[jgnfld]

...you just need to tweak your in-camera jpg settings on the KP and you should be able to match the results of your K-70.

This single phrase describes one of the larger diffs between the 2 cameras. I use both a KP and K-70 in RAW + Silkypix 10 Pro. If there is a difference, I can't see it in practice though I've never tried this specific test.

But the greatest value to me of the KP over the K-70 is how downright easy and accurately you can change settings to match the situation. The next is the superior build and feel--to my hands--of the KP. But that is secondary. The K-70 is fine in the hands. It's just no KP.

[gatorguy]

I have long had the K-S2, the predecessor to the K-70 and similar in design. I got it as a smaller, lighter, backup and alternate to my flagship K-5 IIs. As a general rule, the default "Bright" Custom Image category has color saturation up by one notch over the normal mid-point, and ditto with sharpening level and contrast also

Mike, while the K-S2 and K-70 may share a design statement, the imaging between the two does not. FWIW the immediately obvious difference would be that the K-70 was the first Pentax camera with their accelerator chip.

I still used a K-S2 (one of three at the time) alongside my first K-70 when going on shoots. That was before the KP had been released. The image difference was so apparent to me that I sold all three K-S2's and bought another K-70 and shortly after that a KP. Since then I added a K1 and sold off the KP, so yes I'm familiar with all four cameras.

Off topic, but hoping to soon become intimately familiar with the K3III as well.

[Not a Number]

For a period of my life the color balance between one eye and the other was off. One eye saw the images as more yellow than the other. Compared by closing one eye at a time while viewing the same scene.

[11GTCS]

I’ve never noticed a lack of saturation on my KP compared to other sensors in the same shooting environment. I’ve actually desaturated some images with it and the K1ii, something I’ve never done before. That said, I’ve never shot with the K70 so I can’t directly compare.

[stevebrot]

FWIW the immediately obvious difference would be that the K-70 was the first Pentax camera with their accelerator chip.

Hybrid on-sensor PDAF, yes...Accelerator chip, no. The KP has the latter distinction.

Ooops! You are right and I am wrong. Why is that not in the specs?


Steve

[gatorguy]

Hybrid on-sensor PDAF, yes...Accelerator chip, no. The KP has the latter distinction.

Ooops! You are right and I am wrong. Why is that not in the specs?


Steve

It's all good.

[Kiddo70]

The k70 has PDAF pixels on the sensor, the KP does not. So some image data is missing on The k70 which the processor must interpolate to replace. The amount of data is pretty small, but this may result in different tuning of the image processing.

Overall I would be surprised if you can’t make the KP very close in output to the k70. I personally think uploading some images with full Exif data would help.

That’s the clearest answer to my question for a non-geek like me. Thank you. I can get get the images very close just by compensating another -0.30 of a stop.

[mikesbike]

Mike, while the K-S2 and K-70 may share a design statement, the imaging between the two does not. FWIW the immediately obvious difference would be that the K-70 was the first Pentax camera with their accelerator chip.

I still used a K-S2 (one of three at the time) alongside my first K-70 when going on shoots. That was before the KP had been released. The image difference was so apparent to me that I sold all three K-S2's and bought another K-70 and shortly after that a KP. Since then I added a K1 and sold off the KP, so yes I'm familiar with all four cameras.

Off topic, but hoping to soon become intimately familiar with the K3III as well.

Yes, I noticed a number of differences upon getting the KP compared to the K-S2, other than color rendition, including even better resolution and even better low light/hi ISO performance. However, in this discussion being specifically about color rendition of JPEG output, where the camera's processor plays a major role, it is noteworthy that the K-S2 and K-70 share the same processor, the PRIME M II, except the K-70 adds the accelerator chip for reduced noise at higher ISO and with better preservation of detail, where the KP's processor is the PRIME IV also with an accelerator chip, as shared in the design of the K-1 II,

[gatorguy]

Yes, I noticed a number of differences upon getting the KP compared to the K-S2, other than color rendition, including even better resolution and even better low light/hi ISO performance. However, in this discussion being specifically about color rendition of JPEG output, where the camera's processor plays a major role, it is noteworthy that the K-S2 and K-70 share the same processor, the PRIME M II, except the K-70 adds the accelerator chip for reduced noise at higher ISO and with better preservation of detail, where the KP's processor is the PRIME IV also with an accelerator chip, as shared in the design of the K-1 II,

The K70 has14-bit RAW, different from the K-S2 but same as the KP. The KS-2 sensor was only 20MP while the K-70's 24mp sensor is nearly identical to the KP resolution-wise.

IMO the K-70 is closer to the KP image-wise than it is to the K-S2. I know I might be odd man out saying this, but there's something about certain photos from my K-70 that I preferred over those from KP taken in the same session and of the same subjects. I just don't recall now what those were and what they involved other than certain portraiture-style images in natural surroundings.

[mikesbike]

I can get get the images very close just by compensating another -0.30 of a stop.

If the images then look quite the same, and one not brighter than the other, it is possible the K-70's exposure is turning out a bit under that of the KP. The KP's metering system is one of its advancements. The other Pentax DSLR models I have owned and some I still have and use, are prone to some degree of under-exposure. Not so at all with the K-r, nor with the KP, and very little with the K-5 IIs and barely so or not enough to be noticeable with the K-S2. So if dropping exposure by -.3 with the KP does what you are looking for, that's a very easy matter. However, as lighting becomes dimmer, you might consider restoring to normal value. But please do avoid using your camera's mode dial set to "auto". This will cancel use of most of the KP's excellent set of controls, one of its most useful advancements, and will take away access to many adjustments. Then you can easily go into the Custom Image menus to adjust sharpening as I brought to your attention in my post # 9. It is easy to do and worth doing.

---------- Post added 03-19-21 at 11:20 AM ----------

The K70 has14-bit RAW, different from the K-S2 but same as the KP. The KS-2 sensor was only 20MP while the K-70 is nearly identical to the KP resolution-wise.

IMO the K-70 is closer to the KP image-wise than it is to the K-S2.

Right indeed! But here we are talking about the JPEG output and color rendition, where the in-camera processor does play a major role. The OP has apparently also noticed some difference in metering for exposure, and the KP's metering is different as well, which can affect color saturation.

[mikesbike]

That’s the clearest answer to my question for a non-geek like me. Thank you. I can get get the images very close just by compensating another -0.30 of a stop.

There is one more matter to consider on this same issue- yes, exposure variation can affect color saturation, but as to exposure itself- and its affects, it is not realistic to come to definitive judgements just by viewing results on the rear screens of your cameras. These screens are very convenient for seeing what you have shot, but not as an altogether accurate representation. The screens are backlit to a varying extra-high degree to be enough for adequate viewing to show up out in bright daylight. In other words, portraying the image exposure as being brighter than it actually is.

It is better to first download the images onto your computer to view on its screen for a better representation of the exposure you actually have. Usually, exposure will then show to be somewhat darker than shown on the screens of your cameras. Even then, exposure will show up as being yet darker on prints you might make. So what seems somewhat overexposed (and with less saturated color) just by looking at your camera's screen might well be the better exposure when viewed more accurately on your computer screen.