Eyeing an upgrade from KS-2 to KP. Is it worth it?

**mikesbike** · 10-17-2017, 01:50 PM

I've had the K-S2 for nearly 2 years now, and also the KP since this past spring. The K-S2 I am keeping as my extra-lightweight, compact carrying body, especially with a small lens. I also like its selfie button arrangement and the tilt/swivel back screen. For me, overall exposure has been accurate. With the KP, which uses a different exposure system, accuracy has been great. AF has been improved also. There can be occasional overexposure, due to over-compensation for back lighting in certain circumstances.

Be aware that exposure as shown on the camera's rear screen is not accurate. It is shown being over the actual exposure. Export the image to a good computer screen, or better yet, make a print and you will see quite a difference.

The K-5, II, and IIs tend to underexpose slightly- about 1/4- 1/3 stop, which is still fine under bright conditions. The K-20D and K-200D tend to underexpose by 1/2-2/3 stop.

The KP is certainly a more advanced camera in every way- controls, build quality, features, handling, accessories like the optional battery grip, 14 bit Raw capability along with in-camera Raw development conversion to TIFF images, and more. The tilt rear screen is less versatile, but is probably sturdier in construction. And since it is not swung out sideways to tilt it, it takes up less space widthwise- only the width of the camera while being tilted, and lined up with the camera.

Last edited by mikesbike; 10-17-2017 at 01:57 PM.

**seagas** · 11-09-2017, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by lawsonstone

The KS2 has the fully articulated screen, which I really enjoy using. I don't think the KP has that, does it?

No it does not, but unless you use it in selfie or side view mode, I much prefer how it works more smoothly and with less effort. I kept my K-s2 for use as a second body but since getting the KP, I hardly ever touch it now.

Nicolas06 · 11-29-2017, 01:30 PM

Originally posted by lotgering

Yes, but then it is not silent

To be honest the shutter can be quite silent... But it wouldn't make sense for me to buy a DSLR and then use it only in LV because of the noise. Then buy a mirrorless so you get something that is optimized for that mode.

But I don't see any issue for anybody using a DSLR with the OVF ... as it should be !

**Wingincamera** · 11-30-2017, 03:49 PM

I do a lot of church photos and I use the ES with LV when I want no noise at all. Another thing is the higher usable iso of the camera. In a church setting the lighting is usually very poor and I do not use flash. At first I had the camera settings using a small amount of in camera noise reduction, then in LR make the final adjustments. Lately I turned off all in camera settings and the raw files seem a little cleaner now. I thought the camera settings do not effect raw files, but maybe some do. Anyway, for low light use I really like the KP.

Tatouzou · 12-01-2017, 08:16 AM

Originally posted by Wingincamera

I do a lot of church photos and I use the ES with LV when I want no noise at all. Another thing is the higher usable iso of the camera. In a church setting the lighting is usually very poor and I do not use flash. At first I had the camera settings using a small amount of in camera noise reduction, then in LR make the final adjustments. Lately I turned off all in camera settings and the raw files seem a little cleaner now. I thought the camera settings do not effect raw files, but maybe some do. Anyway, for low light use I really like the KP.

The camera JPEG settings (noise reduction, sharpening, contrast, shadows) dont affect the raw files but they change the look of the jpeg preview encapsulated with the raw file, which is used in many raw converters as the default preview when opening a raw file.

Nicolas06 · 12-02-2017, 06:09 AM

Originally posted by Wingincamera

I do a lot of church photos and I use the ES with LV when I want no noise at all. Another thing is the higher usable iso of the camera. In a church setting the lighting is usually very poor and I do not use flash. At first I had the camera settings using a small amount of in camera noise reduction, then in LR make the final adjustments. Lately I turned off all in camera settings and the raw files seem a little cleaner now. I thought the camera settings do not effect raw files, but maybe some do. Anyway, for low light use I really like the KP.

What I find most funny is that people with DSLR or even mirrorless have a mechanical shutter for increase quality. Some shutter make some significant noise, some other not.

There also the AF noise of screw drive. Lot of people complain about it and justify SDM/DC and other so called silent motor to themselve because of that.

I have done shooting in many situations albeilt with screw drive lenses and K3, in many churchs, even wedding and all and nobody ever complained. And I did that basically for the last 5 years, no issues with a K5 then a K3.

For me it is mostly the photographer that hear it most (due to small distance), and I suspect that it is more psychological than anything else. Nobody ever complained of the noise of my camera and I shoot screw drive + mechanical shutter. I shot in many churchs, including during wedding and all.

I also don't shoot in liveview in a wide variety of situation and get no issue with high iso at all. If anything shooting in live view outside of tripod or other situation like that, one is much more prone to camera shake when shooting in LV than with the OVF meaning need for increased shutter speed and isos.

Remember this only a K3, a camera that many there consider to be quite bad at high iso and the KP is honestly 1 EV better or something like that. Everything what shot in RAW, processed with DxO and DxO prime for noise removal. You can expect better results with a KP if you also shoot raw and use decent noise removal software.

Cordoba meskita, DA15 (screw drive), f/4, 1/8s, iso 1600. K3 with mechanical shutter, handled

Strasbourgh Cathedral, DA15 (screw drive), f/4, 1/30s, iso 640, K3 with mechanical shutter, handled

A wedding:
DA35 ltd (screw drive), f/2.8, 1/80s, iso 1600, same K3 as always, mechanical shutter, handled

Outside of church I use the OVF for even low light shot with absolutely no issue

FA31, screw drive, 1/125, f/2, iso 2000, K3 with mechanical shutter, handled.

FA77 (screw drive), f/3.5, 1/60s, iso 2000, same K3 with mechanical shutter, handled.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
comprar una KP o pasarme al formato compreto (Buy a KP or switch to the full format)?	mariovidal	Pentax KP	5	06-29-2018 05:45 AM
Why Pentax KP? Para que la Pentax KP?	ZeaFoto	Pentax KP	16	06-14-2018 08:53 AM
Pentax KP vs K5-ii (Is an upgrade worth it?)	magic.pill	Pentax KP	18	09-13-2017 10:42 AM
What is the bulge on KS-1 and KS-2?	stillshot2	Pentax K-S1 & K-S2	1	02-09-2015 07:55 PM
Macro Stop eyeing me!!!	eaglem	Post Your Photos!	6	03-09-2012 06:38 AM

10-17-2017, 01:50 PM	#16
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	I've had the K-S2 for nearly 2 years now, and also the KP since this past spring. The K-S2 I am keeping as my extra-lightweight, compact carrying body, especially with a small lens. I also like its selfie button arrangement and the tilt/swivel back screen. For me, overall exposure has been accurate. With the KP, which uses a different exposure system, accuracy has been great. AF has been improved also. There can be occasional overexposure, due to over-compensation for back lighting in certain circumstances. Be aware that exposure as shown on the camera's rear screen is not accurate. It is shown being over the actual exposure. Export the image to a good computer screen, or better yet, make a print and you will see quite a difference. The K-5, II, and IIs tend to underexpose slightly- about 1/4- 1/3 stop, which is still fine under bright conditions. The K-20D and K-200D tend to underexpose by 1/2-2/3 stop. The KP is certainly a more advanced camera in every way- controls, build quality, features, handling, accessories like the optional battery grip, 14 bit Raw capability along with in-camera Raw development conversion to TIFF images, and more. The tilt rear screen is less versatile, but is probably sturdier in construction. And since it is not swung out sideways to tilt it, it takes up less space widthwise- only the width of the camera while being tilted, and lined up with the camera. Last edited by mikesbike; 10-17-2017 at 01:57 PM.

11-09-2017, 10:39 AM	#17
seagas Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2017 Location: SWFL most of the year other wise NEWI Photos: Albums Posts: 85	Originally posted by lawsonstone The KS2 has the fully articulated screen, which I really enjoy using. I don't think the KP has that, does it? No it does not, but unless you use it in selfie or side view mode, I much prefer how it works more smoothly and with less effort. I kept my K-s2 for use as a second body but since getting the KP, I hardly ever touch it now.

11-29-2017, 01:30 PM	#18
Nicolas06 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 4,854	Originally posted by lotgering Yes, but then it is not silent To be honest the shutter can be quite silent... But it wouldn't make sense for me to buy a DSLR and then use it only in LV because of the noise. Then buy a mirrorless so you get something that is optimized for that mode. But I don't see any issue for anybody using a DSLR with the OVF ... as it should be !

11-30-2017, 03:49 PM	#19
Wingincamera Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Pine Haven, Wyoming Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,182	I do a lot of church photos and I use the ES with LV when I want no noise at all. Another thing is the higher usable iso of the camera. In a church setting the lighting is usually very poor and I do not use flash. At first I had the camera settings using a small amount of in camera noise reduction, then in LR make the final adjustments. Lately I turned off all in camera settings and the raw files seem a little cleaner now. I thought the camera settings do not effect raw files, but maybe some do. Anyway, for low light use I really like the KP.

12-01-2017, 08:16 AM	#20
Tatouzou Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 175	Originally posted by Wingincamera I do a lot of church photos and I use the ES with LV when I want no noise at all. Another thing is the higher usable iso of the camera. In a church setting the lighting is usually very poor and I do not use flash. At first I had the camera settings using a small amount of in camera noise reduction, then in LR make the final adjustments. Lately I turned off all in camera settings and the raw files seem a little cleaner now. I thought the camera settings do not effect raw files, but maybe some do. Anyway, for low light use I really like the KP. The camera JPEG settings (noise reduction, sharpening, contrast, shadows) dont affect the raw files but they change the look of the jpeg preview encapsulated with the raw file, which is used in many raw converters as the default preview when opening a raw file.

12-02-2017, 06:09 AM	#21
Nicolas06 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 4,854	Originally posted by Wingincamera I do a lot of church photos and I use the ES with LV when I want no noise at all. Another thing is the higher usable iso of the camera. In a church setting the lighting is usually very poor and I do not use flash. At first I had the camera settings using a small amount of in camera noise reduction, then in LR make the final adjustments. Lately I turned off all in camera settings and the raw files seem a little cleaner now. I thought the camera settings do not effect raw files, but maybe some do. Anyway, for low light use I really like the KP. What I find most funny is that people with DSLR or even mirrorless have a mechanical shutter for increase quality. Some shutter make some significant noise, some other not. There also the AF noise of screw drive. Lot of people complain about it and justify SDM/DC and other so called silent motor to themselve because of that. I have done shooting in many situations albeilt with screw drive lenses and K3, in many churchs, even wedding and all and nobody ever complained. And I did that basically for the last 5 years, no issues with a K5 then a K3. For me it is mostly the photographer that hear it most (due to small distance), and I suspect that it is more psychological than anything else. Nobody ever complained of the noise of my camera and I shoot screw drive + mechanical shutter. I shot in many churchs, including during wedding and all. I also don't shoot in liveview in a wide variety of situation and get no issue with high iso at all. If anything shooting in live view outside of tripod or other situation like that, one is much more prone to camera shake when shooting in LV than with the OVF meaning need for increased shutter speed and isos. Remember this only a K3, a camera that many there consider to be quite bad at high iso and the KP is honestly 1 EV better or something like that. Everything what shot in RAW, processed with DxO and DxO prime for noise removal. You can expect better results with a KP if you also shoot raw and use decent noise removal software. Cordoba meskita, DA15 (screw drive), f/4, 1/8s, iso 1600. K3 with mechanical shutter, handled Strasbourgh Cathedral, DA15 (screw drive), f/4, 1/30s, iso 640, K3 with mechanical shutter, handled A wedding: DA35 ltd (screw drive), f/2.8, 1/80s, iso 1600, same K3 as always, mechanical shutter, handled Outside of church I use the OVF for even low light shot with absolutely no issue FA31, screw drive, 1/125, f/2, iso 2000, K3 with mechanical shutter, handled. FA77 (screw drive), f/3.5, 1/60s, iso 2000, same K3 with mechanical shutter, handled.