K5II to IIs or 3?

**hjoseph7** · 12-08-2014, 08:04 PM

The K3 is going for a good price right now and is supposed to be a better camera according to experts. I myself opted for the K-5 II due to longer battery life, better high ISO performance, less of a load on my computer, and I like the way the buttons are placed. If you like to shoot Video though I would go for the K3.

DSims · 12-08-2014, 10:55 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

I've never experienced a lockup but then I never use a grip either. I wonder what the percentage of issues with versus without a grip would be. it seems to me, just subjective, that reading 'issue' posts a high percentage of them are from grip users.

Yes, actually I believe battery grips making somewhat less than optimal electrical contact with the bottom of the camera has been considered the problem on some other bodies, but I've never experienced it (to any significant degree) on these cameras before. This is what surprised me so much. Since at least 80-90% of the action photos I take are in portrait mode, removing it isn't really an option (my arm gets too tired). I'll have to investigate it later, and making sure my batteries aren't wearing out. It's entirely possible at least two of them are, especially since I switched some of my batteries around this time (I usually put them back in the exact same place after recharging). So perhaps each grip just happened to end up with a failing batter (I usually draw battery power from 'grip first'; I may try changing that as well, but of course that will mean I have to remove the grips after every shoot, instead of only after ones that entirely drained the grip battery.

After reading even more comments over the last couple of days about how the K-3's AF improvements over the K-5 IIs are even greater than I previously believed (since I only borrowed a K-3 for a few hours), I'd like to replace both my K-5 and K-5 IIs with K-3s. But I don't think that will be a budget priority right now. Anyhow, I'm curious about what kind of updated APS-C camera might be released around the same time they deliver a Full Frame camera or two - we'll just have to wait and see.

**jatrax** · 12-09-2014, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by DSims

Anyhow, I'm curious about what kind of updated APS-C camera might be released around the same time they deliver a Full Frame camera or two

With the k-5II series now apparently discontinued I would assume they will be releasing something. Either a mid-tier replacement for the k-5II or push the k-3 down to mid-tier and release a new flagship APS-C to replace the k-3. Though I honestly do not see what they could add to the k-3 to justify pushing it down to mid-tier.

Maybe they will release a k-5III with the 20MP sensor from the k-S1........

**gaweidert** · 12-09-2014, 02:06 PM

I have a K5, K5-IIs and just got a K3. I have to says that the K3 is definitely the best of the bunch. Not heads and shoulders better, but the more I play with it, the more I like it. Image wise I see the difference. The focus confirmation is much better with my manual focus lenses too. And focus peaking is a real blessing for my old eyes.

albertotorinoitaly · 12-09-2014, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by jayman_1975

Hi there, i have been seriously considering pulling the trigger on another body and naturally have considered the k3 as I wouldn't think the IIs is much of a step up from my K5II.

I have however come across a few threads where people are ditching their k3s if favour of the K5IIs. I don't understand why. I get that there have been some issues with the K3 but it seems that it was only a few and has been mostly taken care of (correct me if I'm wrong.).

I would like to be able to better capture moving subjects with less lost shots, possibly BIF if the occasion arises. It seems the K3 would be better suited to achieve this, again correct me if I'm wrong. What would I be losing to go 53 vs a IIs?

With respect to the K-5II, with a K-3 you'll lose a bit of lightness of weight. Then you'll lose in usability of the commands, that in the K-5II are at a lower complexity level. Everything else is better in a K-3
.

aleonx3 · 12-09-2014, 04:57 PM

Originally posted by gaweidert

I have a K5, K5-IIs and just got a K3. I have to says that the K3 is definitely the best of the bunch. Not heads and shoulders better, but the more I play with it, the more I like it. Image wise I see the difference. The focus confirmation is much better with my manual focus lenses too. And focus peaking is a real blessing for my old eyes.

I have to agree with your assessment and observation since I have all three at the moment. The k-5 is a great camera to own if you start out with nothing (better than other brands in same class). However, the k-5IIs brings in more on the table with even sharper images (sans AA filter and more, faster and low light AF and gap-less LED screen), k-3 brings even more with improved processing speed, allows more flexibility to crop, and even better AF. I use MF lenses frequently, it is easier on k-5IIs and up another notch with the k-3. I couldn't believe that I paid the most for my k-5 and the least for my k-3 (both new).

DSims · 12-11-2014, 01:18 PM

Originally posted by jatrax

Though I honestly do not see what they could add to the k-3 to justify pushing it down to mid-tier.

I seriously doubt the K-3 contains all of the AF technologies and improvements currently found in cameras from - well, from all 3 of their DSLR competitors! So there's one thing.

And more fps can always be helpful to some shooters - at least until we get over 60 fps or something. Everyone still has a long way to go in this regard.

halfspin · 12-11-2014, 01:20 PM - **1 Like**

Bigger buffer, too.

DSims · 12-11-2014, 01:27 PM

Originally posted by aleonx3

I couldn't believe that I paid the most for my k-5 and the least for my k-3 (both new).

Pretty funny - me too (if I ever get a K-3)! I think the K-5 is the only time I ever "wasted" so much money in photography. High price, minimal IQ improvement over the K-x, and rapid depreciation. I shouldn't even put wasted in quotes, because it's the only time I ever spent so much on one piece of equipment, and unlike other photography purchases the feeling that I'd thrown away significant money honestly never wore off very much.

---------- Post added 12-11-14 at 12:29 PM ----------

Originally posted by halfspin

Bigger buffer, too.

No kidding - even $40K cameras have a real need for improvement each generation.

aleonx3 · 12-11-2014, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by DSims

Pretty funny - me too (if I ever get a K-3)! I think the K-5 is the only time I ever "wasted" so much money in photography. High price, minimal IQ improvement over the K-x, and rapid depreciation. I shouldn't even put wasted in quotes, because it's the only time I ever spent so much on one piece of equipment, and unlike other photography purchases the feeling that I'd thrown away significant money honestly never wore off very much.[COLOR="Silver"]

Another interesting point is that I bought those two roughly after the 1st year of introduction... so, seems like k-3 depreciates more and quicker than k-5.

peterjcb · 12-11-2014, 07:05 PM

Originally posted by aleonx3

Another interesting point is that I bought those two roughly after the 1st year of introduction... so, seems like k-3 depreciates more and quicker than k-5.

...most likely Ricoh will be coming out with something new and needs to get rid of some K-3 stock.
I initially bought a K-3 last year and returned within the time frame for a full refund. I just purchased it again a couple of weeks ago for about half the price.
It was a fantastic camera for $1200 last year and it was an incredible deal this year for $620....

12-08-2014, 10:55 PM	#17
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by jatrax I've never experienced a lockup but then I never use a grip either. I wonder what the percentage of issues with versus without a grip would be. it seems to me, just subjective, that reading 'issue' posts a high percentage of them are from grip users. Yes, actually I believe battery grips making somewhat less than optimal electrical contact with the bottom of the camera has been considered the problem on some other bodies, but I've never experienced it (to any significant degree) on these cameras before. This is what surprised me so much. Since at least 80-90% of the action photos I take are in portrait mode, removing it isn't really an option (my arm gets too tired). I'll have to investigate it later, and making sure my batteries aren't wearing out. It's entirely possible at least two of them are, especially since I switched some of my batteries around this time (I usually put them back in the exact same place after recharging). So perhaps each grip just happened to end up with a failing batter (I usually draw battery power from 'grip first'; I may try changing that as well, but of course that will mean I have to remove the grips after every shoot, instead of only after ones that entirely drained the grip battery. After reading even more comments over the last couple of days about how the K-3's AF improvements over the K-5 IIs are even greater than I previously believed (since I only borrowed a K-3 for a few hours), I'd like to replace both my K-5 and K-5 IIs with K-3s. But I don't think that will be a budget priority right now. Anyhow, I'm curious about what kind of updated APS-C camera might be released around the same time they deliver a Full Frame camera or two - we'll just have to wait and see. Last edited by DSims; 12-08-2014 at 11:03 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Used K-3 or NEW K5-IIs SAME Price	Driline	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	20	06-11-2014 06:01 PM
Upgrade path: K5II? IIs? K3?	ismaelg	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7	03-08-2014 04:03 AM
Not sure which to bite, New K30 or used K5II	aquashankar	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	03-04-2014 01:21 AM
K-5 ii/iis or Pentax k-3 for me	kricha6431	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	22	11-01-2013 11:42 AM
Upgrade to K-5ii or iis ? - answering the unanswerable	Santoku	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	21	02-05-2013 09:22 PM

12-08-2014, 08:04 PM	#16
hjoseph7 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Minnesota Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,047	The K3 is going for a good price right now and is supposed to be a better camera according to experts. I myself opted for the K-5 II due to longer battery life, better high ISO performance, less of a load on my computer, and I like the way the buttons are placed. If you like to shoot Video though I would go for the K3.

12-09-2014, 11:06 AM	#18
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by DSims Anyhow, I'm curious about what kind of updated APS-C camera might be released around the same time they deliver a Full Frame camera or two With the k-5II series now apparently discontinued I would assume they will be releasing something. Either a mid-tier replacement for the k-5II or push the k-3 down to mid-tier and release a new flagship APS-C to replace the k-3. Though I honestly do not see what they could add to the k-3 to justify pushing it down to mid-tier. Maybe they will release a k-5III with the 20MP sensor from the k-S1........

12-09-2014, 02:06 PM	#19
gaweidert Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Rochester, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,325	I have a K5, K5-IIs and just got a K3. I have to says that the K3 is definitely the best of the bunch. Not heads and shoulders better, but the more I play with it, the more I like it. Image wise I see the difference. The focus confirmation is much better with my manual focus lenses too. And focus peaking is a real blessing for my old eyes.

12-09-2014, 04:27 PM	#20
albertotorinoitaly New Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 2	Originally posted by jayman_1975 Hi there, i have been seriously considering pulling the trigger on another body and naturally have considered the k3 as I wouldn't think the IIs is much of a step up from my K5II. I have however come across a few threads where people are ditching their k3s if favour of the K5IIs. I don't understand why. I get that there have been some issues with the K3 but it seems that it was only a few and has been mostly taken care of (correct me if I'm wrong.). I would like to be able to better capture moving subjects with less lost shots, possibly BIF if the occasion arises. It seems the K3 would be better suited to achieve this, again correct me if I'm wrong. What would I be losing to go 53 vs a IIs? With respect to the K-5II, with a K-3 you'll lose a bit of lightness of weight. Then you'll lose in usability of the commands, that in the K-5II are at a lower complexity level. Everything else is better in a K-3 .

12-09-2014, 04:57 PM	#21
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	Originally posted by gaweidert I have a K5, K5-IIs and just got a K3. I have to says that the K3 is definitely the best of the bunch. Not heads and shoulders better, but the more I play with it, the more I like it. Image wise I see the difference. The focus confirmation is much better with my manual focus lenses too. And focus peaking is a real blessing for my old eyes. I have to agree with your assessment and observation since I have all three at the moment. The k-5 is a great camera to own if you start out with nothing (better than other brands in same class). However, the k-5IIs brings in more on the table with even sharper images (sans AA filter and more, faster and low light AF and gap-less LED screen), k-3 brings even more with improved processing speed, allows more flexibility to crop, and even better AF. I use MF lenses frequently, it is easier on k-5IIs and up another notch with the k-3. I couldn't believe that I paid the most for my k-5 and the least for my k-3 (both new).

12-11-2014, 01:18 PM	#22
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by jatrax Though I honestly do not see what they could add to the k-3 to justify pushing it down to mid-tier. I seriously doubt the K-3 contains all of the AF technologies and improvements currently found in cameras from - well, from all 3 of their DSLR competitors! So there's one thing. And more fps can always be helpful to some shooters - at least until we get over 60 fps or something. Everyone still has a long way to go in this regard.

12-11-2014, 01:20 PM - 1 Like	#23
halfspin Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 258	Bigger buffer, too.

12-11-2014, 01:27 PM	#24
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by aleonx3 I couldn't believe that I paid the most for my k-5 and the least for my k-3 (both new). Pretty funny - me too (if I ever get a K-3)! I think the K-5 is the only time I ever "wasted" so much money in photography. High price, minimal IQ improvement over the K-x, and rapid depreciation. I shouldn't even put wasted in quotes, because it's the only time I ever spent so much on one piece of equipment, and unlike other photography purchases the feeling that I'd thrown away significant money honestly never wore off very much. ---------- Post added 12-11-14 at 12:29 PM ---------- Originally posted by halfspin Bigger buffer, too. No kidding - even $40K cameras have a real need for improvement each generation.

12-11-2014, 02:15 PM	#25
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	Originally posted by DSims Pretty funny - me too (if I ever get a K-3)! I think the K-5 is the only time I ever "wasted" so much money in photography. High price, minimal IQ improvement over the K-x, and rapid depreciation. I shouldn't even put wasted in quotes, because it's the only time I ever spent so much on one piece of equipment, and unlike other photography purchases the feeling that I'd thrown away significant money honestly never wore off very much.[COLOR="Silver"] Another interesting point is that I bought those two roughly after the 1st year of introduction... so, seems like k-3 depreciates more and quicker than k-5.

12-11-2014, 07:05 PM	#26
peterjcb Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Weddington, NC Posts: 468	Originally posted by aleonx3 Another interesting point is that I bought those two roughly after the 1st year of introduction... so, seems like k-3 depreciates more and quicker than k-5. ...most likely Ricoh will be coming out with something new and needs to get rid of some K-3 stock. I initially bought a K-3 last year and returned within the time frame for a full refund. I just purchased it again a couple of weeks ago for about half the price. It was a fantastic camera for $1200 last year and it was an incredible deal this year for $620....