[Manual Zoom Lens Man]

I love the camera, use it with A series Manual Zooms. Sometimes the ressults are magic

[Des]

I did debate between it and K-50, but finally decided to go the K-S2 way, please convince me I chose well.

I had two K-30s before the K-S2 and loved them. For me the K-S2 feels less comfortable to hold than the K-30 (grip is significantly smaller), and the K-S2 lacks the flash controller function and AA battery capacity, but in just about every other way the K-S2 is a better camera. The AF is a little better, it has noticaeably more resolution, and the articulating screen is very useful and works well. The 16mp sensor produces less noise at high ISO, but what extra noise there is with the 20mp sensor cleans up well in PP. The wifi feature is fun to use for remote control of the camera, but it's a bit clunky and I don't bother with it for file transfer.

Neither camera can match the K-3 for AF performance, resolution, metering, ergonomics and buttons, quiet shutter, or build quality (amongst other things). If you can live without a flippy screen, and with the extra bulk and weight, and with less warranty, I'd suggest people also consider a used K-3 against a K-S2 or K-70.

[badsykes]

i payed around 450euros / 475$ an aproximate conversion for ks2 body(used for demo only but in in guarantee) but and the K-3 body new is around 700euros / 725$ (aproximate conversion),The difference in price is 50%.

[Des]

i payed around 450euros / 475$ an aproximate conversion for ks2 body(used for demo only but in in guarantee) but and the K-3 body new is around 700euros / 725$ (aproximate conversion),The difference in price is 50%.

I bought my K-S2 in a Pentax Australia sale in December for $A592 (ie about $US450) - about the same as what you paid. It's an excellent buy for that kind of price.

Normally the K-S2 is $A900+ new in Australia, whereas a used K-3 can be bought privately for around $650-750. On that relativity, I think the used K-3 is better value than the new K-S2. I would be more comfortable about buying a K-3 than a K-S2 second-hand, because the K-3 is more sturdily built, and doesn't have the aperture mechanism issue.

[Penview52]

Few months of handling this camera seems heavy for me, Tried only auto mode and impressions are the following:

Good in low light without using flash and satisfied with the printout photo. I gave a 9 out of 10, where ten is the highest.
Sudden appearance of flashing/blinking red in part of photo of indoor image like glasses or reflective object.
Magnified blackish background due to insufficient light - maybe.
Magnified reddish background due to lighting maybe in indoor still photo.
Not satisfied HDR mode under sunny environment.

[Des]

Few months of handling this camera seems heavy for me, Tried only auto mode and impressions are the following:

Good in low light without using flash and satisfied with the printout photo. I gave a 9 out of 10, where ten is the highest.
Sudden appearance of flashing/blinking red in part of photo of indoor image like glasses or reflective object.
Magnified blackish background due to insufficient light - maybe.
Magnified reddish background due to lighting maybe in indoor still photo.
Not satisfied HDR mode under sunny environment.

Not clear what you mean by some of these points. Some photos would clarify what you are referring to.

I would just make these points:
- Don't rely on Auto mode as a measure of what the camera can do. To move on from Auto, you could try the Scene modes first, but try Av, Tv or TAv as soon as you can. Some practice will help you choose appropriate aperture, shutter speed and ISO settings for a given situation.
- Are you shooting in RAW, or only in jpg? RAW allows for big improvements in exposure, colour balance, contrast and so on. Some very quick tweaks, even with one of the free processing programs, will greatly improve your images. You don't have to give up out-of-camera jpg: there is a setting for RAW+jpg which stores the image on the SD card in both forms.
- The results from low light shooting without flash depend a lot on the lens you are using. Which lens(es) have you tried?
- Jpg results from in-camera HDR are pretty awful in my experience. The PF review makes that clear enough. Post-processing even a single RAW file will almost always produce better results. There are also many programs that can merge multiple RAW files (shot in a sequence, on a tripod) to produce high-quality HDR images.

[Penview52]

Every situation has different set up due to environmental lighting and setting is a must to get the correct exposure; if you are to take photo in a " spur at the moment " setting is not advisable because the image is gone before setting is done, this is what auto mode is at advantage all the time. Let the camera works by itself and give the best it can without so much thinking.

[Des]

Every situation has different set up due to environmental lighting and setting is a must to get the correct exposure; if you are to take photo in a " spur at the moment " setting is not advisable because the image is gone before setting is done, this is what auto mode is at advantage all the time. Let the camera works by itself and give the best it can without so much thinking.

OK, but you are really using a DSLR like a P&S. Don't blame the camera if the shot doesn't come out as well as you'd like! Sometimes it will come up with strange combinations. With a little experience of trying different settings, you will get at least a rough idea of what aperture, ISO and shutter speed settings will work in particular situations. The beauty of TAv, Av and Tv is that you set one or two of the three parameters and the camera will set the rest (within a specified range in the case of ISO) - more control, and the camera does what it's good at. I try to cap the ISO at 1600 (or 800), unless it's really necessary to go higher. Minimum shutter speed depends on the focal length (1/focal length, e.g. 1/30th second for a 30mm shot, is a good starting point) and how fast the subject is moving (assuming you don't want blur). Aperture setting will depend on how much depth of field you want, how the lens performs at particular apertures, and how much light there is. It's not rocket science, and a little trial-and-error will do wonders.

[Penview52]

Tried a P mode and made some few settings, then other day tried a Av mode and set few settings, then other day again tried Scene mode and set other needed settings except ISO untouched. Once i go back to P mode and result was not good because it carried the previous set up from other modes. Without resetting the camera to default mode, the effect of setting is carried to the next mode- this makes unwanted result.