[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?

[godavari]

I was wondering about the same to add another body to K-5. and I got a K5-IIs (for it's removal of anti aliasing filter). Price was too good compared to K-3 during thanksgiving sale.

[jayman_1975]

Right now I'm looking at $150 extra to get the K3

[halfspin]

The only thing the K-3 lacks is pixie dust on the sensor (more dynamic range). But from what I've read on this forum the K-3 can do just as good with more fiddling in post. BIF should be a LOT easier with the K-3...better AF and more cropability. I'm still on the fence about a second body but I'd probably get the K-3 and use my K-5II s for landscapes.

[enoeske]

Right now I'm looking at $150 extra to get the K3

I think the K-3 is definitely worth $150 more than the IIs.

[Na Horuk]

I think the main question is whether you can survive storing even bigger raw files

[jatrax]

I have however come across a few threads where people are ditching their k3s if favour of the K5IIs.

Can you post those threads? Not something I have seen.

I had k-5, and currently use both k-5IIs and k-3. IMHO, there is no comparison, k-3 wins hands down. The k-5IIs is my backup body and rarely comes out of the bag unless I want to use both bodies.

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.).

Not sure what 'issues' that would be? Mirror flop? IMHO, completely overblown. I had it happen to me twice in 16,000 exposures. Pull battery, reinsert, keep shooting. Scared me the first time, the second I was back shooting in less than 10 seconds. Never happened again. And if it does worry you, there is a correction posted with new firmware.

For BIF, the k-3 is way ahead of the k-5IIs. In static shots there is not so much difference. Both focus quite well, but k-3 is consistently surer to lock especially in lower light.

If you shoot RAW you do need to develop a new PP routine, don't just use the presets you had from the k-5. It is a different sensor and needs to be developed differently. There is more room for adjustment in almost all of sliders with k-3. Takes a little more work to get the best out of it, but the best is better than k-5. I think anyone disappointed in k-3 results has not taken the time to learn to develop for it properly. This is speaking of RAW files, I have no experience with jpeg.

[jayman_1975]

I think the main question is whether you can survive storing even bigger raw files

I have 4tb of network storage, I'm good.

---------- Post added 12-08-14 at 01:37 PM ----------

Can you post those threads? Not something I have seen.

I had k-5, and currently use both k-5IIs and k-3. IMHO, there is no comparison, k-3 wins hands down. The k-5IIs is my backup body and rarely comes out of the bag unless I want to use both bodies.Not sure what 'issues' that would be? Mirror flop? IMHO, completely overblown. I had it happen to me twice in 16,000 exposures. Pull battery, reinsert, keep shooting. Scared me the first time, the second I was back shooting in less than 10 seconds. Never happened again. And if it does worry you, there is a correction posted with new firmware.

For BIF, the k-3 is way ahead of the k-5IIs. In static shots there is not so much difference. Both focus quite well, but k-3 is consistently surer to lock especially in lower light.

If you shoot RAW you do need to develop a new PP routine, don't just use the presets you had from the k-5. It is a different sensor and needs to be developed differently. There is more room for adjustment in almost all of sliders with k-3. Takes a little more work to get the best out of it, but the best is better than k-5. I think anyone disappointed in k-3 results has not taken the time to learn to develop for it properly. This is speaking of RAW files, I have no experience with jpeg.

Yes I was referring to the mirror flop and some freeze up issues I read about.

It seems the posts I read where people downgraded were on account of the better dynamic range and high ISO on the K5IIs. Not really sure this would be an issue for me.

[Adam]

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?

I'd go for the K-3. All-around it's a much better camera, though the K-5 does deliver comparable image quality in low light due to having a little less noise at high ISOs.

[jatrax]

It seems the posts I read where people downgraded were on account of the better dynamic range and high ISO on the K5IIs.

There is no doubt that there is a bit more noise in the k-3 image compared to the k-5. However, I have found that after downsizing the image to the same 16mb size as the k-5 image there is no discernible difference. So the comparisons are not strictly valid. The k-3 has more noise, but only when doing something the k-5 cannot do (a 24mp image). When both are compared on even terms (a 16mp image) I see no difference.

I routinely downsized k-5 images to 14mp before sending to agencies to get rid of any lingering noise. With the k-3 I use the same export to 14mp function. My acceptance percentage with k-3 images is higher than with the k-5. And that is for agencies that have zero noise tolerance.

I believe anyone who is leaving the k-3 for the k-5IIs has just looked at images at native size (16mp versus 24mp) and not on a even footing.

Even if there was a degradation of the IQ in some situations, which I have not found, the other advantages of the k-3 would outweigh that IMHO, it is just a better, faster, more responsive camera.

[DSims]

Not sure what 'issues' that would be? Mirror flop? IMHO, completely overblown. I had it happen to me twice in 16,000 exposures. Pull battery, reinsert, keep shooting. Scared me the first time, the second I was back shooting in less than 10 seconds. Never happened again. And if it does worry you, there is a correction posted with new firmware.

I was actually shocked to find that both my K-5 and K-5IIs locked up while I was shooting action Saturday. I took maybe 1500 images between the two cameras, and each locked at least twice! In one case I had to take off the grip and pull the battery in the main body to reset it. Since I usually over-tighten my battery grip (only using my fingers, of course) it was a little painful and time consuming (considering the action I missed) to remove it. I've been shooting more video this year, so I've only used them on a few weekends this season, but I don't remember ever having this problem before! I'm about ready to downgrade my firmware a version or two - they both worked reliably last fall! It's beginning to look like Ricoh may make slightly buggier firmware than Pentax used to - but slightly is just enough to cause trouble!


The bottom line is I'd no longer consider mirror flop a reason to stay away from the K-3. And the AF is truly better. I'm not kidding when I say this - you don't just want to go for the K-3, you need to.

[Titanius1066]

I went from a K-5IIs to a K-3 and I was amazed at how much more responsive the K-3 is over the K-5IIs. The K-5IIs is fast but there were some noticeable delays and I took it on a trip to Japan shooting a band that was on tour there. After getting the K-3 I wish I had had it during the tour. There were many times shooting in low light that the K-5IIs just wasn't fast enough to capture the action on stage. Now I just pick up the K-3, tap the shutter button, and it's ready to go.

[jatrax]

In one case I had to take off the grip and pull the battery in the main body to reset it.

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.

[artlewi]

With the new announcement about the K-5 line being discontinued you can get some great deals on them as a second body. If you are thinking about buying a new primary shooter, then I would spend the extra money and go for the K-3.

[jayman_1975]

Thanks for all the advice. I think im gonna go for the K3!