[jpzk]

As an owner of a K5 and after reading the entire review on the Pentax K5II/s, I have found nothing that would inspire me to upgrade to either the K5II or the K5IIs.
Pentax K-5 II / IIs Review - Introduction - PentaxForums.com

That being said, if my K5 ever fails for good (which could happen, given the way this K5 of mine has been sent to the repair shop 3 times within 4 months), then I would consider buying the K5IIs as a simple measure of replacing the K5, and not really as an "upgrade".

So, to present owners of the K5, what are your thoughts on this?

JP

[Adam]

Personally, I'm thinking of getting an FF that's currently available supplement my K-5, and then sell it again when Pentax releases their FF (if it's good). Pentax needs to come out with a bigger upgrade soon and start doing more than just making unclear promises if they expect to keep loyal users happy! The K-5 IIs has great IQ, but it's nowhere near the big improvement that most of us have been waiting for...

[joe.penn]

The K5IIs gives a bit of added resolution which can go quite a ways with prints. Right now I do prints at 12x18 with the K5 and feel pretty comfortable (my trained printers eye holds me back from doing larger ones), the K5IIs can give me a little more comfort level with slightly larger prints - for me it would be a great investment.

[normhead]

I'd like to have one camera with the AA filter... even if it's a bit fuzzy. So I wouldn't upgrade, I see it as a both kind of situation. Before I upgrade, as in ditch the K-5, I'd go to Image Resources and download the test images, they have patterns that produce moire in the D800e and D600, you could probably view a set that would demonstrate how bad the moire thing is going to be. I haven't done it because, I'll still be using the K-5 in those situations.

[RobA_Oz]

An "upgrade" from my K-5 wouldn't be my intention, based on the II/IIs offerings, although there would be some elements of an upgrade involved. The web prices for the IIs in Australia are very tempting, but I have to justify to myself having a second K-5 body, which would probably involve selling my K20D, or maybe giving it to one of my offspring.

After toying with and dismissing the notion of buying into a current 35mm sensor format DSLR body, I think I'll probably wait and see what the next 12 months offers. I haven't dismissed the idea of buying a good used M9, though, but that's quite another story. Of course, if I hadn't bought a K-5 and simply kept the K20D, I'd most likely have had an order in for a K-5II or IIs by now. As it stands, an "upgrade" for my purposes would be the next Pentax DSLR offering, assuming it's an APS-C body with greatly improved AF speed and accuracy, or perhaps a 35mm sensor in a small, light-weight body.

[halfspin]

I'll be upgrading from the K-r and have yet to decide if the K-5IIs is worth spending $500 more than a plain old K-5. I couldn't see upgrading if I already had a K-5 though. I have till February to decide. Would be great if Pentax announced a K-3 at CP+ but I'm not holding my breath.

[newmikey]

As an owner of a K5 and after reading the entire review on the Pentax K5II/s, I have found nothing that would inspire me to upgrade to either the K5II or the K5IIs.
Pentax K-5 II / IIs Review - Introduction - PentaxForums.com

That being said, if my K5 ever fails for good (which could happen, given the way this K5 of mine has been sent to the repair shop 3 times within 4 months), then I would consider buying the K5IIs as a simple measure of replacing the K5, and not really as an "upgrade".

So, to present owners of the K5, what are your thoughts on this?

JP

More or less exactly the same. I'm glad Pentax did the upgrade to remain a viable alternative. It's a good call with a limited expense of R&D money and almost no costly changes needed to any production lines - as an economic option to stretch a very successful camera model for a while longer. Makes sense from a marketing perspective as well, "release date October 2012" looks much more enticing to prospective buyers than a release date that insinuates an end-of-life model.

For now, I cannot justify replacing my year-old K-5 which is performing flawlessly in every conceivable way and actually outstrips my personal photographic skills to the extent I still feel there's a lot of K-5 for me to "grow into" (or too little of me for the K-5).

If it were to break down, get stolen or lost in any other way, I'd have no hesitation whatsoever to buy the K-5 II (not the S). Although I'm pretty convinced the "S" delivers outstanding resolution that outstrips both the legacy K-5 and the K-5 II, I'd still (at least now) prefer the tried and trusted antialias filter to be in place. I don't think I'd notice the difference at my print sizes and I'm sure there will be the odd occasion where the lack of the AA filter will ruin an otherwise perfectly acceptable shot.

Again, I don't need òr want an FF - not now and not into the foreseeable future for simple primary school arithmetical reasons of weight, body size, lens size, lack of crop factor and price.

[Jimfear]

The K-5 IIs would have been very tempting if it was available when I bought the K-5, close to two years ago. I have always though that AA filters are rather unnecessary. Now when I have the K-5 I don't think I will be upgrading until there is a FF K-mount camera.

As I see it the K-5 is not lacking in IQ, it is lacking in sensor size. I use very few of the functions that digital SLRs offer, so for me there is nothing more to be had from an APS-C camera than what the K-5 can offer.

[twilhelm]

I'm still planning on a IIs, but not as a replacement for my K5. I intend to use it along with my current camera. This may mean I am giving up my K20d, but time will tell.

[Zafar Iqbal]

K-5 IIs looks tempting but I missed more attention on the AF accuracy side. There's been plenty claims of me not being able to handle a camera/K-5 properly but fact is, that the 5-6 brand new K-5's I tried were acknowledged as not performing properly and I got the deal canceled.

It was a very bad experience for me which in turn means I now pay more than usual attention to AF accuracy. Must have shot several thousands of pics with my K-30s and no problem what so ever but that still doesn't mean a simple "AF is accurate on K-5 II" from random users will do it for me.

If the AF is as it should be then I'd pretty much jump right on it (IIs). I'm very happy with my K-30's but always wanted K-5.

[LaurenOE]

At the current price for the K5IIs, it would not be worth it to upgrade my two K5 bodies.

If I had one K5, I would get a K5IIs.

However, even if the price of the K5IIs comes down, it represents a ship that has already sailed as far as I'm concerned.

My hope is that whatever comes after the K5IIs with have the option of the AA filter, and then, it will be game on.

[Sandy Hancock]

I have a K-5IIs on the way. The improvement in low light autofocus should be a major plus for my concert work. If it is as good as I hope, I might get a K-5II to replace my other K-5 as well.

[jatrax]

I'm quite happy with my k-5 and unless something unforeseen happens to it I am good for now. Had Pentax released a 24mp APS-C or a FF camera at Photokina I would have been sorely tempted but I don't see enough difference in the k-5II for me to change. It appears the primary improvement has been in the AF area, and I am satisfied with the k-5's performance there so an upgrade is not tempting at all.

If they release a model with 24mp or more I would probably think about it seriously. And if they release a FF I would have to evaluate what I am doing.

But I think the k-5II is just a refresh to keep the model going, it is a replacement for the k-5, not an upgrade. IMHO, anyway.

[DSims]

I have only one K-5, plus a K200D. I ordered a K-5 IIs. We'll see whether it replaces my K-5 or not. I need at least 2 bodies, and I plan on keeping the K200D whether I keep the K-5, K-5 IIs, or both. The K-5 IIs is due tomorrow.

By the end of the week I should have enough photos (mostly action shots) to make a better evaluation of whether I'm actually "upgrading" or not. I'm optimistic that it will be better, because while the AF may not be a "knockout" improvement, it is faster in Adam's tests, and reportedly is more positive in locking focus, avoiding hunting. I'm thinking this may help in my particular shooting scenarios. In fact, I may be able to start using my DA*50-135 for sports again, since Adam's numbers show the focusing speed improving by almost a factor of 2. And 30-40% faster plus a more positive focus "lock" may make the difference on my FA*85 - that is, giving me more keepers. Furthermore, my K-5 has some BF (even a little more than I can correct for using the AF adjust feature), so hopefully it will be calibrated better. If the IIs is good I'll finally be able to send my K-5 in for adjustment (can't afford to be without it until I have a 3rd body).


So between the somewhat improved AF, the lack of an AA filter, and hopefully better camera calibration, I certainly expect something to be an upgrade for me this week! Anyhow, other than the K-30, there's really nowhere else to go for an improved K-mount body right now, so it's worth a try.

[westmill]

I think a lot will boil down to the type of photography you do for a lot of people. The focus defects of the K5 are rather specific so it may not effect a lot of people. I think it will be a godsend for wedding photographers and suchlike where the low light focusing will pay divdends. I have no intrest in gaining so called higher image quality since even 12 milion pixels are sufficient for my needs. So for me, if I upgrade it will be with just the K5 2. If the s version had given better high ISO then that may have made me think differently. I bought the K5 in the first place for its high ISO ability. If i stay with Pentax I shall indeed buy the K5 2. First... I shall wait a week or two and see more of whats what when they are widely in use.