K-5 to K-3 - how big an upgrade.

**Rondec** · 11-19-2013, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by Winder

I really like the camera. I had the K-5 and went to the K-3. I find the AF accuracy to be the single biggest advantage at this point. The camera is faster at everything which you notice pretty quickly. I'm doing a lot of B&W and the 24MP sensor produces a nice fine grain even at high ISO.

WB has been different in color. I'm getting use to it, but not everyone seems to having WB issues. I've been using my 31mm mostly so AF speed is really not something I can judge.

I think WB issues have to do with Lightroom not having a K3 update yet. With Silky Pix it seems better (but I hate the Pentax software package so I just work with Lightroom).

awaldram · 11-19-2013, 08:22 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Clavius

Come on, be fair an talk about the con too. One good reason to keep the K-5 around is the mechanical SR during video. The K-3 doesn't have that anymore. It has the digital pseudo SR, that causes the jello effect. I'm baffled as to why they did that. Well that's the one and only con that I know of.

Jello effect is caused by cmos inability to shut off instantaneously hence you can see the 'wave' shut off as moved position during hence jello it has nothing at all to do with SR be it mechanical or electronic.

The reason they did it is pretty obvious think audio recording, and if that doesn't give you the answer stick a screw drive lens on the camera and record video whilst using on demand AF you'll get the message loud and clear

Clavius · 11-19-2013, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by awaldram

Jello effect is caused by cmos inability to shut off instantaneously hence you can see the 'wave' shut off as moved position during hence jello it has nothing at all to do with SR be it mechanical or electronic.

SR done in the video processing might not be the cause of the Jello-effect; the rolling shutter is. But electronic video processing does make it much worse. It exaggerates any jello effect that is present. That is why all K-5 spinoffs, with their electronic SR, show the Jello Effect so badly and the old K-5 itself doesn't. (Unless you pan like a madman on steroids.)

Originally posted by awaldram

The reason they did it is pretty obvious think audio recording, and if that doesn't give you the answer stick a screw drive lens on the camera and record video whilst using on demand AF you'll get the message loud and clear

That screwdrive lens is going to make that sound with or without mechanical SR.

normhead · 11-19-2013, 10:31 AM

For me going from a K20D to K-5, the big difference was IQ. If you get an image on a K-5, it's top of class. You may be limited by slower AF, not as good low light performance, slower processing time, but in terms of IQ on captures, the K-5 IMHO is still tops if you consider everything but resolution. . The K-3 is a faster processing, more advanced AF, faster burst mode, to me the K-3 is an action camera…. wildlife, fast moving kids etc. It's not the same upgrade as K20D to K-5. It's a different up grade, and every bit as satisfying. The K-5 addressed absolute IQ, the K-3 addressed the things that take a toll on your keeper rate. It's a different kind of joy. But still a joy.

bass3587 · 11-19-2013, 05:58 PM - **1 Like**

I think for "ME" I'm going to keep my K5 and get a K3 so I'll have the best of both worlds

trumanusa · 11-20-2013, 11:27 PM

Please let me know if it is worth moving from k-5 II to k-3. Sorry if i have hijacked the thread.

CypherOz · 11-21-2013, 12:08 AM

I'm a K100D Super (sold) -> K20D (given to a friend) -> K-7 -> K-5 -> K-3 user

I think the K-5 to K-3 is as big a changed as the K20D to K-7

Last edited by CypherOz; 11-21-2013 at 12:37 AM.

GaryH · 11-21-2013, 05:32 AM

Originally posted by trumanusa

Please let me know if it is worth moving from k-5 II to k-3. Sorry if i have hijacked the thread.

I went from the K5IIs to the K3. If you put value on all of the things that have been mentioned and want even better Autofocus than the K5IIs offers, then yes it definitely is.

11-20-2013, 11:27 PM	#21
trumanusa Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 87	K-5 II to K-3 Please let me know if it is worth moving from k-5 II to k-3. Sorry if i have hijacked the thread.

11-21-2013, 12:08 AM	#22
CypherOz Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Adelaide Posts: 246	K-5 to K-3 I'm a K100D Super (sold) -> K20D (given to a friend) -> K-7 -> K-5 -> K-3 user I think the K-5 to K-3 is as big a changed as the K20D to K-7 Last edited by CypherOz; 11-21-2013 at 12:37 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wanting to upgrade from K-5 to K-5ii/iis - Have some questions	striker_	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	11-13-2013 04:34 AM
K-5 upgrade to K-5 II. Is to worth for P-TTL?	Chris74	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	10	11-06-2013 10:24 AM
Would you pay $350 to upgrade from K-5 to K-5II?	chesebert	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	18	07-16-2013 06:36 PM
How best to de-blur k-5/k-5II users to match k-5IIs	close-enough	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	11	12-03-2012 02:14 PM
Considering upgrade from K-r to K-5	Matchete	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	4	12-22-2011 07:18 AM

11-19-2013, 08:11 AM	#16
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by Winder I really like the camera. I had the K-5 and went to the K-3. I find the AF accuracy to be the single biggest advantage at this point. The camera is faster at everything which you notice pretty quickly. I'm doing a lot of B&W and the 24MP sensor produces a nice fine grain even at high ISO. WB has been different in color. I'm getting use to it, but not everyone seems to having WB issues. I've been using my 31mm mostly so AF speed is really not something I can judge. I think WB issues have to do with Lightroom not having a K3 update yet. With Silky Pix it seems better (but I hate the Pentax software package so I just work with Lightroom).

11-19-2013, 08:22 AM - 1 Like	#17
awaldram Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Hampshire Photos: Gallery Posts: 732	Originally posted by Clavius Come on, be fair an talk about the con too. One good reason to keep the K-5 around is the mechanical SR during video. The K-3 doesn't have that anymore. It has the digital pseudo SR, that causes the jello effect. I'm baffled as to why they did that. Well that's the one and only con that I know of. Jello effect is caused by cmos inability to shut off instantaneously hence you can see the 'wave' shut off as moved position during hence jello it has nothing at all to do with SR be it mechanical or electronic. The reason they did it is pretty obvious think audio recording, and if that doesn't give you the answer stick a screw drive lens on the camera and record video whilst using on demand AF you'll get the message loud and clear

11-19-2013, 08:56 AM	#18
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by awaldram Jello effect is caused by cmos inability to shut off instantaneously hence you can see the 'wave' shut off as moved position during hence jello it has nothing at all to do with SR be it mechanical or electronic. SR done in the video processing might not be the cause of the Jello-effect; the rolling shutter is. But electronic video processing does make it much worse. It exaggerates any jello effect that is present. That is why all K-5 spinoffs, with their electronic SR, show the Jello Effect so badly and the old K-5 itself doesn't. (Unless you pan like a madman on steroids.) Originally posted by awaldram The reason they did it is pretty obvious think audio recording, and if that doesn't give you the answer stick a screw drive lens on the camera and record video whilst using on demand AF you'll get the message loud and clear That screwdrive lens is going to make that sound with or without mechanical SR.

11-19-2013, 10:31 AM	#19
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	For me going from a K20D to K-5, the big difference was IQ. If you get an image on a K-5, it's top of class. You may be limited by slower AF, not as good low light performance, slower processing time, but in terms of IQ on captures, the K-5 IMHO is still tops if you consider everything but resolution. . The K-3 is a faster processing, more advanced AF, faster burst mode, to me the K-3 is an action camera…. wildlife, fast moving kids etc. It's not the same upgrade as K20D to K-5. It's a different up grade, and every bit as satisfying. The K-5 addressed absolute IQ, the K-3 addressed the things that take a toll on your keeper rate. It's a different kind of joy. But still a joy.

11-19-2013, 05:58 PM - 1 Like	#20
bass3587 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 517	I think for "ME" I'm going to keep my K5 and get a K3 so I'll have the best of both worlds

11-21-2013, 05:32 AM	#23
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	Originally posted by trumanusa Please let me know if it is worth moving from k-5 II to k-3. Sorry if i have hijacked the thread. I went from the K5IIs to the K3. If you put value on all of the things that have been mentioned and want even better Autofocus than the K5IIs offers, then yes it definitely is.