Originally posted by rawr Hint: they were likely shooting:
(a) different scenes;
(b) different events;
(c) different lenses;
(d) different camera settings;
(e) different levels of shooting experience.
You want overly simple answers for complicated questions.
Second hint... More or less direct implication of what you just said...
K5 vs K3 is very visible. Like K5 vs K20D... because each time the difference is huge and you see it in most situations. Low light, portraiture, action, wildlife, even landscape for the AF speed.
I can say explictely that AF of K3 is really faster in all situation than K5 and there tests from PF and others that show it. (Hit rate rougly increased by a 15-20%) I can say that most (>50%) low light shoot with FA50 and DA35 were off focus before with K5 AF and now most are focussed accurately. I can say that when I do portraiture with off center point now if I select the eye, the focus is on the eyes. Before it was sometime on the eye, maybe 1 time out of 4... and other time on the ear, the nose... If i wanted to be spot on it was manual focus and/or live view. And the hardware match it because the AF point are much smaller. I did tests with my K3 and if you focus on an object that has a distinctive color now the focus is kept even if you move the camera or the subject move (not too fast) even if there obstacles. Before there was no tracking. And again the hardware match it (before 77 metering in BW, no 80K+ metering in color).
Now K3-II just a small evolution of K3 (hence the name) and the K3-II AF hardware or metering didn't change. They say it is only software improvement for AF... but old K3 also did get software upgrade related to AF too recently.
=> The performance increase is far less visible obviously. AND very noticable is higly subjective and might be only for some kind of lenses, settings, type of scene and require a very experienced pro photographer to show as you explained.
Maybe there nothing to write home about it, really.