[emalvick]

I went from the original K5 to a K3. It was worth it. Focus is better and metering is better. Camera size isn't different enough for me to notice.

The AA filter (or lack of) has been a big help to getting sharp images especially on lenses that are already sharp. The only disadvantage for my use is the large file size. At the same time, I'm making use of that extra resolution more often than not by cropping a bit more a purposely shooting a bit wider.

Anyway, for myself, I had to balance upgrading to the K5iis or the K3 and chose the K3 because the difference in price wasn't that great.

[BrianR]

If you're happy with your k5 then keep being happy with it. Looking elsewhere will only make it jealous, unless you have one of those 'open relationships' with your camera where it's also free to see other photographers. But then you may have to deal with it doing things with them that it doesn't do with you.

Seriously, unless you want or need to have 2 bodies, or an upgrade comes out that will be mind-blowingly awesome for you, I'd keep using the k-5 until it starts to fall apart.

[K-Three]

I went from the original K5 to a K3. It was worth it. Focus is better and metering is better. Camera size isn't different enough for me to notice.

The AA filter (or lack of) has been a big help to getting sharp images especially on lenses that are already sharp. The only disadvantage for my use is the large file size. At the same time, I'm making use of that extra resolution more often than not by cropping a bit more a purposely shooting a bit wider.

Anyway, for myself, I had to balance upgrading to the K5iis or the K3 and chose the K3 because the difference in price wasn't that great.

I too went this path,
The K5 is a very capable camera and I was very happy with it until I picked up a K3,
For some reason the K3 just works better, now I'm happy with the K5, and ecstatic about the K3
I do like the lack of AA filter, I've left mine off and never looked back,
If I had never picked up a K3 I doubt I would feel as I do about the K5 now, nothing wrong with it, just more right with the K3.
Still shoot with both of them, nice to have two very capable, low-light cameras for some of the indoor event work I do, put a wide on one a short tele on the other, and bang away as needed. I've not noticed a significant difference in noise between the two at the higher ISOs.

[jeffshaddix]

With the K-3 you'd lose ISO 80 and mechanical video SR, which may or may not be important to you, but I use them regularly.

[Sten]

Thank you all for sharing your experiences and your views!
It is most interesting to read.
This forum is really very valuable as a source of information.

Sten

[nms_photog]

For me personally, I have come to outgrow my dearly beloved K-x, as I'm to the point now, that at certain times it could no longer do what I ask off it. Was literally seconds away from pulling the trigger on the Black Friday K3. Until, I realized.........I'm not in dire need of all that extra resolution, just a more capable camera. That, and the fact I've come to love the articulated screen on my MX-1 and rumor has it the K3 successor might get that feature. I therefore got a great used K5 from a member here which has a custom split image focus screen (that alone was a deal maker, as I use manual lenses allot and liked hearing the good things about the k3 focus peeking feature). Spending only $300, I knew if I had gotten a k3 at more than double its price, I'd quickly turn around and buy it's successor if it did come with a flippy screen. Therefore saving me potentially allot of money.

[JONAH]

AZ 1895 - Perhaps I am reading your post wrongly, but you seem to be implying that the K3 is not weather resistant? It is weather resistant to the same extent as the K30, K5 and 5iis, are.

[Rondec]

AZ 1895 - Perhaps I am reading your post wrongly, but you seem to be implying that the K3 is not weather resistant? It is weather resistant to the same extent as the K30, K5 and 5iis, are.

I think he was just saying that if he dropped his camera and submerged it, he wouldn't feel as badly if it was an older, cheaper camera than a brand new K3. But you'd still feel pretty bad...

[Dlanor Sekao]

AZ 1895 - Perhaps I am reading your post wrongly, but you seem to be implying that the K3 is not weather resistant? It is weather resistant to the same extent as the K30, K5 and 5iis, are.

I believe its WR even more....but Im really scared to do with it as I do the K30.
I think a move up from a K5 to a K5II or even K30 would be adviseable......Im having remorse over my very recent K3 purchase.

---------- Post added 12-09-14 at 11:00 AM ----------

I think he was just saying that if he dropped his camera and submerged it, he wouldn't feel as badly if it was an older, cheaper camera than a brand new K3. But you'd still feel pretty bad...

Exactly ! I DIDNT need a K3.....should have just bought a K5II or yet just another K30.
My K3 is my baby so to speak , and since I shoot old glass Im not getting all that it can be. If I really dunk it its done as with any of the others also.
For me the upgrade wasnt worth it from a perspective of mainly shooting JPG and having trouble dealing with proper processing of RAW to get the most of the K3......poor lightroom user (inexperienced)
Maybe I will get past that , but Im unsure of my new purchase with the higher resolution sensor and noise + the added settings over what Im used to.
If knowing what I do now and was the OP......I would get the K5II as an upgrade , or a K30 for a second body.
Im finding the K3 a bit intimidating and frustrating.

---------- Post added 12-09-14 at 11:23 AM ----------

I use a film camera in these types of situations.

I save the film for UNDERWATER....lol
A cheap WP Sureshot Cannon.

[emalvick]

I believe its WR even more....but Im really scared to do with it as I do the K30.
I think a move up from a K5 to a K5II or even K30 would be adviseable......Im having remorse over my very recent K3 purchase.

---------- Post added 12-09-14 at 11:00 AM ----------

Exactly ! I DIDNT need a K3.....should have just bought a K5II or yet just another K30.
My K3 is my baby so to speak , and since I shoot old glass Im not getting all that it can be. If I really dunk it its done as with any of the others also.
For me the upgrade wasnt worth it from a perspective of mainly shooting JPG and having trouble dealing with proper processing of RAW to get the most of the K3......poor lightroom user (inexperienced)
Maybe I will get past that , but Im unsure of my new purchase with the higher resolution sensor and noise + the added settings over what Im used to.
If knowing what I do now and was the OP......I would get the K5II as an upgrade , or a K30 for a second body.
Im finding the K3 a bit intimidating and frustrating.[COLOR="Silver"]

I'm not sure I get all the intimidation and problems people have or are concerned with the K3.

File size and resolution: Resize the image (downsize) when you are ready to use it. Unless you are printing a poster or something quite large, you don't need a final image to be at 24 MP (assuming you keep the original safe somewhere). If you think of 300 ppi as an ideal standard for a print, then an 8 x 10 photo is around 7.2 MP.

Noise: K3 images are slightly noisier than K5 images. It's a result of the extra resolution. Resize the original image to the same resolution as a K5 image, and the images will seem almost identical in terms of noise. In reality, you'll be able to resize smaller per the previous item.

Post Processing: I'm finding my K3 images need less post-processing than any camera I've had before:

1. With no AA filter, my images are quite sharp to begin with. I don't really have to apply sharpening in LR, and when I do I can get away with more than I used to do to the finer resolution. In other words, I find that I don't need to finesse the numbers as much

2. NR is the same thing. I can apply NR because the lack of AA filter has my images pretty sharp, and I can use quite a bit of NR before images get soft. I also keep in mind that images tend to look noisier at 100% (pixel-peeping) and on screen than they do at final size and on print. In other words, I can use more noise reduction, but I don't need it that much.

3. The K-3 meters the scenes quite well. My need for exposure adjustments is quite minimal compared to my K-5. Most work is probably confined to the mid-levels (curves and shadows) and perhaps bringing back highlights.

The end result is that my processing in LR is probably about 25% of what I spent with my K-5.


Ultimately, I'm finding the K-3 much better than I expected, and all the concerns and internal confusion over whether I should get a K-5 or K-3 have gone away. Heck, even my flash photos are coming out almost perfect now with little struggle. The camera and flash finally seem to be on the same page. My K-5 was always a struggle for using a flash.

[aleonx3]

And yet another thing.....
I shoot alot standing in water , camera just above water , sometimes even neck deep in water !
Im having a really hard time imagining my summer shoots with a K3 hovering above possible certain death with one wrong move !
Is it a better camera than the K30 , K5 , K5II ?
In a way....yes. But then again if it gets dunked ? Guess what I will be buying on Ebay.........a K30 , K5 , K5II.
So Im not sure exactly what my point is to you , but you wont hear me touting the advantages of the K3 at all.
Its a !%@*&# learning and understanding new settings on it (for me) , and unless you shoot Raw and PP everything there isnt much advantage in upgrading .
If you do upgrade....seriously consider the K5II ?
I might catch Pentaxian Hell for saying this......But Im having a bit of buyers remorse for ((Possibly)) making a wrong decision in purchasing the K3 . Not because it isnt a really great camera , but because it ultimately might not fit my needs , style , and technical ability.
I just learned it takes more work to get the best out of it , and that requires more time in PP .....for me anyway.
Ive had it for all of a week , and not real enthused at this point , but rather frustrated and in a quandry......so take it for whats thats worth.

Life is a journey, enjoy it while you can... get what suits your need to get results that you want (not what others want).

[Dlanor Sekao]

I didnt mean to hijack the OP thread....sorry.
Personally just having a real hard time. First Im dissapointed , then Im happy...happy...happy !
Im going through a very steep learning curve with Panorama software , learning lightroom , and 3 various Pentax K model cameras all within a year.
I really wish I had bought another K5II (first was defective right out of the box so bought K30 while waiting for repair) as a companion to my K30 , but the allure of $600 for the K3 got me.
In over my head and would hate to see someone else make the same mistake (even if temporary) that Ive done.
I learned first hand what Ive read about Pro Cameras....and the k3 is one for sure......its bigger than me and has to be treated as such.
Because of upgrading all my gear and now the K3 , Learning PTGui and Lightroom , 2 broken Gitzo tripods , and a Nodal Ninja III MkII that is giving me fits.........the fun is gone !
I plan on taking a couple courses for photography at ASU or Glendale community college next year.....I need it badly from a technical/software standpoint.
Sometimes more is less for some of us , and would hate to see someone else (OP) get lost in switching/upgrading as Ive done.
The settings seem more.... Shall I call it "pronounced" on the K3 and I cant seem to figure it out.
My Lady companion looked at me last night and said...."you bought too much camera didnt you" ?.........."yup"..... I replied.

[stevebrot]

If You satisfied with the K-5, was not worth change to K-3

The best reason of them all.

Upgrading for other than dissatisfaction is a waste of money.


Steve

[emalvick]

I didnt mean to hijack the OP thread....sorry.
Personally just having a real hard time. First Im dissapointed , then Im happy...happy...happy !
Im going through a very steep learning curve with Panorama software , learning lightroom , and 3 various Pentax K model cameras all within a year.
I really wish I had bought another K5II (first was defective right out of the box so bought K30 while waiting for repair) as a companion to my K30 , but the allure of $600 for the K3 got me.
In over my head and would hate to see someone else make the same mistake (even if temporary) that Ive done.
I learned first hand what Ive read about Pro Cameras....and the k3 is one for sure......its bigger than me and has to be treated as such.
Because of upgrading all my gear and now the K3 , Learning PTGui and Lightroom , 2 broken Gitzo tripods , and a Nodal Ninja III MkII that is giving me fits.........the fun is gone !
I plan on taking a couple courses for photography at ASU or Glendale community college next year.....I need it badly from a technical/software standpoint.
Sometimes more is less for some of us , and would hate to see someone else (OP) get lost in switching/upgrading as Ive done.
The settings seem more.... Shall I call it "pronounced" on the K3 and I cant seem to figure it out.
My Lady companion looked at me last night and said...."you bought too much camera didnt you" ?.........."yup"..... I replied.

Well. It sounds like you started fresh and you are essentially trying to figure out how to use a dSLR, so your problems are possibly not model specific?

Try to look at things from a bright side and step back a bit and look forward with optimism not regret.

Getting a dSLR from a film SLR or a point and shoot digital camera does not all of a sudden make great photos. I had a film camera and a higher end pro-sumer digital camera when I purchased my first dSLR in early 2008 (a K-10d). It took me over a year for everything to click in to place and for my photos to start to exceed what I was getting previously. There is a lot of learning, which is partially just knowing photography (i.e. exposure and compensation) but some of it is just getting comfortable with the camera. When I upgraded to a K-5, it still took 6-months to get comfortable with that camera and really get the shots I wanted. Finally, with the K-3, my learning curve has been a month.

It sounds like you've never gotten through the learning curve with any of your cameras, so it very well may take some time to learn them... And, I strongly suggest you focus on learning one (assuming you still have the others). Pick one and get comfortable with it. Don't fret over all the options and menu settings. Most of them aren't important up front.

If you are really new, get books such as Understanding Exposure to get the basics down. A book like that applies to all cameras, especially dSLRs. Ask a lot of questions here.

As for software. A book on LR can help quite a bit (Kelby and Evening write two separate books that are great... worth getting one). Panorama software, Microsoft ICE (free) is quite user friendly.

Ultimately, it's worth stepping back and learning things one by one. A class helps, but practice helps a lot too. Play with exposure settings, etc, and see how things can change. Photography should be fun.

[Dlanor Sekao]

Yes......Im new to DSLR's about 14 months ago , but have had several higher end Point and shoot prosumer models that I excelled with .... At first I took to it like a Duck to water. Getting really nice compositions and end results with the K30......But I was longing for a bit more.
I understand composition , exposure ,aperature , depth of field , etc....very well.....with film.
Have quite a bit of high end Pentax legacy glass that Ive collected over the years (and recently) so those are my go to lenses.
Its the settings and software that Im getting lost in on the K3 for good results....hit and miss alot.
I can grab a K5 , K30 , K5II and do quite well....... Its the K3 that is giving me remorse about half the time.
On a positive note....I turned OFF every form of NR and suddenly things are looking Happy Happy ???
Im actually wondering if turning the AA filter off today , along with NR off is the whole solution ??? They seem to be fighting/cancelling each other out ???
Suddenly things are looking really really good ! I mean really good.....!