Well if you think the K-3 isn't for you, get the K-5IIs. Problem solved. No need to make a thread with a title that states something as if it is fact, a title that might make some people perceive the camera with a bias.
But the reviews seem to be pretty consistent that the K-3 is better. Then again, people make wow photos even with the ist*, the Q - it all depends on the photographer, the content, and post processing. The K-3 is so new that most sample photos taken with it are just snapshots to demonstrate "it works!" rather than actual photographic art. I'm sure once people get to work with the K-3 they will be able to pull more out of it than the K-5. On the other hand, the K-5 is still a great camera with a lot of features and great IQ. Nothing wrong with getting the K-5 (II, s) and saving some money - to spend it on lenses, of course!