[osv]

I think you may have answered my question with your question. I am not totally pleased with the quality of images with the 50 in low light. I have to normally use it wide open to get a decent noise free image at a fairly low ISO with the K200d. That usually means the aperture is around 1.4. But the image is soft at the aperture. And in low light it's hard to see well enough to focus accurately. So with the better high ISO performance of the K5II I should be able to use a smaller sharper aperture, thus creating a sharper image. And I should be able to see a little easier with the better viewfinder, correct?

you are attempting to focus with a dslr ovf? it's the worst possible thing that you can use for manual focusing, in any light.

liveview should be an improvement, at least in low-light conditions, but it gets washed out in bright light, because it's an lcd, not an oled evf... it's also clumsy to use in any lighting conditions.

do some testing on mirrorless cameras, i think that sony and oly have good evf's in some of their models.

for noise... dxo pro goes on sale for $99 at b&h sometimes; click on one of adam's b&h links, check it out.

in prime mode, it does an incredible job of cleaning up noise... i ran it on some of my old kd10d photos, and i couldn't believe how much better it worked than photoshop.

[micromacro]

My question is should i upgrade to something like the K-5 or K-5II considering the lenses I have, or upgrade to a better zoom lens such as a Tamron 28-75/2.8 or others to be able to shoot better in low light and capture better outdoor events.

I think it depends on how much you like Pentax manual lenses. I'm old lenses addict, and love Pentax for it.
Manual focusing with my k200D is easier than with Canon Sl1. I love in camera focus confirmation and shake reduction. It does help comparing to manual focusing on Canon, especially with shaky hands like mine. But ISO... This is the real pain with K200 in low light and manual focusing. I compromise k200 ISO to 400, no higher number, and reduce noise in LR.

I don't think that K5 iis will be different for ISO performance as any newer camera of that class. LV is very helpful when shooting at night on tripod, but I need to wear reading glasses for it.

I can not say if Canon's AF is better because I don't own any DA lenses for K200, only older FA and F lenses.
Anyway, I miss focus with Canon AF and with Pentax AF, but it may be because I use K200 more often than Canon. I promise myself to put Pentax aside for a while and finally explore Canon better, but then grab Pentax again.


The good thing about other systems compare to Pentax is the fact that you can bring memory card at store, and test cameras to make your own choice.

[8540tomg]

I jumped from the K10 to K5 and the lower light performance is a massive jump. In bright daylight it wasn't an issue with the K10 but toward twilight or indoors at hotels etc. it really is a huge upgrade.

I made the exact same upgrade and share Terror's opinion on this one. I have not upgraded from my K5 yet and I think I'll skip over the K3 and wait for the next generation. There should be dramatic improvements by then. I normally skip a couple of generations before upgrading. At the time of writng my K5 still works very well for me.

Tom G

[simon6z]

I'll upgrade myself since I upgrade k30 to K3 not much has changed and tried upgrading lens also same. So I need to work on my composition and well more eye contact on anything nice to shoot

[Na Horuk]

Q: Upgrade Body or Lens?
A: Lens.

[simon6z]

lens but there are alot of choices that will lead to LBA

[Mikesul]

A K5IIs will amaze you. I now have the K3 and love it but I do sometimes miss the K5IIs for the high ISO and easier sensor. But over all, if you have to choose, lenses are always the best choice.

[micromacro]

I do sometimes miss the K5IIs for the high ISO and easier sensor.

What is "easier sensor"?

[Mikesul]

Sorry, bad word choice. The lower pixel density of the 16 mph means we do not have to be quite so careful. Slight movement can cause problems at 24mph that do not appear at 16mpx. Most of us get used to the k3 and would not want to go back but extra care is necessary hand held especially at longer focal lengths.

[axelm7]

Sorry, bad word choice. The lower pixel density of the 16 mph means we do not have to be quite so careful. Slight movement can cause problems at 24mph that do not appear at 16mpx. Most of us get used to the k3 and would not want to go back but extra care is necessary hand held especially at longer focal lengths.

Is it actually noticeable, though? I've heard the K-3's SR mechanism works better at reducing shake than the K-5II.

Lenses longer than 135mm are always better off with the stability of a tripod, too (and using them in low light is pretty much impossible without one unless it's a 2.8 or faster).

[phoenixvision]

Need some advice. I currently have a K200D, an 18-55 kit lens and some manual lenses. My Vivitar, 2 step 70-150 manual lens is probably my sharpest lens (very sharp on still shots). My 50/1.4 is the next sharpest. I like taking a variety of photos, such as portraits, photos of children, outdoor events, etc. I would like to take better low light images of the children, but without having to pose them and keeping them still. And have more keepers on outdoor events. I recently took pictures at a road bike race that was hit and miss with the kit lens (although not a sharp lens to begin with). And the Vivitar too was hit and miss. I used catch in focus with the manual lens. Worked better than I thought it would but still not what I call sharp. Also I noticed background imagery like mountains were not very sharp with the Vivitar even at f8-f11.

My question is should i upgrade to something like the K-5 or K-5II considering the lenses I have, or upgrade to a better zoom lens such as a Tamron 28-75/2.8 or others to be able to shoot better in low light and capture better outdoor events.

Thanks for any help.

Eventually you will have to do both....what I would consider is the fact that lenses will hold their value and adapt into the future, while camera bodies are rapidly replaced by upgraded technology and dont hold their value....so....the the question is when to by the lens and when to buy the body....it is a good time to buy k5ii, price wise, as the k3 as made them somewhat obsolete and t is an excellent camera

[redcat]

A K5IIs will amaze you

+1, as a K5 IIs user, I have nothing to complain, I compare my photos with my friends FF photo and see no different in IQ (our lens are practically the same), and his cam is 24MP !

[lithedreamer]

If the K-30 hasn't impressed me in low-light compared to the K-x, would the K-5iis or K-3 do it? Is it a big leap in performance?

[dadipentak]

In general, I lean toward lens upgrades but think you're overdue for a body upgrade. I second the recommendation of the K-5IIs but even a used K-5 would be a quantum leap forward from the K200D.

[kooks]

If the K-30 hasn't impressed me in low-light compared to the K-x, would the K-5iis or K-3 do it? Is it a big leap in performance?

K30 / Kx have nothing to do next to K5ii / K5iis / K3 in low light focusing cuz this cameras can do it to ven at -3ev, wich means that event at really lowlight enviroment the camera can focus... also Kx can only handle something around 850 ISO without noticeable noise, meanwhile the K5ii/K5iis/K3 can handle something around 1200 without much problem.. My girlfriend have a K50 and i have a K3, and the fucussing is noticeable, A LOT.