resolution camera, or the ultimate APS-C sports camera. Your choice. Same price.

At least if I were a big wig at Ricoh/Pentax, that is what I would have done.

-Heie

[bdp1]

the K-5 II and IIs. The difference between those two is the AA filter. Now, that will never be an issue again.

The lack of an AA filter can be a problem for studio portrait or product catalog shooters with strobe units, where clothing texture or other patterns can become a problem because the strobes are much faster than the moving sensor solution to aliasing, and it's one reason why I don't think I'll ever get a K-3 camera.

Also, it looks like images with small gray specks in the subject can end up with light from the specks hitting just one or two sensor sites, and showing up with a false color.

Sample at:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/172-pentax-k-3/242505-tale-3-sensors-k-3-...ml#post2580773

[snake]

I'd likely go for a K-5IIIs.

I'm already on the edge with pushing low-light too far, without going to FF, so a slight bump there would be nice. As it is, the slightly poorer low-light from the K-3 is sadly a dealbreaker, even with the fantastic improvements.