[kace]

I have a K-x which I've always enjoyed. Usage is mainly kids soccer, family stuff. I would be considered a weekend warrior even though we all like to consider ourselves expert photographers! Lenses: I have both kit zooms plus a Tamron 70-210 f2.8 zoom so nothing high end.

The price point for the old K-5 is about even with a K30, the things that worry me though are:

K5-old: reports of erratic AF under low light.

K30: The inferior noise performance as reported in the pop photo test. I have to wonder that having the same sensor as the K5, if pop photo just screwed up and tested them with different nr settings? Why should it be worse than the K5?

Both cameras seem like they would be a pretty dramatic upgrade from the K-x but I'd like to make the best choice.

thanks!

[Adam]

I have a K-x which I've always enjoyed. Usage is mainly kids soccer, family stuff. I would be considered a weekend warrior even though we all like to consider ourselves expert photographers! Lenses: I have both kit zooms plus a Tamron 70-210 f2.8 zoom so nothing high end.

The price point for the old K-5 is about even with a K30, the things that worry me though are:

K5-old: reports of erratic AF under low light.

K30: The inferior noise performance as reported in the pop photo test. I have to wonder that having the same sensor as the K5, if pop photo just screwed up and tested them with different nr settings? Why should it be worse than the K5?

Both cameras seem like they would be a pretty dramatic upgrade from the K-x but I'd like to make the best choice.

thanks!

I would go for the K-30 because you'll get better live view and video performance.

IQ differences between the K-5 and K-30 should only be discernible when shooting RAW. Also, the AF (outside of live view) is basically the same: both cameras will do much better than the K-x!

[LeDave]

You can't really go wrong with either, both are a huge upgrade from the K-x in performance as well as being able to use twin dials. Good luck on your decision.

[StephenHampshire]

I have a K-x which I've always enjoyed. Usage is mainly kids soccer, family stuff. I would be considered a weekend warrior even though we all like to consider ourselves expert photographers! Lenses: I have both kit zooms plus a Tamron 70-210 f2.8 zoom so nothing high end.

The price point for the old K-5 is about even with a K30, the things that worry me though are:

K5-old: reports of erratic AF under low light.

K30: The inferior noise performance as reported in the pop photo test. I have to wonder that having the same sensor as the K5, if pop photo just screwed up and tested them with different nr settings? Why should it be worse than the K5?

Both cameras seem like they would be a pretty dramatic upgrade from the K-x but I'd like to make the best choice.

thanks!

Having both, I would say IQ - very little difference, although the k30 is 12 bit vs 14 bit on the K5, can't see much difference in practice. Noise performance equal as far as I can see, and I have used both up to ISO 10000 and more. AF on the K30 is better, and the new tracking mode in AF-C in the K30 works. Also you have focus peaking which is great for manual focus. Only downside of the K30 for me is limited buffer in RAW, less battery life and noisier shutter.

[pinholecam]

Moving up from a Kx, I'd say that either camera will do real well.

I used a K5 for 2+yrs and now have a K30.
IQ wise, they are generally the same.
The K30 ISO goes from 100-25600 the K5 80-51200.
Not a big deal to me on the high end since I don't use them beyond 6400.
I miss the ISO80 on the K5 though.


To me the big differences are :
1. Handling (K5 accesses all functions fast as all the buttons are there); (K30, I like the changing the RAW/JPG button to focus point selection); Overall K5 is a much faster handling camera.
2. Shutter noise (K5 is silent)
3. Better AF accuracy (K30 is better for 2 problematic lenses I had)
4. LV focusing and peaking - K30 is the better camera.

So to me, the real difference is handling.
If fast handling is needed, then K5 is certainly better.
Otherwise, I don't think one can go wrong with K30.

[mamethot]

Wow, Santa is also considering delivery of the same 2 models to me and he is still undecided after reading this thread.

K-30 is can 618$

K-5 is can 749$

mmm...

[kace]

It was tough, but I decided to buy the old model K5.

Got it on buydig today for $679.

Now THAT can't be beat.

Now, to find a better lens than the K-x kit lens........

[curlednoodles]

It was tough, but I decided to buy the old model K5.

Got it on buydig today for $679.

Now THAT can't be beat.

Now, to find a better lens than the K-x kit lens........

Bargain. Was the price the determining factor?
I got the 18-55mm WR lens with my K30 and im impressed with it. Much better than the Kx kit lens and i think if youre gonna have a weather sealed camera, you need to pair it with a WR lens. The 18-135mm WR is also well regarded

[kace]

Well, price helped.

I wanted the top lcd too, although if the K30 had real tangible advantages I would've forgone the lcd for performance.

As someone else had mentioned, I couldn't really go wrong with either choice.


On lenses, I am tempted by the 18-135, but also by the f2.8 17-50 lenses by Tamron and Sigma, also the f2.8/f4 17-70 Sigma lens. I have a Tamron f2.8 70-200 and other than the physical size of the thing like it a lot for sports etc. I'm thinking I would enjoy an equally fast low magnification zoom lens.

[mamethot]

I am really satisfied with the Tamron 17-50 2.8 but focus is noisy, (not DC or HSM, etc). Just in case it's a requirement...