[Riggomatic]

Oy, another contender...ha!

I am really terrible about making up my mind in these areas. I'm terrified of regretting my decision, especially when considering buying used, because, obviously, they are not returnable!

I think I spent a month or more making pro's and cons lists for different cameras before I bought my K-5 used. I've been very happy with it for the past couple years, and try not to look at the shiny new models too much.

[mikesbike]

I've had along list of Pentax film SLR models and DSLR models. I now use both the K-S2 (recent- since late last year) and my K-5 IIs of several years, both bought new. They are both fine cameras, and the newer K-S2 provides features not yet available when the K-5 series was designed. Like the articulating flip-out rear LCD screen, which I find sometimes very useful, wi-fi wireless capabilities, and new in-camera image-enhancements such as a clarity enhancement mode. It also has the amateur-oriented quick-access scene modes, which can be especially convenient to those new to photography. But you are not new to photography, and also might not care about wi-fi wireless transmission. I have so far had no use for that feature, and have always had no use for the scene modes. The K-S2 may have better, more up-to-date video-clip performance, though this category continues to be not a Pentax strong point compared to other brands.

The K-5 series, like the more recent K-3 series, has a more pro-oriented design with its magnesium alloy build quality, much quieter high-performance shutter, and a pro-style on-body control layout, which is more at-fingertip controls without needing to access a function by going to menu. I do like my K-S2 very much, but I still love using my K-5 IIs, especially when facing situations where I'm likely to need making real fast adjustments on the fly. I can do the same with my K-S2 pretty conveniently, but not as conveniently. The K-5 IIs does not have the articulating back LCD, but it does have a top-deck LCD as well as the back screen. If you like having a viewfinder depth-of-field preview feature, it has that instantly available. The K-5 IIs has no AA filter in its design to improve resolution, which is the meaning of the "s". All of the recent Pentax models likewise are designed without the AA filter, but a switchable AA filter simulator has been added, also being the case with the KS2. The AA filter smooths out an off-color moire which can occasionally occur in digital cameras when photographing subject matter having a repeating pattern like some rooftops or perhaps a ribbed tweed coat. But having the filter present also smooths out detail in photos of any nature. I cannot recall yet encountering a moire problem with my K-5 IIs, but it could possibly happen. There are post-process ways of dealing with that should it arise, I am sure. I cannot see any difference as far as megapixels are concerned between my 16 mp K-5 IIs and my 20mp KS2. I can tell you my K-5 IIs delivers outstanding quality, including very good low-light, higher ISO low noise performance while preserving excellent detail. Actually, it has been shown better than a K-3 in this regard.

The K-5 IIs is bargain if you can find one lightly used, in very fine condition, at a good price. It is ruggedly made and made to be long-lasting. Otherwise, since condition and longevity are very important when buying a camera, I recommend getting the K-S2. It is also very good for low noise at higher ISO settings. Only the most recent current Pentax models, the K-70 and KP have advanced in this regard. You will have a new camera and warranty, and it can deliver superb results. As for the separate control for viewfinder DOF previewing, alternatively with digital you could simply take a picture and view it right away on the back LCD screen to check what is and is not sharply in focus, then erase it. Compared to the pro-oriented body designs, it shares such qualities as weather sealing (WR), both thumb and finger control dials for independent aperture and shutter speed control and much else, the exclusive Pentax Hyper system in both Program and Manual modes, and much more. It's polycarbonate body is of high quality material over a metal frame. I can tell you absolutely, you do not find this kind of build quality and such advanced features at this price point except with Pentax. It is an absolute bargain for a new DSLR at its current reduced price, since it is being replaced by the K-70. Outgoing model time is indeed bargain time, as I also did as soon as the K-S2 price dropped after the K-70 came out.

[ChristianRock]

With your budget you could get a K70.

[wstruth]

I had the the K-5 and sold it to fund a K-S2 and have been very happy. While the K-5 is a semi pro body and the K-S2 is not, the K-S2 is bit lighter, and has the flip screen which I find I ended up using for high and low shots quite a bit. I really did not use the top screen on the K-5 to monitor the camera settings, because for me the settings I needed to see were indicated in the view finder. The wifi is useful for quickly uploading jpegs to your phone (raw images take seemingly forever), The K-S2 will also work with the newer PLM lenses, and the last I saw the K-5 Series will not. Both are great in low light but you do get a resolution boost with the K-S2.

[eminker]

Hi Amanda,

Welcome to PentaxForums!
I have both the K-5 and K-5iis, Both are wonderful cameras but if I had to make a choice, get the K-5iis.
Images are excellent and the body is more than rugged enough.

[pathdoc]

I have the K-5 and I love it. There is something (which I'm sure better photographers than I can explain) peculiarly excellent about the sensor that was chosen for it and the image processing behind it, that keeps the entire K-5 series being some people's favourites even in light of every other APS-C Pentax body that came after it, with nominally better AF and nominally improved (higher MP) sensors.

That being said, the later iterations (the -II and -IIs) had significant improvements to their AF and a few other things (e.g. removal of the anti-aliasing filter in the -IIs) without losing that special sensor something, but they came out just too late for me to buy them instead of the base model (I was replacing an earlier Pentax model that had died), and when they did come out, I couldn't justify the upgrade cost in the context of the limited amount of shooting I do within my profession (as opposed to personal fun stuff). You are almost certainly better off with a K5-IIs than with a base model K-5.

I have heard it said that the glass matters more than the body; even a 6MP sensor can deliver fantastic images, because it's all they had in the dawn of digital and people did fine work with it. So on that basis, a used K-5 plus lens(es) may well be the way to go. But if the kit lens on that KS-2 was the DA 18-135... that is a whole different kettle of fish, because therein you would have a weather-resistant (but not waterproof and certainly not swimmable) package out of the box, which would be one-lens-does-all for 95% of your holiday needs, and many others as well until you could sort out where in the focal length range your shots were clustering and which other lenses you should start saving up for. And the KS-2 is, from everything I've heard, no slouch of a camera (even if it is not a flagship-level body).

It is possibly the case that you might be able to find (e.g. on the Marketplace here) the combination of K-5 series body and used DA18-135, and if you could then that would be ideal.

The next lens you should consider after that is a fast prime, e.g. 35mm or 50mm, for shallow-depth-of-field shots and flashless low-light work. How prepared are you to go manual focus for those "artsy" shots? Because then your options broaden enormously and the price drops way, way down in many cases.

Do not forget in all this, however, how useful a small but strong tripod can be (when you are not "on the fly" and conditions permit it).

[UncleVanya]

The color capture (is there a proper term for this??) isn't true-to-life. I have to do more editing than I would like to do get the color correct, and in very bright or very dark situations, getting the exposure correct is finicky and isn't always fixable in editing. For nighttime shots (cityscape types things, usually) it's almost impossible to get a decent, clear shot, even with a tripod. I am using the kit 18-55mm lens 90% of the time, and the other 10% a 55-200mm I bought at the same time.

I'm not too particular about whiz-bang, to be honest, having been such a dedicated film photographer for so long. I care about photo quality and camera sturdiness/longevity, I have no interest in being able to use WiFi to send my pics from my camera to my phone instantaneously so I can post them all over my social media.

Are you shooting jpg or raw?

The d3000 is quite plastic feeling but isn't a bad camera. JPG rendering is very personal taste related and what some love others hate. Depending where n where you are maybe you could see if a forum member or local camera club member has the model you are interested in to directly compare them.

You may find getting better Nikon glass would improve the photos. Shooting in raw should allow you to skew the output to match just about any taste. The underlying sensors are similar across many brands. But tha d3000 will still feel plastic and the output raw files may suffer from poor amplification and reduced bit depth (I haven't studied the d3000 since a friend owned one years ago but I believe it lacks 14 bit raws ).

The k3 is what I have. I love it. The k5iis is highly recommended but I haven't used it. The k5iis and k3 offer 14bit raw files. The ks2 if I'm not mistaken is offering 12 bit raw.

The k3 has more megapixels but since they are more densely packed they aren't quite as good at low ISO as the k5iis. Downsampling images can make this look better but I find good noise reduction is sufficient for my needs. (I use DXO OPTICS prime for noise reduction. )

Lenses are very important. The basic kit glass is fine within the limits it imposes. Expect to shoot around f8 with the kit glass to get the best image quality. Better glass allows sharp results with wider f stops. Better glass offers better flare resistance and different rendering.

An overlooked lens is the DA 17-70 - it is optically quite good. However the in lens motors had issues and people are scared to buy them. If you find one at a good price you might try it.

As others mentioned the plastic fantastic duo DA 50 f1.8 and DA 35 f2.4 are quite good and very inexpensive.

Good luck!

[TER-OR]

The least expensive will be a used K5. They're built like a tank. I like and use the top LCD a lot - more than the viewfinder display - so I won't give that up. This used K5 will give you budget for lenses. I think the 18-135 is the best travel lens available - if you can take just one, that's it. Many times I'll take that and the DA21 on travel, because it's so tiny and very good. If you can find the K5II for a good price, jump on it - there aren't as many out there.

Additional lenses? Depends on what you do. If you're not sure, just use the zoom for a while and figure out what you can't do or what you'd like to do better. Take your time.

I upgraded from K5 to K3II for loss of AA filter, in-built GPS and higher resolution mostly for my macro work. For 90% of everything else, the K5 is more than sufficient.

Oh, and on your trip shoot RAW. Buy more memory cards if you need (and a little ziplock or sealed pouch for them). You'll appreciate the ability to process from RAW.

[UncleVanya]

Just realized I was thinking of the d3200.
The d3000 is similar to the k10d and has a CCD sensor. The high ISO performance of that type of sensor is challenged.

[BrianR]

The color capture (is there a proper term for this??) isn't true-to-life. I have to do more editing than I would like to do get the color correct, and in very bright or very dark situations, getting the exposure correct is finicky and isn't always fixable in editing. For nighttime shots (cityscape types things, usually) it's almost impossible to get a decent, clear shot, even with a tripod. I am using the kit 18-55mm lens 90% of the time, and the other 10% a 55-200mm I bought at the same time.

I will continue to play the devil's advocate here, some of the issues you're citing might just carry directly over to whatever new camera you get. This might already be stuff you know, but in case you haven't thought about it:

Colour accuracy - you have stated a preference for the K01's jpegs (I assume jpeg?), so that's a plus for a Pentax. Have you tried tweaking the JPEG settings of your Nikon? Are you setting White Balance at the time of capture? Either way, you might just be better off shooting in RAW and developing profiles of your own. Using a Colour Checker type of target, or just eyeballing something to your preferences. This goes for any brand of camera (a Colour Checker type of target is the way to go if you're super picky about accuracy or consistency)

Exposure in Bright/Dark - This could be how you are using the camera to meter. Super bright and super dark scenes will always be tricky and confusing for the built in meter without the operator compensating appropriately. Shooting in raw also gives you more processing leeway after the fact (not that you plan to need to correct mistakes, but it's helpful when you need to stretch things out). Newer cameras will definitely have better dynamic range than your oldie, so that's a definite plus (the sensor in the k5/k5iis series is really excellent here), but operator input is necessary to get an optimum exposure, no matter the camera.

Sketchy nighttime tripod performance - The kit lenses are not the greatest, they never are, but looking at samples from your camera + Kit, it's still pretty competent (Nikon D3000 DSLR 18-55 mm | Flickr). With a sturdy tripod and solid technique I can't see any reason why you shouldn't be able to get impressive cityscapes. If things are blurry, is your tripod stable? Using the timer to trip the shutter? Turning shake reduction off? I'd suggest you figure out what's going wrong, it will only help you going forward no matter what camera you end up with.

[C_Jones]

I would suggest that you shoot jpeg + raw when on your trip, to just have an idea of what you can get as results and make sure you don't miss out. Later, if you want to switch to one or the other depending on your situation you will have the choice.

[northcoastgreg]

I'm firmly in the K-5iis camp, liking that camera so much I bought a second one and plan to use both until they finally give up the ghost. It's fairly compact for a camera in its class, durable, and produces beautifully malleable raw files. Not sure about it's jpg output, as I'm exclusively a raw shooter, but I'm sure with a little tweaking, it should do better than an old entry level Nikon DSLR.

[eyeball]

I have both the K5IIS and the KS2. Although I take out the K5IIs when I'm out for "deliberate" photography, like landscapes and architecture, for family events and street photography, I'll take the KS2, and it's what I'd take for travel. It's smaller size makes it easier to pack, but the biggest advantage is the flip screen: you can raise the KS2 above your head and shoot down onto plants, over bridges & walls, flexibly place the camera for flower shots (great for getting interesting backgrounds), or comfortably compose shots with the camera at waist- or ground-level. Also, composing selfies is easy, if you want to document yourself. I'm guessing that low-light photography won't be the majority of what you do, or that you'll be photographing opportunistically rather than formally, so those advantages of the K5IIs won't be that compelling. Shooting with the K5IIs feels more satisfying somehow, but I find the the KS2 the MUCH more practical and versatile of the 2.

Glass can make a big difference, not just for the essential image quality, but also in giving you a natural angle of view for your style of composition. I'd go out where you live and spend some time shooting tourist-style just to see what angle of view(s) you prefer. Especially I'd worry about how wide-angle a view you need. In agreement with the others, 18-135 is a pretty decent zoom in that regard, if a 27mm FF equivalent is wide enough. For myself, I prefer a wider angle: the 15mm limited (22mm FF eq) is barely enough. A trip might be a great way to find out what kind of lenses you like, but you'll probably be happier if you can get some idea of what you really like, and what's pretty much useless, before you set out.

[Blacknight659]

K-5ii and K-5iis owner here.

I think the battery life alone should sell you on the K-5ii. The IQ is about the same, and the K-5 series is built extremely well and has been the body design for several years for a reason. I think your only real gain with the K-s2 is the flip out screen. If you really need that, go with the k-s2, otherwise get the K-5ii or K-5iis

[mikesbike]

One thing going for a new K-S2 is it can be had as a kit with the little 18-50mm WR lens, so you have a WR package right away. The new little kit lens also has a quiet DC AF motor, with fast and accurate focus. In fact, it is among the quickest focussing among my lenses, including some expensive top-tier zoom lenses. The problem here is the very limited budget issue, and the fact the K-5 IIs, the last of the K-5 series, has not been made for a number of years. If one is lucky enough to find one with low use, in excellent condition, what would be the price? And then what about a lens? The current little kit lens is not yet offered as a kit with the K-70. The only kit lens I've seen with it is the very desirable DA 18-135mm DC WR, but then we're talking way over budget. The little WR kit lens can be bought separately- for about $300! The older, larger kit lens now with WR is still available- at about $185 but it is not as good, and its screw-drive AF not as fast or as sure. So getting the new kit lens with the K-S2 for some $50 is an amazing bargain! Even though it comes that way without its lens hood. I didn't really need the little lens as I already had the DA 18-135mm, but for that little money how could I say no? Now I am glad to have it. I find, since I have a couple of jackets with VERY large pockets, I can even shove the smaller K-S2 with the little zoom lens into a pocket! I could only do that before by having a compact Limited prime on the camera- never did I think I'd be able to do that with a zoom lens! Of course, I always take out the camera before putting on or taking off the jacket so it does not get slung around. Part of the appeal for my getting the K-S2 was as a replacement for my little K-r as my compact lighter-carrying model, due to some meaningful new features, like the articulating LCD screen and dual control dials for the full Pentax Hyper system. Now having the little compact zoom has increased its compactness value when I'll need a zoom lens!

Some comparative images I have seen have shown the new kit lens as having some improvements in image quality over the previous model, and I have found this is true. I had the same previous kit lens model but without WR bought 10 years ago as a kit with the K-200D, and was a well-regarded kit lens. I recently gave it to friends along with my old, nice little K-r. I have found the new little zoom is superior, the AF for sure, and does a good job for general shooting and compact carrying. Some people have said they don't like that it retracts for carrying and you have to press the button to release it for use, or even to bring up the screen to change any settings. It can be a little bit fiddly, but not a big deal to me, and nothing at all compared to the compact convenience it delivers.

I am more like eyeball in my use of my K-5 IIs and my K-S2. I shoot mostly jpegs for their convenience, and both of these cameras deliver excellent jpeg quality right out of the camera. The boost in visible resolution compared to the K-5 and K-5 II is by way of removing the AA filter in the "s", which is also true of the K-S2. I found it beneficial to have sharpening set to "Fine" for the "Bright" category and also "fine" for "Natural" as well, but not of course for "Portrait" in the custom image settings. When I shoot my friend's indoor roller-hockey events, or high school wrestling he coaches, I usually take the K-5 IIs due to its fast, pro controls for any quick changes. For instance, to change ISO, I just hold down the ISO button on top and change value displayed on the top LCD with the thumb dial-just that quick. But with the K-S2, you press the ISO button on the back once, and the ISO screen comes up where you can also change value with the thumb dial , then press the "ok" button. Not as quick, but still pretty convenient. Or I take the K-5 IIs when I need its quiet, almost noiseless shutter instead of a "click". Like say at a recital concert, or recently at a baptism ceremony of my friends little new son. I used it with the 18-135mm and got a couple of shots they love.

For out and about serious photography, I take either, depending on circumstances I'll be dealing with. The K-S2 for me is largely about extra-light carrying, and often for macro where I can pull out its articulating screen and use live view to frame low shots without having to crawl on the ground. Same for firing over a crowd. Its battery is smaller... and lighter with less capacity than the K-5/K-3 series, so its advisable to take along a fully charged in camera and at least one fully charged spare if you'll be out and about for a long while, taking lots of shots. I bought an off-brand (Watson) spare along with the camera. I think if you get this camera you will be very impressed and very pleased with its performance and all of its many assets. More about the Pentax Hyper system later.

These are both very fine cameras and can deliver great results. Each has its particularly desirable aspects. Some of us own both models and are pleased with both of them.