Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-03-2015, 09:18 AM - 1 Like   #16
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,325
QuoteOriginally posted by iss2012 Quote
For me, the high ISO performance of the K-30 is better than that of the K-3.
Yeah, many say the K-5IIs still has the best noise performance of Pentax cameras, because it has 14bit (this is higher than K-30, K-50), allows ISO 80, and it has a really good 16MP sensor. The K-3 has higher resolution, captures more detail, but this also allows more noise (but is similar when it comes to bit depth and DR). Not terribly bad, won't be noticed in most situations, but when you PP a lot and enlarge the photo, it might be noticeable. And the K-5IIs delivers sharper photos than the K-30 because it has no AA. Honestly, you can get a K-5IIs for such a good price these days, you can spend the rest on an UWA lens.
We are still waiting on the K-3II, that camera might be better still. But at this stage of technology, a ceiling has been reached with the K-5IIs, which will be hard to beat. (and the K-30 has the same/very similar 16MP sensor, so it has similar noise characteristics, but it has smaller bit depth and dynamic range, plus AA filter)

06-03-2015, 09:20 AM - 1 Like   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2013
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 601
None of the crop sensor cameras today offer significant high-ISO performance compared to the K-30. They just process the pixels differently. While the manufacturers may tout their latest and greatest as being the second coming of Christ (with toast) the truth is high-ISO performance is limited by physics. Cameras from the last 3-4 years are all pretty much the same.

As many have said, lenses are the way to go. Not sexy, not as fun as a new camera, but realistic advice. Even then, it's often possible to get very good, professional results with less expensive gear. There are many bargains in Pentax-M lenses out there.
06-03-2015, 09:24 AM - 1 Like   #18
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 120
First of all, I believe every lens has it's designated to have certain characteristics, that includes sharpness or blurriness. Every lens has it's resolving power up to certain point as "Optimal" resolution, and beyond that, the image will no longer gain any better resolution even your sensor is upkeep for capturing. Been said, you will never expect plastic holga lens do any better no matter how good the film you are putting into the camera. Since the lens itself can never resolve "sharp" image in the first place.

On the contrast, you are worrying about lens resolution isn't going to hold up when you upgrade the sensor. The truth is, up till 36mp, most of lenses are fine and you won't tell much difference on the resolution. Sure! We are arguing what if 50 megapxiel cameras comes out on the market? But you also have to understand, there is no "optimal" situation because every lens is design different and sensor won't be able to always resolve 100% every pixel juice you wanted. UNLESS, you are talking about something like SONY RX1R. A fixed lens designed just for that camera.

I would say is, don't worry much just use it. Even if you think your lens can only resolve 19mp resolution at wide open. While you are upgrading camera, you still can see image quality boost each time. Till you finally reach to a certain point you don't think your lens is really resolving any better, then you switch out your lenses. I can tell you even kit lens can go up higher than 24mp. I am adapting my pentax lenses onto A7, A7R.. Even the oldest FA24-90 still amazed me about the detail it can capture. Sure! The sharpness isn't absolute sharp like prime lenses (We can totally see that from the naked eyes) but keep in mind, when I upgrade from 16 to 20, 20 to 24, 24 to 36.. The lens resolution keeps upgrading itself as well!!! The worst case about 50 megapixel camera on day comes into my camera bag. My current lens lineup will still "upgrade" the image quality, but just not as much. I will have somewhat blurry at best when view 100% pixelated enlargement, It's still will be a very "SHARP" 30ish megapixel image in 50 megapixel resolution.

That my friend...... is what everyone did today! They stick up a kit lens on 24mp K3.. keep in mind kit lens is no where better than 20mp resolution!! But people still rave about kit lens on modern highend cameras. It's really comes down to how "satisfy" are you on your image that's all.

YES! I am a lens guy! I'll tell you to upgrade your lens in any given day.... But in reality good lens with low end camera body at end of the day still give you much better image than low end lens with highend camera body. But you won't see people complain!!! Simply because resolution isn't really EVERYTHING of an Image.

My advice, I believed even prime lenses can hold up roughly about 36mp about optimal resolution.. Actually not that many prime can get to 36mp on every pixel juice. That's the reason why Zeiss redesigned the entire lineup just for Sony 36mp sensor. However, Pentax is no shabby either. K3II on the highest resolution is still a tiny bit sharper than A7R with proper Zeiss gear. But how much sharpness do you really want? Before today, everyone was still happy about their 10mp enlargement to wall size prints..... when is enough?
06-03-2015, 12:03 PM   #19
Senior Member
Davidparis's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 268
Original Poster
Once again, thanks.

Again, thanks to all for the excellent thought-provoking responses. Sure is helpful to have such good advice. New option number 5 requires re-negociating with the Minister of Finances and convince her to authorize a budget extension (sometimes I wish I was the boss in my own home...) in order to finance a new K-3, DA16-85 and a nice WA prime and then just suck it up and take pictures!

---------- Post added 06-03-2015 at 12:11 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim Quote
Hate to be a contrarian, but I disagree with most of the responses. As a former owner of the K-30, I can say without hesitation that the K-3 is a huge step up overall because it is in the flagship class for the build quality, AF, performance, better WR and expected durability. In the long run, getting a high-quality body will save you money because it will satisfy your needs longer and ownership costs over time will be very low. I especially notice the battery capacity and shutter quietness differences.

The concern over the sensor "out-resolving" your existing optics is pretty much myth. All lenses improve resolving power as you increase pixel density (assuming that added noise doesn't nullify the resolution increase). Better lenses benefit more markedly than lower resolution lenses, so improving your lens arsenal is a valid long-term goal. Issues related to CA tend to be emphasized on the K-3, so those lenses will show those faults as you pixel peep. If and when you make a body change decision soon, then assess your lens arsenal on the new body. Lenses are very long term when you have a plan (roadmap), and you need to select with care because of the investment and larger overall impact on IQ. Think of your lens system independent of the body.

As for UWA, the 14mm Pentax is a dog - no other way to describe it. If you don't mind manual focus or some heft, the best value is going with the 14mm Samyang (Rokinon, Bower, Vivitar, Polar, etc.). I think the 15mm Pentax is fine, especially if you want a compact lens; but its corner sharpness is not in the same league as the Samyang.
Hello,
Interesting reponse. I like the K-30 so much that I'd like to keep it as a second body and retire the K200d. I may plan to acquire the K-3 as primary weapon of mass destruction and then probably add the DA16-85 to replace the very decent DA18-135 and finally add a limited prime. I suppose no solution is perfect, but that would satisfy the ridiculous Western value of consumerism of which I'm a victim and have some new toys to play with. Thanks for your input.

06-03-2015, 12:41 PM   #20
New Member
Mactaus's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 7
Ultra Wide

I find that the 10-17mm is nice for a really wide lens if you don't mind distortion or if you want the distortion as an affect. Produces some really nice photos with the k100d super may not be sharp enough for k-3 or k-30 though would have to ask someone else.
Both Pictures at f10 1/500. 1st picture at 17mm and 2nd at 10mm
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K100D Super  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K100D Super  Photo 
06-03-2015, 01:10 PM   #21
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
I would also vote for upgrading your lenses before upgrading your camera body. First there is economics. Lens prices generally go up but camera body prices go down with new model releases. Get what you want now while you can. For me that meant the three FA Limited lenses. It helped me kick LBA. I don't lust for lenses now. Heresy? Maybe. Second, a new lens can breathe new life into an old body - both camera and human. A new lens can offer new perspectives, performance, and rendering.

After you have exhausted your lenses and your camera starts feeling old after a few years then I would say get a new body.

Then again, it's your money. If you want it and can afford it then buy it. The world economy would appreciate your contribution.
06-03-2015, 03:19 PM   #22
Pentaxian
ScooterMaxi Jim's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,464
Agreeing with Wolfeye that none of the cameras under discussion are going to govern choice based strictly on IQ. The sensors are all quite close. That's why my rationale for the K-3 indicated its other qualities that make it superior and a better long-term value than the earlier bodies, especially the non-flagship models. Given the current pricing, it is a good first step to go with the K-3 before reassessing the need for new lenses. Over the past six years, only the K20D, K5 and K-3 made clearly huge steps in capabilities and these cameras became tremendous values when their pricing reached half or less of their original market value. Glass doesn't work that way because good glass is never going to be heavily discounted.
06-03-2015, 06:18 PM   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 301
I prefer my sigma 70mm on my k100d over my tamron 18-250 at 70 on my k-s2 up to 125% of the 6.2 mp of the k100d. That is extreme difference in camera and glass. That is the advantage I see of good glass. The glass will keep upgrading with you over time but the bodies go obsolete.

The other side is really about what features you feel you need that you don't have. How many shots do you miss because you don't have these features? Keep in mind that good glass also helps get shots.

06-04-2015, 04:12 AM   #24
Junior Member




Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 38
My 2 cents worth.
I own both the K30 and the K3 and I will echo a lot of the comments here, get new glass.
There is nothing wrong with the K30 nor can I say that there is anything I can do with the K3 that I cannot do with the K30.

Having used the K30 for two odd years now and the K3 for a year or so I would rate the two bodies as follows.

K3 pros:
Better build quality, the fit and feel is awesome, the dials and buttons all feel so nice to use. It is so much nice to use because of this.
Bigger files allow for more cropping if required.
Dual card slots.
No AA filter.
Shutter is oh so much quieter
X mode, it is very handy to lock the shutter at 1/180 while using flash.

K30 pros:
It is lighter! Not normally an issue but it makes a difference when you happen to be hiking all day with the 200mm attached.
The files are smaller and dont fill up my hard drives so quickly.
The grip is deeper and more comfortable to hold.

When it comes down to it I really would be hard pressed to tell the different between a photo I had taken with both the bodies because I use the same glass between them. Having said that if I compared a file of the same subject matter back to back then for sure the K3 gives more and finer detail but does that really matter? Viewed in isolation the K30 produces excellent images, it is just that the K3 is better.

Also just for your information I have the following lenses that I use:
DA15mm f4 limited
DA*55mm f1.4
FA77mm f1.8 limited
DA*200mm f2.8

Cheers
06-04-2015, 01:05 PM   #25
Senior Member
Davidparis's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 268
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Dreamsong Quote
My 2 cents worth.
I own both the K30 and the K3 and I will echo a lot of the comments here, get new glass.
There is nothing wrong with the K30 nor can I say that there is anything I can do with the K3 that I cannot do with the K30.

Having used the K30 for two odd years now and the K3 for a year or so I would rate the two bodies as follows.

K3 pros:
Better build quality, the fit and feel is awesome, the dials and buttons all feel so nice to use. It is so much nice to use because of this.
Bigger files allow for more cropping if required.
Dual card slots.
No AA filter.
Shutter is oh so much quieter
X mode, it is very handy to lock the shutter at 1/180 while using flash.

K30 pros:
It is lighter! Not normally an issue but it makes a difference when you happen to be hiking all day with the 200mm attached.
The files are smaller and dont fill up my hard drives so quickly.
The grip is deeper and more comfortable to hold.

When it comes down to it I really would be hard pressed to tell the different between a photo I had taken with both the bodies because I use the same glass between them. Having said that if I compared a file of the same subject matter back to back then for sure the K3 gives more and finer detail but does that really matter? Viewed in isolation the K30 produces excellent images, it is just that the K3 is better.

Also just for your information I have the following lenses that I use:
DA15mm f4 limited
DA*55mm f1.4
FA77mm f1.8 limited
DA*200mm f2.8

Cheers
Thanks for the info. Hopefully I can do both; K3 and a new selection of better glass and keep the K30 as a very capable second body.
06-04-2015, 06:28 PM - 1 Like   #26
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,189
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
I usually recommend people stick to the gear they have until they can point out exactly how it is holding them back.
What he said. Let pain be your guide.


Steve
06-04-2015, 06:37 PM - 1 Like   #27
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,189
QuoteOriginally posted by photodesignch Quote
On the contrast, you are worrying about lens resolution isn't going to hold up when you upgrade the sensor. The truth is, up till 36mp, most of lenses are fine and you won't tell much difference on the resolution.
Yep! Besides that, you want the sensor to test the limits of the lens performance. That case is much better than the reverse! The happy thing about the K-3 sensor is that even middle-tier glass will often perform much better than expected when allowed a little breathing room.


Steve
06-05-2015, 08:15 PM   #28
Pentaxian
ScooterMaxi Jim's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,464
Dreamsong, I think you've got it right in comparing the two cameras. I'll even add that the overall exposure accuracy is considerably better on the K-30. You have to keep an eye on the K-3, or it will overexpose at times.

However, the overall build quality, quietness, and AF performance of the K-3 is so much better - it's hard to quantify in words. Also, the grip difference is a matter of personal preference. The K-30 is really designed for very small hands - and my hands are not at all large. I find the K-3 much less cramped, and yet just as sure-handed.
06-10-2015, 04:02 AM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 841
I got my new forest green K-S2 yesterday, so I haven't had time to take images in the field with it yet but here are my first impressions:

It replaces my K10D and K-x, being more compact than the K10D but thicker and beefier than the K-x and with an excellent handgrip. It's very nice with big and chunky lenses, like the DA 17-70 f/4 AL SDM that was unpleasant and front heavy on my tiny K-x but now is a very comfortable and lovely combination with the K-S2, this is my preferred standard zoom.

Build quality is excellent, the swingable back screen is really useful and viewfinder is smashing. Tons of settings to make and it's easy adjustable to one's own preferences. It really gives me K10D features in a smaller and more compact package, without being too small. It lacks the AA-filter too, like the K-3, and it has the same adjustable AA-filter simulation. Sure some options are in the menu instead of on separate buttons and controls, the K10D (and K-3) has more external controls, but thank's to user modes and programmable buttons one can make settings that gives easy access to DOF-preview etc.

All in all I'm very happy so far, and see no real point (for me) to go for a K-3.

Only thing I don't like is the black plastic shutter button, it was shiny chrome metal on my K10D...
06-10-2015, 04:24 AM   #30
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,873
I would go with the k-3 and the DA* 16-50 (or 16-85) to start with. The reason is that with the k-3 you can crop without worrying about losing lots of pixels. The k-3 is a real bargain compare to other brands at similar level. The DA* 16-50 is really a bargain if you can find a used one (even if it is converted to screw drive only); the only thing I am not using it as much is because it is a bit heavy to carry (for me anyway as I prefer to travel light); and of course, the alternative would be 16-85 if you shoot a lot outdoors.

Last edited by aleonx3; 06-10-2015 at 04:32 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
angle, body, camera, da, dslr, features, k-3, k-30, k3, k30, lens, lenses, magazine, noise, option, pentax, pentax k-3, pf, photos, settings, sharpness, subject, thanks, upgrade
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reasons (not) to upgrade from K-5 to K-3? Sten Pentax K-3 36 12-26-2014 02:01 PM
For Sale - Sold: Focusingscreens.com EE-S Screen for K-3, K-5, K-5II, K-7, K-30, K-50 & K-500 Aperturae Sold Items 6 10-06-2014 06:49 AM
For Sale - Sold: KatzEye Split-Prism Focusing Screen - for K-3, K-5, K-5II, K-7, K-30, K-50 & K-500 chickentender Sold Items 7 04-15-2014 08:35 PM
Upgrade from K-5 to K-3 Budster48 Pentax K-5 11 02-04-2014 10:00 AM
K-3 Upgrade from K-30 kosmoejtg Pentax K-3 13 02-01-2014 05:09 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:01 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top