[bgm1956]

Welcome to the forum bgm1956; glad you joined us.

Plenty of people still shoot film and love it. I shot film for over 30 years, but once I made the transition to digital I never looked back. My first serious digital camera was a K10D. Then a couple years later I got a K-5IIs, which I love. Apet-Sure's Album: Nature-K5IIs - PentaxForums.com I found I could set the the ISO (ASA) as high as 1600 and still not get objectionable levels of noise (similar to film grain). That may sound high coming from film, but these days newer cameras can go much higher. I recently picked up a used KP, and have the ISO set to top out at 6400 right now. (A PF member recently posted an image of a vase/pot shot with their KP set at 10,000; it was amazingly good!) This high-ISO capability would be quite useful for sports photography.

One of the biggest things I noticed about the KP was how accurate the colors are. Apet-Sure's Album: Nature-KP - PentaxForums.com My beloved K-5IIs is wondering why I'm ignoring it.

I could definitely recommend a K-5 II or IIs. The IQ is very good and they are still highly regarded cameras. I've never used a K-3 but plenty of people swear by them. You'll get 24 megapixels instead of the K-5's 16MP, so better resolution in your images. Here's a spec comparison:
Pentax K-5 II vs. Pentax K-3 vs. Pentax KP - Pentax Camera Comparison - PentaxForums.com

As others have said, one of the biggest adjustments for me was the change in field-of-view for any focal length lens going from FF (35mm) to APS-c format. On a 35mm camera a 50mm lens gives you a 'normal' FOV. To get the same FOV on APS-c cameras you need a 30-35mm-ish lens. A 50mm is slightly telephoto. It will give you the same FOV as a 75mm lens on a 35mm camera.

You'll love digital cameras ability to adjust white balance settings. No more 82A or 80B screw-on filters. You just set WB to daylight, cloudy, tungsten, etc., or just use auto white balance and let the camera decide. AWB on modern cameras is pretty darn good.

There are so many other advantages of digital over film. Digital cameras are so adjustable/customizable that the manuals are 3/4" thick. Don't let that intimidate you though. With modern Pentax cameras you can always set them to 'Green' mode and just point and shoot. The camera makes all the decisions. On the other hand, if you want to make 99 tweaks, you can.

Whatever camera you end up getting, it will be a grand adventure!

I hadn't thought of not needing a filter. I always keep filters on my lenses to protect them. Guess that's one thing I would have to change out if I wanted to shoot film again.

[cpk]

- interchangeable focusing screens are not an option on digital. In some cases you can buy replacement screens that are better for manual focusing but changing them requires dissecting the camera.

Not so. The focusing screens are changed in exactly the same manner as with the LX, through the lens mount. I always get uptight when i have to do it for fear of slipping and causing some damage. Also adding dust.

If you get a K-5, get a K-5 II or IIs. Their low-light focusing is better than the original K-5.

[aslyfox]

in case the OP hasn't found it yet

the forum has a very nice side by side comparison tool:

Pentax K-5 II vs. Pentax K-5 IIs vs. Pentax K-3 vs. Pentax K-3 II - Pentax Camera Comparison - PentaxForums.com

[Apet-Sure]

I hadn't thought of not needing a filter. I always keep filters on my lenses to protect them. Guess that's one thing I would have to change out if I wanted to shoot film again.

Some digital shooters keep skylight or UV filters on their lenses to protect the front element, and remove them just before snapping the shutter. Any more glass in the light path degrades image quality somewhat.

If you are used to using polarizing filters, you'll need to get a different kind for digital. In film days, polarizers were 'linear'. Digital cameras do better with 'circular' polarizers. Linear polarizers can cause auto-focus and light metering problems on some models. There is a wide price range available. From what I've read, the cheap ones are made from cheap glass, have little or no anti-reflective coating, and just don't work well. I decided to go with the Marumi DHG series. They were about 1/3 from the top of most expensive, and got good ratings. Others will have different opinions of course.

[rogerstg]

Either would work for me. I have an excellent hot shoe flash and a SunPak handle flash both TTL unless they have changed the interface somehow

Voltage may be an issue. Some film era flashguns have high trigger voltage. There's a lot about this online. Basically you'll want to make sure your flashes voltage doesn't exceed 25ish volts. Read more at Checking trigger voltage | DPanswers

[AstroDave]

Lots of good advice above.

I'm in the boat (pun more or less intended) with Normhead - I've got a K-3 and a K-1 and use them almost interchangeably, mostly depending on which is closest and how much reach I do or do not need. I would recommend either over the older K5 variants (which I also had once upon a time).

My biggest adjustment to digital was getting white balance right. It's more than just "daylight" or "indoor" (incandescent). After initially (almost 15 years ago!) not being all that happy with AWB for both Canon and Pentax DSLRs, I've tended to always set WB either to one of the presets or do a custom balance (for product shooting). My Canon G15, however, is very good at AWB.

[mikesbike]

I'm contemplating moving from film to digital. I know I'm late to the game, but I had a great amount trouble finally deciding to give up the Pentax LX. I of course want to stick with Pentax and am considering either a K-5 or a K-3. I don't think I'll be someone who wants to spend a great deal of time correcting images on a computer. I want a camera that will just take the best possible picture right out of the box. I will want to use some of my old glass so I need interchangeable focusing screens. I will be picking up some AF lenses as well. Most of the use will be outdoors, camping trips, vacations, wildlife, etc. But I also will use it at the grandson's sports games and sometimes they are indoors. Some of the indoor events are less than ideal lighting. Between these two of these cameras, which one would you chose and why?

I am an old, long-time film shooter. I shot film exclusively for some 30 years, and waited until digital became good enough to nearly match the standards I had become accustomed to. Eventually, digital would not only match but would prove to be far more capable and more economical. The money saved by going without film and processing compensated for upgrades in newer camera bodies as the technology progressed. Something to consider in choosing your first DSLR, which have at this point have reached a very high level of advancement! You might still cherish your old film collection, but you have some really amazing imaging capabilities to look forward to- that is how far the DSLR has now come. I have by now had plenty of experience with numerous DSLR bodies.

I started out before any camera had auto anything, with a Vivitar SLR, plus 50mm and 135mm lenses. An experienced friend showed me how to work the camera and recommended slide film for economy and easy storage. That was all for 6 years until the camera stopped working, Upon shopping for a new camera, I chose a Pentax ME Super with the M 50mm f/1.4 and a mid-telephoto zoom lens, as auto focus (AF) was not yet developed. It would be another 6 years until I added my first AF body, the SF-!n and the "F" 50mm f/1.7 lens. I eventually updated to the PZ-!p and also the MZ-S and a slew of AF lenses.

In your case, with your advanced experience, and the type of body you are accustomed to, I recommend that you go some extra and get a new KP. I still have my K-5 IIs (the last and best of the K-5 series) which I still like very much, and use occasionally. As to low light, it remained tops by a small margin, even compared to the newer K-3. I take very good care of my equipment. But for the past 2 years now, the KP is my main camera. Furthermore, it is enjoying an amazing price drop, the current price being time sensitive. I shop mostly at B&H of NYC. Both black and silver versions are being offered with extra accessories at no charge. But do get a spare battery.

I got mine in silver, a relief from the usual black and it is a beauty. That price for a unique compact-stye camera, but with excellent weather-resistant (WR) metal construction (magnesium alloy), is outstanding. The KP also has outstanding capability for low-light shooting with very low noise (grain), even coming close to the Pentax full frame (FF) performance. it has the newest advanced set of controls to make shooting more efficient.

It also has a body form not far off from that of the old Pentax MF bodies, that is- not having a bulky right-hand grip unless a motorized frame advancement is added. Of course, with the KP, frame advancement is motorized anyway! But as to handling, it would be a natural for you. And of great importance here (and for me also)- its processor is outstanding for excellent JPEG quality right out of the camera! Just do one extra (easy) set-up step for optimum results. I will fill you in later. That was a very pleasant surprise on top of all its other attributes!

As to lenses, you will want a good general lens having WR construction. The two standouts are the rather costly but fine very compact Pentax 20-40mm f/2.8-4 DC WR Limited (a premium-constructed lens) and the DA 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 DC WR, a very well-built but still compact lens having a very useful and versatile zoom range. (I highly recommend it) I would say, with the KP's ability for low noise at higher sensitivity ISO settings, this lens could do as well or better for low light compared to a larger-aperture lens on a lesser body.

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 04-28-2020 at 05:10 PM.

[Apet-Sure]

Just to throw another consideration at you, if you don't already have one, you should think about getting an IPS technology computer monitor. Entry-level monitors are usually TN technology. They aren't capable of reproducing all the colors that modern DSLRs can capture. IPS monitors often have a spec for %age of the sRGB color space (range of colors) that they can display. Since you'll be viewing your images on your computer, you'll want your monitor to closely match the camera's color capabilities. IPS monitors have come way down in price in recent years, and now cost about what TN monitors did not so long ago. Well worth the investment. Your eyes and brain will be happy. Staying with TN would be like putting a $5 lens on your new fancy camera. They are fine for documents and spreadsheets, but not for photography or graphic arts.

[bgm1956]

Just to throw another consideration at you, if you don't already have one, you should think about getting an IPS technology computer monitor. Entry-level monitors are usually TN technology. They aren't capable of reproducing all the colors that modern DSLRs can capture. IPS monitors often have a spec for %age of the sRGB color space (range of colors) that they can display. Since you'll be viewing your images on your computer, you'll want your monitor to closely match the camera's color capabilities. IPS monitors have come way down in price in recent years, and now cost about what TN monitors did not so long ago. Well worth the investment. Your eyes and brain will be happy. Staying with TN would be like putting a $5 lens on your new fancy camera. They are fine for documents and spreadsheets, but not for photography or graphic arts.

Thanks, that is great information. The monitors I use are great for the CAD work I do, but are not that kind of quality.

[K2 to K50]

My biggest adjustment was manual focusing. I don't know if you know that the focusing screens on digital cameras do not have any magical microprism, or split image to aid manual focusing (yes, they do have a beep when you hit focus, and an indicator inside the viewfinder, but I found these were not as helpful as my old K2 microprism. Perhaps I was too slow to stop turning the focusing ring?)

But I didn't go from film to digital: I went from film, then nothing at all from about 1982 to 2018. I was shocked at how inaccurate my manual focusing was when trying out my 4 or 5 legacy film lenses on the 2nd-hand K50 I bought. I was not too bad with my 50
mm F4 Macro, my 28mm F2.8, and my 85mm F2 in good light, but hopeless with the 200mm F4 and the 135mm F3.5.

I seriously considered changing the focusing screen to one with a central microprism (like my beloved Pentax K2 film camera had) when I bought my KP in June last year, but instead defaulted to always using one of the 3 new modern auto-focus lenses I bought with the KP, and left my old lenses sitting around doing nothing again (even though having them was one of the reasons I decided to buy a Pentax when I returned to photography).

Maybe your eyes will adjust better than mine did.

But I would strongly recommend you consider the Pentax KP, as recommended above by a couple of the other posters. But if you do, do get a couple of spare batteries - the KP is very heavy on batteries, especially if you allow the LCD screen to stay on all the time the camera is on. And if you try out the odd bit of video recording. Or maybe buy the battery grip.

[Apet-Sure]

Check the specs on the monitors you currently use. You might get lucky. (I swapped a dying TN for a new IPS at the last CAD job I had.) If 'IPS' shows up in the description, you are good to go. Not all IPS monitors are created equal of course. Some cover a bigger percentage of the sRGB color space than others (or at least the advertisers say they do), and are sharper, etc. My home IPS came with a certificate of calibration; not all do.

[jatrax]

I have an excellent hot shoe flash and a SunPak handle flash both TTL unless they have changed the interface somehow.

Pentax digital cameras no longer use TTL. So yeah the interface has changed. The new protocol is called P-TTL. Also some older flashes that worked fine on film have a trigger voltage high enough to cause damage to digital cameras. Use caution with older flashes.

---------- Post added 04-28-20 at 06:23 PM ----------

Not so. The focusing screens are changed in exactly the same manner as with the LX, through the lens mount.

Maybe dissecting was a little strong I've changed screens in my k-x and in both k-5's but its not something I suggest for the casual user. Of course the OP might be just fine with it, I've no idea.

[bgm1956]

Pentax digital cameras no longer use TTL. So yeah the interface has changed. The new protocol is called P-TTL. Also some older flashes that worked fine on film have a trigger voltage high enough to cause damage to digital cameras. Use caution with older flashes.

---------- Post added 04-28-20 at 06:23 PM ----------



Maybe dissecting was a little strong I've changed screens in my k-x and in both k-5's but its not something I suggest for the casual user. Of course the OP might be just fine with it, I've no idea.

I dug through my old stuff and had more laying around than I remember. I have 3 handle flashes that work and a dead Sunpak 611. The two better flashes are a Sunpak 544 and a Sunpak 555. Both have acceptable voltage but I may need to get a different TTL module if one is available. If not, it will be put aside and put in the case with the Kowa 6.

As far as the monitor goes, mine is pretty dated. Gives me an excuse to update it. And of course you can't update it without updating the computer too But seriously, are any laptop displays good enough?

---------- Post added 04-28-20 at 07:16 PM ----------

---------- Post added 04-28-20 at 06:23 PM ----------



Maybe dissecting was a little strong I've changed screens in my k-x and in both k-5's but its not something I suggest for the casual user. Of course the OP might be just fine with it, I've no idea.

I have 3 focusing screens for the LX and have no problem swapping them out.

[calsan]

My tip for digital is that an underexposed photo can be saved. The even slightly overexposed parts of your photo can't be recovered and look horrendous.

Therefore, if you have a scene with a lot of contrast - deliberately underexpose the whole scene and remember to fix it up when you 'develop' it in your computer.

This is the main benefit of shooting digital RAW, but even this is true to a lesser extent in that jpegs can be partly fixed up when underexposed. I had my doubts about digital processing at first, thinking it would suck up too much time, but it's really not much of a hassle. Once you get used to it, you get pretty fast. Soon everyone will be giving you comments on 'how good your camera' is.

[noelpolar]

I'd go for a KP.... if a crop camera is what I wanted.

I currently also have a K1 with a canon S focus screen in it and it is great for manual focus.

If one is ok with the bulk of the K1 over the KP..... then the K1 provides me with 5x the satisfaction of using manual lenses with either the K5, K3 or KP.