[Mash4077]

Hi

I am after some advice and thoughts on an upgrade. Currently I shoot with a K5-IIs which is still working fine but I am getting the subtle and not so subtle hints from a family member that it is time to upgrade. She is just starting out and feels very comfy and at ease with the K5IIs.

Earlier this year I came to the forum asking for help on low light and received excellent help, that coupled with many training sessions and several more to come over the winter months to help further my low light photography is improving. I am looking for something that is outstanding in low light, slow shutter speeds and potentially high ISO usage. Currently I tend to peak at about 1600 within the K5IIs before the noise starts to have an impact. The images that I take are potentially printed at A3 in order to be entered into club and county competitions.

Have been looking at the K3II and the K1 in terms of lens compatibility. At the moment all my lenses bar the 150-500 will need to operate in crop mode on the K1 as to replace them with full frame lenses would push the cost up to the region of £6000 which is not a possibility at this stage, over time yes but not initially. Obviously I know that all my lenses will work fine on the K3II but also that it is possibly heading for replacement at somepoint in the next 12-18mths etc.

At the moment my logic bank balance head is saying opt for the K3-II whilst my heart is saying "stuff it" go out and get the K1 as whilst it will be in crop mode most of the time with slightly lower mega pixels compared to the K5IIs the significant improvements with the sensor and processors will make a big difference.

Thanks

Paul

[robgski]

If I had the money, I'd go directly to the K-1, but I have a lot of older lenses that will will as full frame.

From everything I've read the K-3ii is a great camera, and with others shifting to K-1, can probably be picked up at a reasonable price. I don't like to spend more than I must, and the savings goes to new lenses

Another thing to consider is adjusting from the APS-C 1.5 crop factor to the K-1. IF you like the free boost to longer lenses that APS-C provides, it can be a surprise.

[Mike.P®]

If you are looking for something that is better than the K-5IIs in low light and you want to stay with Pentax then your only real choice is the K-1.

I love my K-5IIs but recently purchased the K-3II and although it is a step up in most places over the 5IIs IMO it is slightly worse in low light/dynamic range performance and so because of this I decided to keep both.

[Scorpio71GR]

I say the K1 if you are going to make the switch to Full Frame. Otherwise I would just sit tight until the K3 successor comes out.

[interested_observer]

Morning, I also shoot with the K5IIs primarily in low light and have considered upgrading. I came across this Sensor Noise DataBase a few months ago, that has been keeping pace with recent camera announcements, and the K5IIs performs at a really exceptional level. Now, to be fair - they measure and compare everything at ISO 3200 +5ev, across 1, 30 and 300 seconds all NR disabled, in order to set up an extreme situation to bring out the worst in the sensors. It also includes the K1, K3 and K5 - so you can compare apples to apples, for all of your options.

• The Sensor Noise DB. – Brendan Davey Photography

Bottom line, and this is just a single point of comparison, however - you are going to really be unable to beat the K5IIs. The K1 lags behind some, and the K3 is even farther behind. The K5 blows the socks off the rest of the bodies. Some folks will point out that even with NR fully disabled, Pentax is still doing a bit of NR in the RAW in camera pre-processing. No matter, as there is nothing users can do about it, except live with the results. The K5 has pretty spectacular results across the board at 1, 30 and 300 seconds compared to all other sensor/bodies.

So - back to upgrading. There are a number of creature comforts that I would really enjoy, like - the articulated rear monitor, having GPS built in and available all the time, focus peaking along with Pixel Shift for some situations. But, I just don't feel the overwhelming urge to upgrade. Half of my lenses would support full frame. The one glaring need would be the 15-30 for wide angle - going out to 111 degrees wide - pretty much equaling the Sigma 8-16 in width and being faster (f2.8) to boot. I would need to spend $3,300 for the K1 and the wide angle lens. If I had the overwhelming urge to - I would upgrade. And by all accounts, the 15-30 is a spectacular lens. It has been in the back of my mind, but you would really need to go with the K1 and with the full frame lenses, in order to get the full benefit of the larger sensor and capture the additional 1+ stop of low light capability. The database reflects the full size of each sensor (with no lens dependencies) and the K1 was not able to surpass the K5 there. So, my urge to upgrade, just evaporates every time I think about it.

I have a pretty extensive set of crop wide angle lenses so the potential of the K3II replacement body does have some allure if it is discernibly better than the K5/K5II/K5IIs. So, for me - there is hope with the new unknown body. In my mind it is a cropped version of the K1 - with all the bells and whistles - with a new very low noise sensor probably out in mid 2017. How it would compare with the K1 and K5 - I don't have the foggiest idea. I did consider the K3 when I was thinking about the K5IIs, but under ISO 1600 - the K5 wins, and with this Sensor Noise DB it shows that the longer the exposure, the better the K5 sensor is.

Bottom line is that, I am happy with what I currently have and just go out and shoot.

[DDoram]

While I moved from the K3II to the K1 and love it, if your lenses are for APSC the K3II is a mini K1 and has great IQ and the same features (except swivel screen) as the K1. If you don't need to print large, the K3II will do fine.

[Blacknight659]

Morning, I also shoot with the K5IIs primarily in low light and have considered upgrading. I came across this Sensor Noise DataBase a few months ago, that has been keeping pace with recent camera announcements, and the K5IIs performs at a really exceptional level. Now, to be fair - they measure and compare everything at ISO 3200 +5ev, across 1, 30 and 300 seconds all NR disabled, in order to set up an extreme situation to bring out the worst in the sensors. It also includes the K1, K3 and K5 - so you can compare apples to apples, for all of your options.

• The Sensor Noise DB. – Brendan Davey Photography

Bottom line, and this is just a single point of comparison, however - you are going to really be unable to beat the K5IIs. The K1 lags behind some, and the K3 is even farther behind. The K5 blows the socks off the rest of the bodies. Some folks will point out that even with NR fully disabled, Pentax is still doing a bit of NR in the RAW in camera pre-processing. No matter, as there is nothing users can do about it, except live with the results. The K5 has pretty spectacular results across the board at 1, 30 and 300 seconds compared to all other sensor/bodies.

So - back to upgrading. There are a number of creature comforts that I would really enjoy, like - the articulated rear monitor, having GPS built in and available all the time, focus peaking along with Pixel Shift for some situations. But, I just don't feel the overwhelming urge to upgrade. Half of my lenses would support full frame. The one glaring need would be the 15-30 for wide angle - going out to 111 degrees wide - pretty much equaling the Sigma 8-16 in width and being faster (f2.8) to boot. I would need to spend $3,300 for the K1 and the wide angle lens. If I had the overwhelming urge to - I would upgrade. And by all accounts, the 15-30 is a spectacular lens. It has been in the back of my mind, but you would really need to go with the K1 and with the full frame lenses, in order to get the full benefit of the larger sensor and capture the additional 1+ stop of low light capability. The database reflects the full size of each sensor (with no lens dependencies) and the K1 was not able to surpass the K5 there. So, my urge to upgrade, just evaporates every time I think about it.

I have a pretty extensive set of crop wide angle lenses so the potential of the K3II replacement body does have some allure if it is discernibly better than the K5/K5II/K5IIs. So, for me - there is hope with the new unknown body. In my mind it is a cropped version of the K1 - with all the bells and whistles - with a new very low noise sensor probably out in mid 2017. How it would compare with the K1 and K5 - I don't have the foggiest idea. I did consider the K3 when I was thinking about the K5IIs, but under ISO 1600 - the K5 wins, and with this Sensor Noise DB it shows that the longer the exposure, the better the K5 sensor is.

Bottom line is that, I am happy with what I currently have and just go out and shoot.

I think this kinda sums up the technical aspect of why the K-5 line is still a very functional camera.

If you still feel the need to upgrade, I suggest you wait for the new APS-C camera before you make your decision. Rumors be as they may, we see the K-70 packed quite a punch for its class. I have a feeling we will see an amazing camera released to replace the K-3ii. I do expect a jump in IQ, but if we don't see a measurable difference there, we will see better performance and features. Even if you decide the new camera isn't for you, the K-3ii and K-3 should drop in price saving you money.

No matter what you decide, now is the time to wait and see what is around the corner.

[BrianR]

A K1 seems awfully expensive if you're primarily going to use it in crop mode. A k3ii doesn't seem to add anything to your low light requirements.

Perhaps a crazy thought, but why not pick up a used k5/k5ii/k5iis for your family member and hold off on your upgrade? Then you can spend more time perfecting your technique with your k5iis.

[gaweidert]

My progression was K5, K5-IIs, K3 and then K1. In my humble opinion, just bite the bullet and go with the K1. Some of the DA lenses work fine on the K1 and even my DA 12-24 works fine from 18 to 24mm. My first Pentax SLR was a Spotmatic II over 40 years ago. The K1 seems to be replacing it as my all time favorite SLR camera.

[Biff]

I haven't tried either the K1 or K3 II, but I have a K5IIs and agree with others it's a great camera. I certainly don't need to upgrade for a while.

Have you considered picking up a lightly used K5IIs at a great price on the Forum? That might be a win-win until you decide if you really need a newer model right away. My dos centavos.

[JohnX]

The K3 is on end-of-line sale at SRS, so could be another flag-ship APS-C body is on the horizon, although the K3II is still on sale.

I too looked at whether to up-grade to the K1, but much as I like what it offers I baulked at the cost when factoring in lens changes, plus the additional weight vs. equivalent APS-C body and DA lenses. That said, are your Sigma's FF? I think your DA 35 and 50 are, so could be you won't need to spend much on new glass although I suppose it could become problematic if you are and your wife are out shooting at the same time with just one set of lenses between you.

[C_Jones]

The K-3II will reveal a bit more detail than the K-5IIS, the AF is more advanced, it has more user modes, it has pixel shift resolution, it includes GPS, and it will give you great prints large or small. The K-1 is there and will give you the full-frame detail and resolution that is superior, but the K-3Ii will give you the distance if you are a telephoto dedicated user. I have the K-5IIS and the K-3II. I consider the full frame option for landscape and portrait needs, but for now I am not disappointed in results, and am also waiting for the most conservative pricing on the K-1 and compatible Pentax lenses in case I decide to invest. If you get the K-3II, it will give you the advanced version of the Pentax aps-c dslr category.

[MadMathMind]

I used to shoot with the K-5IIs. Now I have the K-1. The difference between the two is staggering. Like, a world of difference. It's like when I went from a K110D to the K-5IIs. The colors are better, the contrast is deeper, the whites and blacks are better...you can just really make images pop with the K-1. This isn't to say that the K-5IIs is bad, but...world of difference.

Examples. Here's a couple of my best technical images with the K-5IIs (shot very close to when I switched):







No doubt the K-5IIs does nice things. (These are all with the FA31 btw). Colors are solid, details are good, contrast is ok. But here's a few with the K-1:







Hard to tell at webrez but there's just more detail, much deeper black levels, and more range in the K-1 shots. I don't think there's as much upgrade from the K-5IIs to the K-3. You'll get some but not a ton. But going to K-1 is a big, big jump.

[rgknief60]

I went from the K-5IIs to the K-1. I really like the K-1. In one sense I feel like I'm relearning macro all over again.

If I try to fill the frame of my K-1 with that butterfly, there is a better chance I will scare it away than with my K-5IIs.
The full frame depth of field is so shallow, and my eyes are not what they once were. I pay much more attention
to the plane and point of focus now. I only thought I was doing that before!

I look at the two bodies as different tools for different purposes. When the K3II goes on closeout, I will probably
be in line to get one for the increased pixel density in the crop size. For skittish insects at the same distance, I
should be able to get better detail with the K-3II than the K-1.

[surfar]

Most of your list of lenses will operate in FF mode on the K1.The 18-135 is crop only though.The sigma 17-50, I don't know?The Sigma 10-20 works from 15mm.


Pentax 35/50 and 55-300 all do ok.And the big Sig is FF.


There are many reasonably priced F and FA lenses that work quite well...GO the K1, its worth it.


Also the square crop will make a difference to the 10-20.(firmware 1.3)