[jjnevis]

I have a fairly new K50 that has developed the dreaded "black image" disease - aka intermittent aperture actuator failure. I'm going to have a go at fixing it, but I'm pretty disappointed in Pentax, since I had invested in brand (2 other lenses and flash) specifically because of good reputation.

Now, I know things fail so I need to get over it, but what should be my way forward? I want to move on (and up a bit) and was thinking of getting a K3 (seems very well built), but it looks like that model is fairly old and might not be being made anymore? What other model should I consider for mainly hobbyist stills of all kinds? Budget approx £600 (inc preowned)

[Adam]

The K-3 II is the way to go if you want durability and performance at a great price, since it's outgoing yet not outdated.

The K-70 would also be a natural upgrade path, and should fit within your budget new. It has better low light performance than the K-3, but both are already a substantial upgrade over the K-50.

Finally there's the KP, which is similar to the K-70 but more durable and stylish. It's missing some of the K-3's pro level features, but is better in many aspects. (See our recent review on the homepage)

[sewerynthegreat]

I have a fairly new K50 that has developed the dreaded "black image" disease - aka intermittent aperture actuator failure. I'm going to have a go at fixing it, but I'm pretty disappointed in Pentax, since I had invested in brand (2 other lenses and flash) specifically because of good reputation.

Now, I know things fail so I need to get over it, but what should be my way forward? I want to move on (and up a bit) and was thinking of getting a K3 (seems very well built), but it looks like that model is fairly old and might not be being made anymore? What other model should I consider for mainly hobbyist stills of all kinds? Budget approx £600 (inc preowned)

I replaced my K-500 (basically K-50 without weather sealing) with K-70 and I am really happy with it.
Images are much sharper (thanks to more MPix and lack of AA filter) also low light performance is better. Main draw back is battery which lasts for around 400 shots.
If money are not a problem, you don’t need build in flash, and low light performance is not crucial I would buy K-3 II it will be probably slightly better. More focus points, better battery life, faster continuous shooting.
I have chosen K-70 mainly because I don’t wont to carry additional flash with me, in any other case I would buy K-3 II.

[jddwoods]

The K-3 II is the way to go if you want durability and performance at a great price, since it's outgoing yet not outdated.

The K-70 would also be a natural upgrade path, and should fit within your budget new. It has better low light performance than the K-3, but both are already a substantial upgrade over the K-50.

Finally there's the KP, which is similar to the K-70 but more durable and stylish. It's missing some of the K-3's pro level features, but is better in many aspects. (See our recent review on the homepage)

I have a K-5 (original) and a K-3 with the K-3 as my primary and K-5 as a backup. Would there be much to gain by upgrading the K-5 to the K-P? Regarding lenses, I use the DA limited primes, DFA 100 Macro WR and DA 55-300 PLM on the two cameras, except the 55-300 PLM on the K-3 only. I do not shoot video, only stills with either camera. There is always an urge to have the latest and greatest but my K-5 is in like new condition and still takes great photographs. My other interest is trading my aging DA 17-70 for the DA 16-85 and am wondering if that may be a better, and less expensive option for my needs. Image quality and durability and my main priorities but also value low light performance to get the best out of the 55-300 PLM.

---

Last edited by jddwoods; 07-04-2017 at 06:11 AM. Reason: fix typos, add content.

[Theov39]

K-3 or K-3II is the only way to go. A much better camera in every way then the K-50 and you can avoid any possible concerns about similar problems on the K-70.

[f22]

KP. I have a K-50 but the KP is so much more in IQ, ISO, and features. The K3-ii was my second choice, but I wanted the better high-ISO performance of the KP.

[Jeff Lopez]

Since you have the flash, I would go for the K3II..You mentioned durability, which although the K70 is a very nice camera, I wouldnt carry it to the forest..

[The Squirrel Mafia]

If you want the "pro" build & durability of a 200,000 shutter life, the K-3II is it. The K-70 is a pretty decent camera. High ISO is a tad better than the K-3II's high ISO ability, but doesn't have the "pro" build. The KP beats all of them at high ISO, but no 200,000 shutter life.

If you can wait a bit more, a possible K-3II replacement will be on its way.

[jjnevis]

Thanks to everyone for the advice!

Repair update (for anyone that's interested)... I have successfully managed to repair the aperture motor/actuator issue that was causing the black images (Yay!). I filed down the ends of the D shaped metal core of the electromagnet using wet and dry paper just enough to create a small gap so that it doesn't stick magnetically to the other side - it was a bit of a leap of faith because I couldn't be sure that that's what the problem actually was, but after fitting it all back together it seems (for the moment at least) to be working a treat. A word of caution for anyone taking the casing off - be sure to locate the auto-focus selection switch on the bottom right (as you look at the front) correctly - otherwise you'll have to take it apart again to fix when the focussing doesn't work!

Okay, so having looked at the suggestions, it would seem that the K-3II is the obvious choice, especially from a build quality perspective, but as suggested by The Squirrel Mafia - waiting to see if there is a replacement soon might be an idea partly because I've now got my K50 back working and partly because it should push the older K-3II closer to my budget if there is surplus stock kicking about. That said, I should be able to sell the old k50 for a few quid to help fund the upgrade!

Thanks again (nearly considered selling up and going Nikon/Canon route)

[GodsPetMonkey]

I have a fairly new K50 that has developed the dreaded "black image" disease - aka intermittent aperture actuator failure. I'm going to have a go at fixing it, but I'm pretty disappointed in Pentax, since I had invested in brand (2 other lenses and flash) specifically because of good reputation.

The K-50 is still a very capable camera, with the aperture block being its only major issue. Sadly, when if it does go (as it has for you) it's a pretty big problem.

If the camera is still fairly new, check to see what your warranty options are. If you can get the camera replaced or repaired under warranty you can save your 600 pounds for another day.

Now, I know things fail so I need to get over it, but what should be my way forward? I want to move on (and up a bit) and was thinking of getting a K3 (seems very well built), but it looks like that model is fairly old and might not be being made anymore? What other model should I consider for mainly hobbyist stills of all kinds? Budget approx £600 (inc preowned)

A second hand K-3 is a very good value option. Lots of camera for your pound. A new K-3II is also a good value way to go, being at the end of its sales life (due for replacement with a new model) it is going at a good discount, but it might be just out of your budget.

The K-70 is the other major option. It occupies the same place in the lineup as the K-50, but has some pretty nice tech updates to make it a substantial improvement. As I understand it also uses a different aperture motor, to address the failure problem you have already experienced.

[mikesbike]

I have both the KP (recent) in silver/black finish, also the K-S2 with the fully-articulating screen (about 2 years), and the K-5 IIs for several years (which is of very similar style to the K-3 in handling, controls, and build). Plus other past models, the K20D, K200D, K-r, K-100D, etc. as well as several bodies from the film era. All bought new.

The K-r, a vey nice little camera, which I recently gave to some friends who have a new baby, along with 2 lenses as their first interchangeable lens camera. It is closest to your K-50 in body design, but being without WR and the premium VF, not as advanced. The K-S2 is a direct advancement of your K-50, as the K-70 is yet a further advancement of this class and style of design.

The most logical upgrade from this style and class of camera would be the KP, from my experience. Relating to the K-5/K-3 class, it has the pro-style magnesium body build, no "scene" modes, yet is still more compact like the K-70 class, with no top LCD, and about the same weight. Its control features are more advanced and pro-oriented. It does not have the fully-articulating screen, but does have the pull-out flexible angled screen like the K-1. From what has been said, since its design and build are very different from the K-r, K-30, K-50, K-70 class of camera, and thus is not likely to have the aperture failure problem. It would truly be a move up over your K-50 in many respects, when you are ready to do so.

[Adam]

I have a K-5 (original) and a K-3 with the K-3 as my primary and K-5 as a backup. Would there be much to gain by upgrading the K-5 to the K-P? Regarding lenses, I use the DA limited primes, DFA 100 Macro WR and DA 55-300 PLM on the two cameras, except the 55-300 PLM on the K-3 only. I do not shoot video, only stills with either camera. There is always an urge to have the latest and greatest but my K-5 is in like new condition and still takes great photographs. My other interest is trading my aging DA 17-70 for the DA 16-85 and am wondering if that may be a better, and less expensive option for my needs. Image quality and durability and my main priorities but also value low light performance to get the best out of the 55-300 PLM.

The KP does have noticeably better image quality, in terms of white balance, detail, and also high-ISO performance. I'd recommend the upgrade, or whatever might come around and replace the K-3. The K-3 is also an upgrade, but not as much as the KP if image quality is the only thing you care about.

[jjnevis]

Just want to say thanks again for the advice. I've had a look at the KP, but apart from it being a little out of my budget, the reviews that I checked out were not that impressed with it and both suggested the K70 was far better value for money, they also suggested waiting to see what the K3 mark III looks like before making any decisions on the KP. I confirm that I suspect what I'll end up doing is waiting for K3 update and then getting an older version of the K3 either at discount on new price or second hand. Until then K50 is performing great again, so no urgency.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

^ If it ain't broke..... Hahaha!

I'm on the same boat. I'm insanely interested in that upcoming K-3II replacement. I do hope that Pentax releases one & my only want is improved AF tracking. Pentax has already improved everything else. They just need to take all the recent improvments from the K-70, KP, & K-1 along with an improved AF system & stuff it all into the upcoming APS-C flagship & they'll have a winner. If there are still some K-3II cameras around that time, chances are that they'll be blown away at an outrageously low price and/or with some with some freebies too. I'd be willing to get one if they did. It's a win win situation.

[jjnevis]

Gave up waiting for k3ii "replacement", which will no doubt be announced shortly! Managed to pick up a second hand k3 at a reasonable price even though both the k3 and k3ii seem to be quite rare on the second hand market. Very excited.