[kraigg007]

After about 4 months of research, I concluded that the Pentax K-5 IIs was for me. I was going to pull the trigger on Black Friday thinking surely there would be some great deals, but low and behold…the deal that I couldn't pass up was for the Pentax K-5 II. So I order one, and invested in some prime limited lenses and some highly regarded zoom lenses. After pulling the trigger on Thursday Morning, I am now having buyers remorse/questions. Did I do the right thing, purchasing the K-5 II over the K-5 IIs? The difference in price was about $250 dollars for the body only and that money was used to invest in the Pentax DA 70mm f/2.4 limited and DA 35mm f/2.8 macro limited lenses. Probably should have gotten the 15mm limited too before it sold out, but opted for a lower price zoom lens (choosing between SMCP-DA 55-300mm f/4-5.8 ED AF or Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG OS lens).

Did I do the right thing or should I bite the bullet and spend the extra for the superior camera body system in the K-5 IIs and acquire the lenses down the line? Nothing irritates me more than a soft photo, so will investing in superior glass and the K-5 II get me the results I am looking for?

I am new to DSLR Photography, out of the game since the 1980's with my Minolta 35mm.

Any feedback spoken from the point of experience, knowledge of the systems, and objectivity would be appreciated.

Thanks

(This is my first Pentax Forum Post)

[jatrax]

Did I do the right thing or should I bite the bullet and spend the extra for the superior camera body system in the K-5 IIs and acquire the lenses down the line? Nothing irritates me more than a soft photo, so will investing in superior glass and the K-5 II get me the results I am looking for?

The only difference between II and IIs is the lack of an AA filter on the IIs. This can result in slightly sharper images with the IIs. But honestly if I had to choose between IIs or the II and a good lens, I go with the lens. It really is not that much difference. I had k-5 and k-5IIs and I think I can tell the difference but not without looking at 100% and mostly guessing. If you were an experienced DSLR shooter, maybe. But at this point in your journey good technique, and good glass will make more difference than the missing AA filter.

[Adam]

The only difference between II and IIs is the lack of an AA filter on the IIs. This can result in slightly sharper images with the IIs. But honestly if I had to choose between IIs or the II and a good lens, I go with the lens. It really is not that much difference. I had k-5 and k-5IIs and I think I can tell the difference but not without looking at 100% and mostly guessing. If you were an experienced DSLR shooter, maybe. But at this point in your journey good technique, and good glass will make more difference than the missing AA filter.

Agreed!

[kraigg007]

The only difference between II and IIs is the lack of an AA filter on the IIs. This can result in slightly sharper images with the IIs. But honestly if I had to choose between IIs or the II and a good lens, I go with the lens. It really is not that much difference. I had k-5 and k-5IIs and I think I can tell the difference but not without looking at 100% and mostly guessing. If you were an experienced DSLR shooter, maybe. But at this point in your journey good technique, and good glass will make more difference than the missing AA filter.

Thanks for your perspective. It makes perfect sense. In my heart of hearts I know going with the K-5 II at a bargain basement price is the way to go. I am sure I will be wanting the K-3 when the DPreview comes out with their review. I thinks this camera body will give me an opportunity to learn, grow, and create incredible images at a price point that I can live with.

Now I just have to find a great wide angle lens under 17mm by Cyber Monday.

Appreciate again you weighing in and any other perspectives or comments. Both camera body owners seem to be more than happy with their purchases and I am getting this K-5 II body at a price that is less than a used body.

Black Friday needs to come around 4 times a year!

[krebsy75]

The S model is for users who want the ability to manage moire/false color on their own by using special techniques.

Make no mistake, the "S" model is missing a part as compared to the standard K-5. This is because 16 MP sensors require anti-aliasing by default.

Long story short: you did fine. The IIs is more or less a factory-hacked camera that appeals to some advanced users. One isn't better than the other.

I have both. (wife has the standard II)

[DavidSKAF3]

Not meaning to be nosey, but what was the total cost of that kit you put together? I think a lot of people would be happy with it!

[kraigg007]

Not meaning to be nosey, but what was the total cost of that kit you put together? I think a lot of people would be happy with it!

Don't tell my wife but. I will end up having 3 primes, 35 L, 50 da, 70 L, 1 zoom 70-300, the k-5 ii body (got in really early but thought the 18-135 lens was a cheap kit lens so I passed...mistake), and I ordered but am not attached to the idea of a pentax 10-17mm fish eye. The reviews seem pretty positive, but I need a standard wide angle first (but adorama had it doe $200 off). So minus the fisheye , software , and accessories the total came to around $1800. I saved over $1000 so I feel pretty good.

I live in Florida, so I couldn't get the extended warranty on anything. Going to have to insure them annually...bummer.

[interested_observer]

I think that you did excellent. The difference between the II and the IIs was reported to be 8% by one review. Another post did a pretty extensive analysis and determined for the most part that with a reasonable amount of sharpening the II and IIs were equal. So on the balance of it, by getting the glass I think you are way ahead. For $1800 you did exceedingly well.

[alamo5000]

After about 4 months of research, I concluded that the Pentax K-5 IIs was for me. I was going to pull the trigger on Black Friday thinking surely there would be some great deals, but low and behold…the deal that I couldn't pass up was for the Pentax K-5 II. So I order one, and invested in some prime limited lenses and some highly regarded zoom lenses. After pulling the trigger on Thursday Morning, I am now having buyers remorse/questions. Did I do the right thing, purchasing the K-5 II over the K-5 IIs? The difference in price was about $250 dollars for the body only and that money was used to invest in the Pentax DA 70mm f/2.4 limited and DA 35mm f/2.8 macro limited lenses. Probably should have gotten the 15mm limited too before it sold out, but opted for a lower price zoom lens (choosing between SMCP-DA 55-300mm f/4-5.8 ED AF or Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG OS lens).

Did I do the right thing or should I bite the bullet and spend the extra for the superior camera body system in the K-5 IIs and acquire the lenses down the line? Nothing irritates me more than a soft photo, so will investing in superior glass and the K-5 II get me the results I am looking for?

I am new to DSLR Photography, out of the game since the 1980's with my Minolta 35mm.

Any feedback spoken from the point of experience, knowledge of the systems, and objectivity would be appreciated.

Thanks

(This is my first Pentax Forum Post)

No need for remorse at all. I shoot with the original K-5 still and I am still learning. Only now after a year and a half I sometimes bump up against the camera's capability. 99% of the time I am bumping up against MY capability.

You will be hard pressed to outrun the K5/II/IIs...

That said good glass matters. It matters more than the camera body in many cases.

I don't know if you are into sports or not... but just because you buy the same shoes as an NBA player...get the same jersey... buy the same brand of ball... that doesn't make you play like they play.

With photography there is a certain level of 'gear' that is needed...but beyond that it's all on you....and with the 5/II/s .... you have more camera than you think you do. Be confident and roll with it. You won't be disappointed in your choice.

[thechumpen]

I was just in the same boat but the IIs with 18-135 kit was only an extra £30 over the II so hardly any difference. I still got the II though as I think it will be a better option for me. I mainly use my camera for family pics so didn't want to worry about moire on clothes and there is lots to say you sharpen to get pretty much the same results. Also I don't have the quality glass to get the most out of the IIs.

[kraigg007]

I don't know if you are into sports or not... but just because you buy the same shoes as an NBA player...get the same jersey... buy the same brand of ball... that doesn't make you play like they play.

With photography there is a certain level of 'gear' that is needed...but beyond that it's all on you....and with the 5/II/s .... you have more camera than you think you do. Be confident and roll with it. You won't be disappointed in your choice.

Exactly, I am a bassist and have learned that gear is about 25% of the sound. The other 75% comes from your fingers! heart, and mind. Thanks for the analogy as now I am content with my decision.

Thanks for everyone's words of wisdom. I also appreciated the 99% of the limiting output of the camera is the user comment.

So to quote Jay-Z... I have 99 problems but the Pentax K-5 II "ain't" one.

Great insight ladies and gentleman.

[Barry Pearson]

The S model is for users who want the ability to manage moire/false color on their own by using special techniques.

Make no mistake, the "S" model is missing a part as compared to the standard K-5. This is because 16 MP sensors require anti-aliasing by default.

My K-5IIs has had about 60,000 shutter actuations, including 1000s of studio shots, and Moire has never been a problem. I've spotted it in one photo, and that appeared to disappear by itself without effort from me.

I have never regretted buying the K5IIs rather than the K-5II. My photos with the K-5IIs typically appear sharper than those with my K-5, but that could be for various reasons as well as the lack of the blurring filter (sorry, AA filter).

(Edit: I print at A3+).

[kraigg007]

My K-5IIs has had about 60,000 shutter actuations, including 1000s of studio shots, and Moire has never been a problem. I've spotted it in one photo, and that appeared to disappear by itself without effort from me.

I have never regretted buying the K5IIs rather than the K-5II. My photos with the K-5IIs typically appear sharper than those with my K-5, but that could be for various reasons as well as the lack of the blurring filter (sorry, AA filter).

I know the K-5 iis is a great camera. To me i feel it is a superior camera from an image sharpness standpoint (from my research). However, I feel the value of the K-5 II is better for me. Not that it is a superior camera, if all things were equal, I would have purchased the K-5 IIs because I have heard from most sourcse the moire affect might be visible in one shot of of 1000. It is quite rare and not a reason to bypass the IIs.

Congrats on your purchase. Being a DSLR novice, I am sure the K-5 II will provide me with many golfing moments…Surprise shots that turn out amazing with little effort and frustrating shots that are difficult to explain due to my lack of experience. However just like golf, it is the incremental improvement that keeps bringing you back.

I can't wait to start my Pentax DSLR journey (I chose Pentax over Canon and Nikon, due to price, features, WR build quality, reviews, prosumer features, limited number of lens options, and the fact that they weren't Canon or Nikon…I hate being like everyone else).

[tomwil]

No matter how sharp a lens is, it can never be its sharpest with a camera that deliberately blurs the image. The K-5IIs should be the best choice.

[krebsy75]

tomwil: I feel your advice is misguided. Imaging sensors like the one found in the K-5 require an AA filter as part of its design. There's no other way around it. That's why the original K-5 was specified with it.