Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-03-2015, 09:21 PM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Western PA
Posts: 67
Is it just me?

I'm in the market for a K-3, so I have been looking at some of the sample pics posted in the K-3 section.
But then I looked at the sample pics for the K-5ii, and they blew me away.
Sharper, clearer, more vibrant colors.

Is it just me, or does the K-5ii take better photographs than the K-3?

I'm really starting to second guess my purchase.

02-03-2015, 09:28 PM   #2
Pentaxian
Sagitta's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,937
I just picked up a K-3 today, and while I can't talk for the K-5/K-5ii, I can say with utmost certainty that the K-3 is miles ahead of the K-30 as far as quality goes. I'm not regretting my purchase at all, except for a general "well crap, time to relearn what I already know" kind of thing.
02-03-2015, 09:33 PM   #3
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,541
Both are excellent and neither takes the crown on every single count. In the right light any camera can take great photos. We're fortunate to have more than one excellent choice available right now (the K-s1 is excellent too once you get past the ergonomics); looking back at other cameras after a purchase will give you a headache from neck strain And you may be comparing Vivid-setting K-5 to a Natural or Muted K-3, so all 'apples' are not alike much less the oranges.

Your shots will impress you, without a doubt.
02-03-2015, 09:44 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pasadena, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,113
K-5II has been around longer, so people had more time to get better shots. In my opinion the K-3 has a better image quality than K-30, but it requires a bit more effort and careful processing to scale pictures down properly.

02-03-2015, 09:45 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Chaos_Realm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,251
The K-5ii has better performance at higher ISO, but it has lower resolution.

You do need to remember that much of the image quality comes from the lens used, post processing and the user.

Do you shoot in RAW or JPEG?
02-03-2015, 10:19 PM - 1 Like   #6
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,749
The k-5 and the k-3 use different sensors. When I first got the k-3 I was a little disappointed that the images were no better, and sometimes not as good as those from my k-5IIs. After a while I realized I was using the same PP presets on the k-3 as on the k-5IIs. But they are NOT the same. I started over from scratch and developed new presets just for the k-3 and now I can say I use the k-3 almost exclusively. I won't say the images from it blow the k-5 away but generally they are better and certainly have no reason to be poorer.

I've no idea what you have been looking at so it is possible those have the same problem mine did, or not. I put little faith in what I see on a screen on the internet. The resolution is downsized dramatically, you have no idea how the image was processed or if it was re-processed / re-sized by the website on upload. The only test I rely on is the one I do myself, with my gear, my subjects, my PP.
02-03-2015, 10:52 PM   #7
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Western PA
Posts: 67
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
The k-5 and the k-3 use different sensors. When I first got the k-3 I was a little disappointed that the images were no better, and sometimes not as good as those from my k-5IIs. After a while I realized I was using the same PP presets on the k-3 as on the k-5IIs. But they are NOT the same. I started over from scratch and developed new presets just for the k-3 and now I can say I use the k-3 almost exclusively. I won't say the images from it blow the k-5 away but generally they are better and certainly have no reason to be poorer.

I've no idea what you have been looking at so it is possible those have the same problem mine did, or not. I put little faith in what I see on a screen on the internet. The resolution is downsized dramatically, you have no idea how the image was processed or if it was re-processed / re-sized by the website on upload. The only test I rely on is the one I do myself, with my gear, my subjects, my PP.
I've looked at at least 30 pages of photos in the K-5 and K-3 sections, so I'm assuming that the different combinations of photographers, lenses, settings, processing, etc. are balancing out. The K-3 takes excellent photos, but to me, the colors in the K-5iis photos look better, and there seems to be a clarity there that just gives them more punch. Maybe it's better contrast in the K-5iis, or something like that. I'm starting to think I should rent each one for a week and see which one I like more.
02-03-2015, 10:52 PM   #8
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,642
I jumped from a K5 to a K3 and I am more than pleased with the K3.

02-04-2015, 02:14 AM   #9
Site Supporter
Madaboutpix's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Rhine-Westphalia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 277
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
The k-5 and the k-3 use different sensors. When I first got the k-3 I was a little disappointed that the images were no better, and sometimes not as good as those from my k-5IIs. After a while I realized I was using the same PP presets on the k-3 as on the k-5IIs. But they are NOT the same. I started over from scratch and developed new presets just for the k-3 and now I can say I use the k-3 almost exclusively. I won't say the images from it blow the k-5 away but generally they are better and certainly have no reason to be poorer.

I've no idea what you have been looking at so it is possible those have the same problem mine did, or not. I put little faith in what I see on a screen on the internet. The resolution is downsized dramatically, you have no idea how the image was processed or if it was re-processed / re-sized by the website on upload. The only test I rely on is the one I do myself, with my gear, my subjects, my PP.

Makes perfect sense to me.

I would add that a simple click in Lightroom, namely selecting camera calibration "Embedded", rather than "Adobe Standard", makes for a much better starting point in PP with regard to colour rendition and accuracy, as has been noted elsewhere on this forum. I'm confident the malleability of the K-3's DNGs beats anything I've seen before, and I have absolutely no regrets about replacing my old K-7 with it (which was no slouch in that respect either). As far as I'm concerned, the K-3 output rocks!
02-04-2015, 02:19 AM   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
rayallen's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Forresters Beach, Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,667
QuoteOriginally posted by alamo5000 Quote
I jumped from a K5 to a K3 and I am more than pleased with the K3.
A bit off-topic, but I jumped from a K10D to a K-3 so you can imagine how pleased and surprised that I was! More than pleased is an understatement.
02-04-2015, 06:30 AM   #11
Pentaxian
dcshooter's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Washington DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,555
Don't look at sample pics here.

Look on Flickr or some other site where you can view full resolution originals. The forum software downsizes and compresses the heck out of anything posted here that is above the very low image cutoff thresholds (1000px wide or 800px high!). If uploading originals, the larger, higher MP images form the k-3 have to be downgraded even more than those from the K-5!

QuoteOriginally posted by jeryst Quote
I'm in the market for a K-3, so I have been looking at some of the sample pics posted in the K-3 section.
But then I looked at the sample pics for the K-5ii, and they blew me away.
Sharper, clearer, more vibrant colors.

Is it just me, or does the K-5ii take better photographs than the K-3?

I'm really starting to second guess my purchase.
02-04-2015, 07:01 AM   #12
Pentaxian
redcat's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Paris
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,825
I confirm that the K5 II (or K5 IIs) is perfect for portrait,still subject (that I usually shoot), I've seen many many photos before ordering the camera, it can compete any camera
check out my signature for some humble photos of mine ^^

Pair it with a FA31 or FA77 and you don't have to worry too much in PP

Last edited by redcat; 02-04-2015 at 08:25 AM.
02-04-2015, 08:18 AM   #13
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 869
QuoteOriginally posted by jeryst Quote
I'm in the market for a K-3, so I have been looking at some of the sample pics posted in the K-3 section.
But then I looked at the sample pics for the K-5ii, and they blew me away.
Sharper, clearer, more vibrant colors.

Is it just me, or does the K-5ii take better photographs than the K-3?

I'm really starting to second guess my purchase.
I owned a K5IIs and passed it on to my brother and got myself a K3. Without pixel peeping, I can say that they are similar if not identical with K3 packing more pixels. I hear that K5IIs is better on high ISO. In either camera, I tried not to go much past ISO 800. most of my work was and is done at ISO 400 or below.
02-04-2015, 08:31 AM   #14
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 36
A year ago I switched from canon to a pentax k3 ; above all with regard to the saturation and contrast I was baffled : canon raws files looked much better . then I realized that the file raw product from K3 was very neutral and with a minimum of pp I could get amazing results . k3 produces excellent files, of course lenses and pp are very important...
For ISO setting I also took pictures at 3200 with good result; at 6400 with denoise in pp k3 produces good 8x10 prints

Last edited by teoprome; 02-04-2015 at 08:41 AM.
02-04-2015, 08:54 AM - 2 Likes   #15
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,258
The K-5 IIS produces beautiful images, that sensor was in the hands of the Pentax engineers for a long time and they knew how to squeeze the most out of it. The difference between that and the K-3 is not IQ but other qualities of the body. I jumped from the K-5 to the K-3 and started getting colors and details that I didn't see in my K-5 files. The noise characteristics of the K-3 are harsher; a similar noise level produces unpleasantness. Your post processing has to improve with the K-3.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, k-3, k-5ii, photography, pics, sample
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is this a bad service center or is it just me !? I need help! Dexxx General Photography 11 11-20-2014 04:38 PM
Is it just me or the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 EX is disappearing? fgaudet Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 08-15-2014 04:08 AM
Is the Nikon D4s ugly or is it just me? 6BQ5 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 35 04-09-2014 12:14 PM
is it just me? adwb Pentax DSLR Discussion 16 03-25-2013 01:06 PM
Is it me or is it just wrong to... Iksobarg Photographic Industry and Professionals 15 01-08-2013 03:39 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:28 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top