[roti]

Hi,

New K5-II cameras are still available in shops, (at least in my country, strangely K3 is not ) and seems like a good option, given the lower price. Would you recommend getting one today? Should I pay attention to anything in particular when choosing a K5-II over K3-II (or KP). Out of all the differences I would consider the only poorer ISO performance and Stabilization being important, with the first more than the latter. I don't care much about more Megapixels (should I?). I like the compactness of the K5-2 over K3-2 (im mm and g the difference is small, but in the hand you feel a difference), as well as the built in Flash (I have no Idea at the moment how much I would miss the built-in Flash, I don't intend to use an external one, because the camera is for travels).

I appreciate any opinion on this matter, thanks.

roti

[twilhelm]

Check out the K 3 review on this forum, they did a lot of side by side shooting and comparison with the K5 II and s camera. Personally I think the K5 series is still an amazing camera and hard to beat for everyday shooting. Plus I believe the K3 file sizes are 50% larger requiring more storage space for files.

[GlennG]

Roti, I believe whether the K5 II is a good deal or not would depend on the price, but if you feel the price is good, I believe the K5 II would still be a great performer. The high ISO is still among the best for APS C and the ergonomics are great. I have the original K5 and I'm still very happy with the performance, and I travel with it. It is still a joy to use, and I believe the K5 II would be just a bit better regarding focus capability. I don't plan to upgrade any time soon, either. I must add, however, that I've not tried any of the newer models, but they offer features that are not an advantage to me, currently. This is just one person's experience and opinion.

[talgarik]

Would you recommend getting one today?

I see - body only:

K5II €500
K70 €600
K3II €750
KP €1250

and I say the choice is between the K70 and the KP, the ISO performance of the new cameras cannot be ignored, but this is my point of view according to my photographic needs, if you can live without the new sensor while you appreciate the build quality and pro features you can find in the K5II and K3II then go for one of them, they were and remain great cameras. One reason to prefer the K3II to the K5 series could be the PLM option, just one lens nowadays, but it makes sense that PLM will be featured in every future Pentax lens and the K5 series is and will remain out of the game on this regard.

[aslyfox]

here is a link to a side by side comparison between the K 5 II, K 3 and K 3 II

Pentax K-5 II vs. Pentax K-3 vs. Pentax K-3 II - Pentax Camera Comparison - PentaxForums.com

and the in depth review of the K 3 / K 3 II

Pentax K-3 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

Pentax K-3 II Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

and the K 5 II/ 5 IIs

Pentax K-5 II / IIs Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

I hope this helps

[pathdoc]

One reason to prefer the K3II to the K5 series could be the PLM option, just one lens nowadays, but it makes sense that PLM will be featured in every future Pentax lens and the K5 series is and will remain out of the game on this regard.

This is the BIG problem for anyone considering buying a store-new K-5 series camera today - the complete incompatibility with the PLM lens technology. For those who already have them - from the film era or an earlier Pentax body - the question may be irrelevant, but for those coming in from the start, it could mean that in one or two generations of lens development you will be stuck with a camera that can't use the new ones properly.

Granted, you would still have access to some of Pentax's finest lenses as they exist today, but it is something to bear in mind.

[Qman]

I would suggest taking a look at the K-70 instead of the K-5ii. Improved IQ, very good high ISO (better than the K-3 ii), tilt screen, pixel shift, compatible with new lenses, small and light for travel, built in flash. You give up battery life and the top LCD screen.

[deus ursus]

I have a K-5IIs, and am quite happy with it. I don't feel I'm missing anything and don't feel the urge to upgrade to K-3/K-3II.

The only thing that would make me change my mind would be if I suddenly got stinking rich and could afford to buy new lenses and the only lenses I wanted had KAF4 mount. That would never happen, though, so I'm quite content.

[pakinjapan]

Should I pay attention to anything in particular when choosing a K5-II over K3-II (or KP).

If I could find a second hand, low shutter count K3 at around the same or even less $$$ than new K5-II, I would go with the K3 family body. Not to say that K5II has anything wrong. I like my old K-5 a lot and 5II has a lot better low light auto focus than K-5, but K3 is very easy to do manual focus at night via back LCD. I do a lot of night photo and this is a very big plus for me. More noise though, but I can live with it and it is an easy fix during post. but but but I have to admit, I miss iso80 on K5. How much is a second hand K3(II) in your area? I got my K3 secondhand at around 550 USD.

I like the compactness of the K5-2 over K3-2 (im mm and g the difference is small, but in the hand you feel a difference),

I am in the same area here, however I think a few more grams on K3 comes with an even better build. To really save on weight, I go with a smaller single prime and carry no bag.

I would miss the built-in Flash, I don't intend to use an external one, because the camera is for travels

I select the popup flash over the build-in GPS. Popup flash is handy and external flash is always bigger than an O-GPS unit.
Anyway, high ISO performance on K5 and K3 families can do a travel photo job well, I don't think you will miss the flash that much.

on KP,
well, it is a more expensive body. if you are willing to spend, it could be the best option concerning its weight, auto focus, low light performance and it comes with the latest stabilization system.

my 0.2$

[jddwoods]

This is the BIG problem for anyone considering buying a store-new K-5 series camera today - the complete incompatibility with the PLM lens technology. For those who already have them - from the film era or an earlier Pentax body - the question may be irrelevant, but for those coming in from the start, it could mean that in one or two generations of lens development you will be stuck with a camera that can't use the new ones properly.

Granted, you would still have access to some of Pentax's finest lenses as they exist today, but it is something to bear in mind.

I agree completely. While my K-5 is the backup to my K-3, I do find that the lack of compatibility of the K-5 to the PLM is its one big drawback. If Ricoh would release a firmware update to the K-5 series to enable the KAF4 mount it would make the K-5 a much more valuable camera. I am hoping they do but as time goes by it seems less likely. Otherwise for my purposes the K-5 holds its own when compared to my K-3 not as good but plenty good enough.

[stevebrot]

Tough question. I went directly from a K10D to my K-3 in early Spring of 2014. Along the way, I considered the K-7 (huge improvement in build and handling) and the K-5IIs (the K-5 had too many problems, but the K-5IIs hit a sweet spot), but neither promised enough of a boost in performance over the K10D to justify the expense. I resisted the K-3 for several months, but finally folded and have not regretted the purchase for even a second.

• Would I buy a K-70 over a K-5IIs? Probably not.
• Would I buy a K-3 over a K-5IIs at the same spread (€100)? Quite likely, assuming both were new in box. The difference in resolution is very real as is the difference in build over the K-70.
• Would I buy a K-3II over a K-5IIs with a €250 spread? That is hard to say. It would depend how much one wanted the extra resolution, pixel-shift and astro-tracer and whether one already had an appropriate flash.
• Would I buy a K-3II over a K-3 with a €150 spread? Tough call.

You give up battery life and the top LCD screen.

The list is somewhat longer than that. The K-70 is a nice camera and is better-spec'd by some accounting, but only if those features are strongly desired. I might consider a K-70 as a backup or companion for my K-3, but not as a replacement.


Steve

[Blacknight659]

The newer lenses will have PLM tech, which is important if you want to stay current. But, if you plan on using this a bridge to a different camera in the future, go for it. I love my K-5iis, I only wish I could use the new 55-300 WR .

[DeadJohn]

...Out of all the differences I would consider the only poorer ISO performance and Stabilization being important...

The K-3 and K-5 series are nearly identical in terms of ISO performance. The K-5 has larger pixels and shows less noise in an individual pixels if you pixel peep. The K-3 shows slightly more noise in an individual pixel, but there are more pixels in the same viewing area so the noise averages out differently.

For sports, birding, or other fast action the K-3 is superior because of better autofocus and a more rapid burst speed. For landscapes, the 2 cameras are equally good.

If you print large or heavily crop, the K-3 images will look sharper. At typical viewing sizes on screen or printing up to around 16x20 inches, you're unlikely to notice a difference between K-5 and K-3 image quality.

[roti]

I see - body only:

K5II €500
K70 €600
K3II €750
KP €1250

and I say the choice is between the K70 and the KP, the ISO performance of the new cameras cannot be ignored, but this is my point of view according to my photographic needs, if you can live without the new sensor while you appreciate the build quality and pro features you can find in the K5II and K3II then go for one of them, they were and remain great cameras.

So, you mean you would choose K70 over K3II just for the ISO performance?

---------- Post added 08-02-17 at 04:21 PM ----------

How much is a second hand K3(II) in your area? I got my K3 secondhand at around 550 USD.

I never really looked. I was generally thinking to buy a new camera and then use it as much as possible. I did a quick search and found a used K3 at 750 USD (body only), supposingly in a very good condition, with only 1600 shots taken (can you see that in the menu?). Choosing between K3 and K3II is really a pain. I would like the new stabilizer, but I'm afraid I'm going to miss the flash.

BTW, if you are reading this and frequently use the GPS from K3II I would love to hear your use case.

on KP,
well, it is a more expensive body. if you are willing to spend, it could be the best option concerning its weight, auto focus, low light performance and it comes with the latest stabilization system.

Yes, the KP is pretty tempting.

[pakinjapan]

Choosing between K3 and K3II is really a pain. I would like the new stabilizer, but I'm afraid I'm going to miss the flash.

BTW, if you are reading this and frequently use the GPS from K3II I would love to hear your use case.

Yes, it is. I went through that.

To me, at the end it comes down to K3’s Flash or K3II’s Pixelshift. Because I found out that the total price of secondhand K3 + a GPS1 unit is about the same as a K3II secondhand in where I live, so I went with a K3 and I will get a GPS1 unit later.

I do not think I will “need” the pixelshift feature. Even if I have to use it, I can shoot multiple images and do super resolution trick on photoshop.
On the other hands, if I need more artificial light, pop up Flash can be very useful. Not very ofthen but once in a while that little popup flash safe me.

By the way, K3 high ISO performance is not bad at all. Its image stabilization is also good. But again, it is not going to be as good as in K1 or KP. It is an older and cheaper body. This is ISO 1600 (of course after post process)