[Docrwm]

I believe the OP is saying she can do a new camera here, instead of a budget used one. A new camera and latest technology is nearly always better if one can. Definitely true in this case.

How on Earth is New KP better than a used KP? That new camera smell? Or do you mean that the current models are nearly always better? My K5iis still does better in a number of circumstances than my K3. Generic advice - meh.

[mikesbike]

How on Earth is New KP better than a used KP? That new camera smell? Or do you mean that the current models are nearly always better? My K5iis still does better in a number of circumstances than my K3. Generic advice - meh.

How many shutter actuations? how many times was it dropped? Does it include a warranty? Of course it is as good as buying a new camera- sure.

Except for a 35mm film body, quite some time ago from a low-use owner, or a left-over 35mm film body demo from a dealer. all of my camera bodies have been new, including other AF 35mm film models. All of my DSLRs have been. They are far more electronically complex. If I'm looking for a deal, I wait until the end of a model run and buy at closeout price. But, hey, if used is the only way, or if one is ok with taking a chance, fine. But to say how on earth could a new one be better????

And I said the latest model, latest technology, is NEARLY always better. I passed on the K-3 and took a deal on a left-over NEW K-5 IIs instead. I agree about the K-5 IIs vs the K-3 under some circumstances. There is no such comparison with the KP's performance, features, and the low-light situations brought up in this thread.

[Sandy Hancock]

The OP's sample shot is too slow a shutter speed for sharp results in this environment. Unfortunately there is no substitute for cranking the ISO (or pushing the files in post) when the light gets low. I agree with clackers that the K-5 does OK, but the KP/K-70 or ideally the K-1 Mark II are quite a big step up, not least because the files have more dynamic range.

K-5 at 12800. It's sharp, but dat noise



K-5 IIs in pretty low light:



Even the Q can perform at a pinch:



K-01 at 25600



K-01 at a more sensible ISO



K-3 at 25600. The noise doesn't spoil the mood for me.



I haven't shot much live music since I moved to the K-1, but it delivers

[newmikey]

K-5 was an awesome camera but AF fared very badly under artificial lighting, often failing to lock on. Wide open with a very narrow DOF that makes shooting under those conditions frustrating. As others have already noted the second generation of the K-5, the K-5 II and IIs solved that problem and can be had for a steal nowadays. The K-70 is a couple of jumps up from there and still very affordable with the KP topping it and then some but at a decently higher price level. Top of the bill would be the K-1 MarkII which is the best you can get if your bank account has maneuvering room.

[clackers]

K-5 was an awesome camera but AF fared very badly under artificial lighting

A lot of venues go for a red or purple LED setup, great for the mood of a gig but very, very bad for us photographers in lots of ways (including making true colours almost impossible to recover in postprocessing, the best you can hope for is white). The red is actually very low energy and really pushes up the ISO.

[bigdavephoto]

K5IIs with 50mm 1.8 lens @ 6400 ISO

[aslyfox]

in less than 24 hours, the OP has received a lot of helpful information, opinions and guidance

a tip of the hat and a pat on the back to the members of the forum

[SarahF]

Running after a hardware fix, is probably the second thing to do, after you perfect your technique.

I can tell you what I would do first (based on my theatre photograph experience and problems I had using higher iso and often blowing out highlights, and having problems with missed focus). You will need to address it the way you think best.

The following assumes the shot you show is typical (iso 3200 at f/1.8 and 1/50s); and use of raw capture--if you don't--you should in order to allow significant underexposure.

Firstly, to address the focus problem, shooting wide open is problematic, and I would suggest closing down about 1-2 stops. E.g., f/2.8 would be 1.5 stops closed down, and a better starting point.

As regards the shutter speed--I see some blurring--enough to suggest movement, but not too much, so it is likely a good choice/not likely you can go much lower.

Finally about the iso 3200, there is no advantage to using a high iso as the K-5 is "isoless," so instead use iso 400 (or lower), and increase exposure in pp. E.g., using iso 400, you would about +4 e.v. pp.

Other things are:
1) Consider trying a different viewpoint--such as a wider FOV lens--to give more depth of field. This means you are expressing/emphasizing the performer more in the environment.
2) Try and perfect better manual focusing technique.
3) If the distance to the performer is fixed, set the lens distance manually, using the distance scale on the lens.**
___
** Just realized your lens does not have a distance scale (personally I think that makes no sense!), and thus maybe you can prefocus the lens at some point when the lighting is better.

Thank you, you've given me a lot to think about. I find the manual focusing quite tricky, though I'd say about a third is manually focused on a night like this. I do pine for the manual focus aid that was on the ME Super, back in the day, it was so handy! I do try to close down when possible, because 1.8 doesn't give much margin for error in focusing.
I hadn't heard of "isoless" until now, that's quite a concept! I have zero skills in post processing, that's something that I've been putting off learning (I know), I'll put it on the "to do" list.

[aslyfox]

some folks find this accessory to be helpful

PENTAX Magnifier Eyecup O-ME53 reviews - Pentax Camera Accessory Review Database

have you tried " live view " instead of the eye piece ?

[SarahF]

What post processing noise reduction do you do @SarahF?

Shamefully, none, I have no idea about post-processing, it confuses me completely! I know that I have to get over this fear. Also, I don't want to have to buy into a monthly subscription service like photoshop (I'm more of a save up and buy something once type of person, you never know what the future may bring).

[UncleVanya]

Thank you, you've given me a lot to think about. I find the manual focusing quite tricky, though I'd say about a third is manually focused on a night like this. I do pine for the manual focus aid that was on the ME Super, back in the day, it was so handy! I do try to close down when possible, because 1.8 doesn't give much margin for error in focusing.
I hadn't heard of "isoless" until now, that's quite a concept! I have zero skills in post processing, that's something that I've been putting off learning (I know), I'll put it on the "to do" list.

Download and try this tool: DxO PhotoLab - DxO
30 day free trial and a good price. I found it much easier to get results from than Lightroom. It is relatively complex to do complicated things in any of the tools but the things that will help - automatically applies lens corrections, smart lighting feature is easy to use, noise reduction - prime is a one click option most of the time (raw only), clearview feature can be friend or foe - use it if you like it and don't overuse it.

Shoot in RAW or RAW+ so you can take advantage of the PRIME noise reduction feature in the tool.
Don't be afraid to shoot at ISO 3200 - while ISO Invariant works you will be able to get a decent idea of what your shots are looking like as long as that ISO isn't blowing out the highlights.
Try LiveView if you get a new camera when you want to focus - the focus peaking and magnified focus options will help when AF is tricky.
I've shot live music with my m43 rig which is far worse in low light than the K-5.

[dms]

Thank you, you've given me a lot to think about. I find the manual focusing quite tricky, though I'd say about a third is manually focused on a night like this. I do pine for the manual focus aid that was on the ME Super, back in the day, it was so handy! I do try to close down when possible, because 1.8 doesn't give much margin for error in focusing.
I hadn't heard of "isoless" until now, that's quite a concept! I have zero skills in post processing, that's something that I've been putting off learning (I know), I'll put it on the "to do" list.

I do pine for the manual focus aid that was on the ME Super, back in the day, it was so handy!

They sell them (I purchased from Focusing Screen). About $100, but you need to install and then possibly insert shims till the focus is correct. The process is somewhat of a pain! As I mentioned I use one on my K-20d (based on the screen used in the Nikon FM-3). So something to consider in the future.

[UncleVanya]

They sell them (I purchased from Focusing Screen). About $100, but you need to install and then possibly insert shims till the focus is correct. The process is somewhat of a pain! As I mentioned I use one on my K-20d (based on the screen used in the Nikon FM-3). So something to consider in the future.

There are a lot of reviews and threads on the use of aftermarket screens. Even the best of these can affect metering and can be difficult to use with slower lenses. I have tried the Katz-Eye and may try again (I still own one) I just don't love it enough to put up with the issues.

[SarahF]

in less than 24 hours, the OP has received a lot of helpful information, opinions and guidance

a tip of the hat and a pat on the back to the members of the forum

I've been truly amazed by the help I've received here. I never expected so many helpful people to be here :-) Thank you all!

[Docrwm]

I've been truly amazed by the help I've received here. I never expected so many helpful people to be here :-) Thank you all!

Pentaxians are a small group. We love that someone, anyone, else is as contrarian as we are in their photography choices!