Originally posted by clackers Interesting that a new Japanese member linked to this review by a photographer who thinks that at least with his 35mm lens, the high ISO performance was between one and two stops superior to the K-3. Only the 645Z waa better, in his opinion:
This sounds a little optimistic, but one stop could be possible. Some how I don't think so, since it's 12-bit RAW. Maybe they study jpg's with noise reduction in the camera.
For hi iso my K-5 wins over K-3 and K-5 wins over K-01, but havent looked serious in to K-01 versus K-3 since I use the camera for different things.
At base iso (so iso 100-200) the K-3 has lots of extra detail while the K-5 (at iso 80) has extra dynamic range. I gues the K-S1 will bring the extra detail aswell. The K-01 has stunning IQ at base iso, but does not stand out in any way to the others, just very good dynamic range and detail and delivers extra crisp sharpness compared to my K-5 (less filter infront of the sensor), but not to the K-3 (or probably the K-5 IIs).