[Nereva]

I would like to keep using my old good lenses, so now I’ve desided to let my digital 😉Nikon go, and go Pentax all the way 🙂

I’m sure I will quickly adapt to any of these cameras in terms of wheels, buttons and grip. My consern is more how the old K 5 sensor performs compared to the new K70 sensor. The K5 is up to the discussion because of the smaller filesize than the K70. You see, my 2011 iMac can have performance issues editing too large raw files. (LR)

So, question: is it worth the hassel editing the 24 mp raw files from the K70, or is the IQ and low light performance from the K5 iis still good enough?

I will eventually render my raw files to jpgs when edited for streaming from my iMac to an appleTv. Will of course store my raw files .

[Adam]

I would like to keep using my old good lenses, so now I’ve desided to let my digital 😉Nikon go, and go Pentax all the way 🙂

I’m sure I will quickly adapt to any of these cameras in terms of wheels, buttons and grip. My consern is more how the old K 5 sensor performs compared to the new K70 sensor. The K5 is up to the discussion because of the smaller filesize than the K70. You see, my 2011 iMac can have performance issues editing too large raw files. (LR)

So, question: is it worth the hassel editing the 24 mp raw files from the K70, or is the IQ and low light performance from the K5 iis still good enough?

I will eventually render my raw files to jpgs when edited for streaming from my iMac to an appleTv. Will of course store my raw files .

At this point I would say the K-70 has a clear edge. The K-5 family of cameras held its ground well and still delivers good image quality, but the noise performance, color rendering, and resolution of the new sensors is superior.

[BigMackCam]

Welcome to the forums

The K-5iis is a fine camera - a flagship-quality model, with excellent build quality, massive estimated shutter life, great IQ, and good high ISO performance. None of that has changed - everything you could do with it in late 2012 when it was released, you can still do now.

The K-70 is also a fine camera, but best described as mid-range. The build quality and shutter life are still excellent, but not quite to the standard of the K-5iis. Resolution has improved considerably, and that's nice. But the biggest improvement is in high ISO performance, and it really is very noticeable indeed. The question is, do you need that?

What do you shoot, where, and at what times of the day or night? Do you use mostly available lighting? Do you need high shutter speeds for creative control? If you think you're likely to shoot at ISO 6400 and above regularly, the K-70 will give far better results - no question. But if most of your work is at ISO 100 to 3200, the differences really don't matter so much - especially if you're processing RAW files yourself with good software such as Lightroom.

If you can acquire a lightly used K-5iis with low shutter count in excellent condition, and at a good price, it's a great choice - so long as high ISO isn't your top priority. If it is, though, or if the peace-of-mind a new camera (and perhaps extended warranty?) can offer, the K-70 might be a better choice

[Nereva]

Thanks for a lot of good input. I mostly shoot outdoor, and in good light condition. Seldom ISO 2000 or above. Mostly nature and outdoor city.

I prosess in Lightroom on my trusted iMac from 2011. My 12 bit 16 mp Nikon raw files are OK in terms of speed and convenience. Do anyone have experience with the edit differences between the k5 iis raw files and the k70 raw files? I am a little bit concerned about the size of the k70 files?

[boriscleto]

Thanks for a lot of good input. I mostly shoot outdoor, and in good light condition. Seldom ISO 2000 or above. Mostly nature and outdoor city.

I prosess in Lightroom on my trusted iMac from 2011. My 12 bit 16 mp Nikon raw files are OK in terms of speed and convenience. Do anyone have experience with the edit differences between the k5 iis raw files and the k70 raw files? I am a little bit concerned about the size of the k70 files?

I edit K-3 RAW files in Lightroom on a 2009 Mac mini. You don't have anything to worry about.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

The K-5IIs is a great camera. I don't think any other Sony, Nikon, or Pentax camera that had that 16MP Sony sensor could pull out as much detail out of it as the K-5IIs.

However, the K-70 takes it even further. Yes. It doesn't have that K-5IIs flagship build, but the other features that it has makes it much more attractive than the K-5IIs. First off, you have KAF4 compatibility. This is something the K-5IIs will most likely never have. The K-70 has a flippy screen, great for getting those low or high angle shots. Selfies too, I guess. The IBIS is a tad bit better rated at 4.5 stops versus 3 for the K-5IIs. The viewfinder is a tad bit larger (.95 vs. .92). It has the same exact autofocus system that the K-5IIs has. The K-70 also has an AA simulator, pixel shift, & you can easily set the auto ISO from 100 to 25600 & still get very usable images at ISO 25600. I wouldn't go higher than ISO 12800 on the K-5IIs. The K-70 offers a tremendous amount of bang for the buck. The RAW files will be a bit larger, especially the pixel shift ones, but the end result will be a really awesome image. Attach a very good DA* or Limited lens to that body & you'll get some spectacular images.

Don't get me wrong. The K-5IIs is still one very good camera, but I'd take a K-70 over it. Funny thing is that I would take a K-3II over a K-70, even though the high ISO image quality is not as good as the K-70 nor the K-5IIs. I'd be getting a K-3II more for the the build, performance, & speed of it.

[DW58]

I bought a K-70 at the beginning of the year and am VERY happy with it. One minor complaint. The battery drains pretty quickly. Especially when using Live View a lot. I carry an extra so it's really no big deal. But I don't fire off a bunch of frames in rapid succession either. Like has been said. A lot of bang for your buck with the K-70.

[GalacticPhoto]

A K-70 hands down over the K5. The K5 is just dated now. It's got a better body but that's all it really has going for it. If IQ is important, K-70.

[Nereva]

Thanks for all your input. I've ended up with a "used" K3 with just above 900 in shuttercount. Ordered and payed for, just waiting for delivery in middle may. Payed around the same as I payed for my SFXn back in 1986 :-) (6000 NOK, thats around 750 USD) I'd think the 6000 NOK in 1986 money was equal to around 13500 NOK in 2018 (2,2 in ratio), so I'm paying less for my k3 than my SFXn back then :-) Anyways, I'm still using my SFXn, and looking forward to start shooting with a K3.

[BigMackCam]

Thanks for all your input. I've ended up with a "used" K3 with just above 900 in shuttercount.

Congratulations! That's near enough a new camera - and what a camera it is. I'm sure you'll love it

[Pepe Le Pew]

Just bought a k-70 since the k-30 died

[Jonathan Mac]

There are still some K-3iis are around, I'd recommend going for one of them over either the K-70 or K-5ii.

Don't get rid of your SFXn - they're great film cameras.

[Nereva]

Today I received my K3 prestige Edition all the way from Japan. Camera was in original box and complete. Totalt mint condition :-) Still browsing the manual. I’ve shot 5 pics in DNG format and sitting in PS and try to learn how the pictures will behave. So far, the DNG amazes me. Extremly sharp and great dynamic range.

[Jonathan Mac]

Glad to hear you're happy. The prestige edition is a beautiful machine - I wish I had one instead of my standard black one