[Nicolas06]

I do have a point. Did you know that B&H Photo (one of the top online retailers in the US) will ban people with a history of excessive returns? It's true, ask Henry Posner if you don't believe me. In any event, people who do what the OP contemplated doing are a tiny minority. You can believe that or not, I don't care.

That's logical. My father is on another forum (dpreview I think) and a guy was continously getting gear to evaluate it, post a review of it then send it back One day the reseller (Amazon) was thinking enough is enough and banned him. Now the guy is upset, but really I understand them. I don't want to pay more to sponsorize such behavior.

[Nicolas06]

I was thinking the same thing, for me it will depend on how much less the K-S2 will cost in the stores. (I am trying very much to save up for the Pentax FF next year)

In the meantime, I think there are pro's and cons for basically three bodies.

K-S2
Pro's - Small body, articulated screen, built-in Wireless control
Con's - I don't know how the 20MP sensor performs yet, "only" the 11 point AF system, Plastic body, no grip option, no top plate LCD. slowest FPS

K-5IIs
Pro's - Build, Low light is the best (unless the 20MP sensor beats it), that 16MP sensor is a legend!
Con's - older 11 point AF system, cannot compensate the AA filter

K-3
Pro's - Resolution, similar size to K-5, build, 27 point AF, fastest FPS
Con's - Low light not as good as the K-5 (IMHO), battery life not as good, but at least it is the same battery as the K-5 which is a good thing, Different grip to K-5

All of course have no AA filter and are weather sealed.

So it comes down to this.
Light weight and flexibility - K-S2
Low Light performance - K-5IIs
Resolution and best AF for moving objects - K-3

Of course, If you can afford all three, get all three :-D (Mind you the combined cost would will be less than the launch price of the Pentax FF - Ouch!)

Honestly the optionnal Low pass filter is a gimmick.
Higher bust mode is also is a gimmick except if you are really serious after ultimate actions shooting where then Pentax is not at all the best choice. All the current camera offer enough FPS for when you need it outside of very specific extreme situations. And if you are really after this kind of feature, really you should not after a Pentax.

Resolution wize, K-S2 and K3 are identical. biggest gain from K5 was the low pass filter anyway. and 20 vs 24MP is negligible.

Low Light performance is similar for the 3 bodies. The K-5IIs is maybe a very tiny bit better in particular because Pentax blur the Raws to improve its performance. K3 would show more noise out of the box and more details. Learn to use a tool like DxO or Lightroom and you'll keep the resolution of the K3 while removing the noise.



In conclusion for me
K-S2 win in comfort features like wifi/articulated screens and being more lightweight.
K3 win on photographic features and build. like far better AF, better exposure, better white balance and a pro build (2 SD slots, 200K shoots, full magnesium aloy body, far better autonomy than K-S2).

[Bagga_Txips]

20 vs 24MP is most definitely not negligible. In certain situations something else in the processing path might be a kind of bottleneck, my monitor sucks for example, but the extra 4MP might be useful sometimes while at the same time adding problems of storage space and file transfer speed.

Also, sensors have differences beyond their size - the rendering might have totally different characteristics. Considering how obsessed we used to be about our film choices way back when, I am surprised by how little attention is paid to sensor rendering nowadays. At the moment I am surprised and delighted by the results from my new K-S1, and may well choose the K-S2 rather than the K-3 for that reason alone, one day...

[Nicolas06]

20 vs 24MP is most definitely not negligible. In certain situations something else in the processing path might be a kind of bottleneck, my monitor sucks for example, but the extra 4MP might be useful sometimes while at the same time adding problems of storage space and file transfer speed.

Also, sensors have differences beyond their size - the rendering might have totally different characteristics. Considering how obsessed we used to be about our film choices way back when, I am surprised by how little attention is paid to sensor rendering nowadays. At the moment I am surprised and delighted by the results from my new K-S1, and may well choose the K-S2 rather than the K-3 for that reason alone, one day...

Well if has to be that, on the technical review of DxO the 20MP sensor is limited by the 12bit at least on K-S1. So the K3 has more room and slightly better results overall.

As for rendering, of course having a good sensor is important, but now all sensors are good. In our case they are like all Sony sensor so it really like anyway we all use a Fuji Sensia anyway. Maybe using CCD instead of CMOS is more different but even the sensor are qualibrated to give the same output so this is still say Fuji Sensia for everybody.

The actual differences we see in practice are often very linked to the color profile the manufacturer decide to apply and how he allow us to tweak it in case of Jpegs. With Pentax, there already lot of setting you can play with.

What can I say? I always work with RAWs and I use DxO film pack. So in practice I'am not stuck with virtually equivalent sensors with just different contructors profile to say that this sensor is better than this other one and so on. Bundled is more than 100 of film emulation and the difference is really here. Combined with the control you have on saturation, grain, vigneting, blur and so on this give much more possibilities than using another sensor give. And that far easier.

So here is a very contrasty B&W based on Ilford HPS 800



This one is based on Fuji FP 100C and a CPL filter



Here this one is based on Lomography redscale 100, but I applied only half of the effect:



This one is based on Kodak Ektakrome:



This one is based on Kodak Elite Extra Color



So you see you have lot of possibilities and this is much more powerfull and practical than changing sensor (and so camera body) each time you want a different rendering. Before you had to choose right at the film selection phase and you could not try many different effects. Now you can do much more, you are more in control, and can get everything with the same camera body counting you have the proper post processing software and a little of practice.

As for the resolution difference between 20 and 24MP, counting this is 2 body without low pass filter, the difference in resolution theoretically is 10%. In practice on a given lense it is more likely to be less than 5%, less than the variation you typicall get from samples to sample. In all prints, in all level of cropping you are going to get rougly the same DPI, arround the same number of pixels. This is not very relevant when in today market one can buy DSLR/hybrids that range from 12MP to 50MP.

[Bagga_Txips]

Rendering.


I do not think it means what you think it means...

[edri]

What is the rated shutter life for K-S2?

[Nicolas06]

Rendering.



I do not think it means what you think it means...

Then be explicit, show examples and explain how sensor A is different than sensor B in rendering and explain how:

- This is not part producted by the lense that affect the OOF transition, bokeh and colors, contrast.
- This is not the Manufacturer settings to give a different JPEG type
- This is not the post processing that change the colors, contrast, sharpness, film grain, vigneting etc.

All I have seen from different sensor:

- Some have different resolution than other, allowing for higher resolution print.
- Some are blurer than others through the low pass filter to reduce moire.
- Some have different size than other. This affect the dof and rendering. Typically larger sensors have more color deph, participate in in focus/out of focus why to render things (as is the lense).
- Some have issues to really get the light of fast lenses, in particular with old design and on border due to the way light rays hit the photosites.
- Some produce better color deph lower noise and more dynamic range than other.
- Some use really different technnology like foveron or EXR.

Here we were speaking of Sensor A of Sony technology with CMOS on APSC with 20MP and Sensor B of Sony technology with CMOS on APSC but 24MP. Both are same generation of sensors. We know the 20MP is limited by design in dynamic range as being entry level sensor.

So yes I have difficulties to understand how the K-S1 must have special rendering that K-3 might not have and that you think K-S2 must have without even knowing if they didn't review the sensor a bit (new version of it with a few differences).

For me without explanation, characterisation of the difference, some example to backup doesn't look like something I could relyiably take into consideration when choosing a camera. From what you said that could be the default JEPG setting or the kit lense sample bundled with you K-S1, or maybe that your previous body was a CCD anyway and few years old so something where it more understandable you see a difference...

Anyway this is far from being clear here.

---

Last edited by Nicolas06; 03-14-2015 at 03:31 AM.

[Spodeworld]

But the practice of buying multiple bodies to send back the ones you don't like has to raise the cost of doing business which is inevitably passed on to the consumer.

I don't like the concept either. Unfortunately, in the US, it's getting harder and harder to find B&M camera stores, and even harder to find B&M camera stores that stock Pentax. And that's for big city dwellers. If you live in small town USA or, like me, in the country, it's impossible to buy Pentax in a store.



Uh, no. That might come close to true if the factory's daily production quota was not much more than a few units. For factories running at or near optimum operating capacity, the cost to produce one additional unit is minimal. Plus, it's not like a returned camera has to be disposed of. It can still be sold, albeit at a discount. To claim that buying two cameras with the intent to keep one and return one doubles use of energy and resources is a bit over the top.

[Nick Siebers]

I'm torn. Thinking of upgrading from my K5 for the resolution gain without the AA filter; love the articulating screen and wi-fi of the K-S2 but my gut says go with the K-3. They are basically the same price, now, with some extras thrown in. Hmmmm....

[clackers]

I'm torn. Thinking of upgrading from my K5 for the resolution gain without the AA filter; love the articulating screen and wi-fi of the K-S2 but my gut says go with the K-3. They are basically the same price, now, with some extras thrown in. Hmmmm....

As an experienced tog, Nick, surely you"d go for the K-3?

[Nick Siebers]

As an experienced tog, Nick, surely you"d go for the K-3?

Surely. But... built in wi-fi! Selfie screen! :-)

Oh heck, who am I kidding, The K-3 will do me just fine. There's always the phone for selfies.
eta: And, I just ordered the K3 with flash and 50 bundle. Whee!

[Bagga_Txips]

Well done Nick. I have a K5, a K30, a K-S1, and I bought a K3 very recently, and I now kind of regret all the months I have spent without the K3. It gives me excellent IQ and LOADS of mp-space for the cropping that I like to do. I did a 30% crop of an image recently and it still looks really nice and sharp in flickr. And the speed of response is fantastic - my K-S1 goes click... click... wait for it... click/no I can't be bothered with the 3rd bracket shot, whereas the K3 goes clickclickclickclick.......... are you sure you want 18 identical shots?