[RonHendriks1966]

The increase in lw/ph according to Imagine Resources is from 2200 to 2700 so the resolution increase is less than 25% despite the 50% increase in MP. What that gives you is the ability to crop 23% of your image and still have k-5 resolution. That and the additional AF capability. The law of demising returns has set in with this sensor. A Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ1000 with a 1 inch sensors can achieve 2700 lw/ph but not beyond 125 ISO. Using current technology, you could get to 40 MP with an APS-c sensor but at the cost of low light performance.

If you're looking for 72 distinct lines per inch, you can get to 38 inches with a K-3 so apron. 30x40. But that's probably the low end of what folks will be happy with.That gets you an extra 7 inches over a K-5. 24x36 as opposed to 30x40. If you print 20x30 max like I do, I have to go a lot biggar before I see much improvement in my prints. And I have to go a lot bigger before I consider an F(fraction) F(frame). I have barely maxed out a K-5. A K-3 is a luxury. I like luxury. Extreme luxury.. like a 36 MP 35x24 . My guess is for 99% of current Pentax the 35x24 will be extreme luxury.

That is actually pretty amazing. How good digital sensors became over the last 10 years.

[psychdoc]

I have two K-5's. The only time I wished I had a better camera was for really low light stills shooting of my daughter's dance. Otherwise I am constantly surprised by the good results I get for my own needs. For travel light I use a sony rx100ii which is another lovely camera. I am not feeling the gear inadequacy of others but then I don't need super fast AF or long telephoto lens needs.

I tried a sony a7s for low light. Someday I might get one of those used. Otherwise no upgrade for me unless one of my cameras die!!

[Dewman]

I have two K-50's and I LOVE them! I see no reason to spend hard-earned cash for more megapixels when the 16.3 that I now have works just fine. Now, if I made my living with my cameras or if I was a lot more intense about my hobby, I might consider it.


Actually, I'm going backward in a way, having just bought a like-new K-x with only 12.4 MP and a likewise like-new K10D with even less MP at 10.2. I very seldom make prints any larger than 8" x 10", so.... to answer the question to the poll...... no.

[joango]

I did over the holidays. Had a kr for years, and then a k01 when the price was too tempting. I missed the viewfinder and feel of a dslr, so Santa shopped around and found a k3 for me!

[Mothballs]

I'll stick with the K-50 until the 3 year extended warranty expires.

[newmikey]

This response more or less fits where I'm standing right now, with the possible exception of the red highlighted portion:

Nope, because:
* 16 Mp is the upper limit of what I subjectively need.
* 16 Mp is the upper limit of what my computer can handle.
* There is no significant benefit to currently available newer sensors in Pentax bodies.
* I'd like but don't particularly need better AF.
* I don't need to crop.

I don't care about LCD, dual slots, wifi, gps, video, more buttons & wheels.
I'm not interested in FF; that's too much for me in every sense.

I've got a K-5 IIs and a Ricoh GR and from where I'm standing, I'll be running the both of them into the ground before upgrading. Both were purchased about 2 years ago so I recon they've got at least two more years in them if not more.

Glass-wise I may make minor purchases/upgrades but I run from 8mm through to 300mm with a mix of great quality glass (Sigma 8-16, Sigma 85mm, DA*50-135mm), sufficient quality (DA50mm, DA55-300mm, Tamron 17-50mm) and some specialty stuff (Tammy 90mm macro, Lensbaby, Arax Tilt lens) which all together cover all of my needs on the K-mount. GR-wise I have the GW3. On top of that I've got Haida ND's for a few of my lens-sizes as well as step-up rings so they'll do the job on the GR as well. Flash is covered by the Metz 58 AF1 (which I hardly ever use).

So, all said and done, unless I drop my K-5 IIs or GR on a concrete floor, I'm not in the market for a number of years to come for any photogear.

[starjedi]

I'm on my 3rd DSLR... into my second year with the K5iis. My plan?... staying on track with 5 years per body. So no. I have a few years to go, and this time around, I don't see anything yet that tempts me to move on to something new.

Nice plan. I just realized that I roughly take 100k photos per 5 year. So it is indeed a camera body life cycle!

[apete]

Nice plan. I just realized that I roughly take 100k photos per 5 year. So it is indeed a camera body life cycle!

I was on similar plan though it was 4 years for me and not 5 Now I might move to 3 years cycle but that is not due to megapixels but other camera features like improved focusing, general responsiveness and so on. As for sensor, 16MP is perfect for doing 10x15 prints and web publishing and that is what I need the camera for. Higher resolution means even more TBs of data storage and slower postprocessing...

[kentishrev]

I am very happy with my K-30 - with Ltd primes I can do just about anything I need to. Longer term, I guess the FF beckons, but I don't need it just yet, nor can I afford one. While I'm saving, I am going back to film for a self-imposed lesson in composition, patience and exposure. My trusty P30n is loaded with HP5 and ready to go.

[Kunzite]

I voted "Most likely yes" - even though I like the 16MP APS-C sensor, and I don't need 20+ MP. But "most likely" I will get the K-1, and new lenses for it. One main reason for that is the viewfinder, the larger the better. Hopefully they'll next announce some nice, compact (Limited-like) primes.

Getting back to the resolution issue, since I like the 16MP APS-C sensor and I might have to crop more at times, 36MP+ will do nicely

[Vantage-Point]

I am happy with my K5 II and K-01 cameras. They have very good IQ. If Pentax were to make a 18 or 24 megapixel APS-C or Full Frame BSI high iso camera that would probably pique my interest. I am more interested in improved focus peaking, auto focus and low light performance than a increase in megapixels.

[disord3r]

K-50. Haven't had it long enough to want to upgrade yet, but I will definitely give the K-3ii some serious consideration when FF comes out and I see what's happening with prices on new and lightly-used bodies.

[DarCam]

Not this year. I like my K5IIs. It's comfortable and I've finally gotten used to its shape, its curves and its weight. Having that relationship between the hand and the body already established and changing it feels counterproductive. I would also have to consider upgrading my work laptop to handle larger files from 20+ MP cameras. I'm a creature of habit when it comes to photography. Once I get a handle on my camera and its layout, it helps me when out and about taking pictures and capturing what really matters. Changing bodies for extra bits of MPs wouldn't really advance my craft, but probably would hinder me in some other ways, mainly having to deal with slow downs on my work machine due to the larger file sizes. Would I submit myself to that while post processing and storing those files, disrupting the flow of my work? Nah, not worth it.

[Auzzie-Phoenix]

Going to second the need for (already did) as an option. I had to vote no since I bought a k-3II the same day I did my taxes to replace an out of warranty k-50 with aperture block failure.

[klaatu3]

Most likely not. It would be tempting to get a K-1 this year--or even try to pick up a bargain on a K-3 or K-3ii--but for my current usage I can't really justify the expense. My K-5ii and K-01 still provide amazing IQ, plus I'm trying to do some occasional film shooting. Maybe next year...?