[CapitanXeon]

Hi folks!

This is something i've been thinking about in the past

I currently have a very trusty Pentax K-5, which apart from the pink pixels on video (that i don't even use), has been an absolute performer.

Now, currently sitting at around 68000 shots, looks like it's nearing its EOL as the noises in the shitter box, although esporadic, have been a bit more frequent. I know there's still life left in it, but i'm not confident it will reach 100k actuations, so i'm already thinking on getting a second body to be prepared when this one dies.

I have three possible models hovering my head, which are the following:

Pentax KP
I'm not interested in jumping into the full frame boat yet, and even if i wanted, most of my lenses are APS-C so i'd have the same resolution in a K1 that i have in a K5.
Also, we don't K-new specs (not that i could afford it anyway) so currently the KP is the absolute best camera i would buy into the Pentax ecosystem.

Pros:
-24MP
-Up to 819200 ISO (usable images under 6400 make me happy, which is what the K5 delivers me)
-7 FPS (same as K5)
-Pixel shift
-UHS I support
-Bendy screen
-Software AA filter

Cons:
-Extremely short battery life (or that's what some say, i'd need your help here, i've been able to get 1300 shots out of a single K5 genuine battery while it's rated at half)
-No top LCD (can't say if it's an issue with a main screen pointing up?)
-Unless i get an extreme deal, probably not affording it
- max speed at "only" 1/6000 - i've seen myself shooting rather frequently at 1/8000 for some reason, mostly on extremely sunny days, i might have to spend a while looking into ND filters
-8 RAW Buffer

Neutral:
Wifi and smartphone control, nice to haves, but absolutely don't care about it - been sending pictures of my screen from racetracks with great results for the matter

Pentax K-70
This is one model that has caught my attention, as i could afford it and spec-wise looks like it can do almost everything the KP can do

Pros:
-24MP
-Up to 102400 ISO (again, while it works well under 6400, i'm completely fine)
-Pixel shift
-UHS-I support
-Bendy screen
-Software AA filter
-i might be able to afford it

Cons:
-Again, short battery life that could be mis-stated or somehow exaggerated on my camera
-No top LCD, but again, does it matter with an articulated screen?
-11 RAW Buffer -i don't know if it got bumped up with an update though

Neutral:
6FPS, slower than the K-5 but not by a margin i would care much
Wifi and smartphone control, nice to haves, but absolutely don't care about it - been sending pictures of my screen from racetracks with great results for the matter

Pentax K-3
While a bit older, the K-3 still has the "flagship carisma" from when it came out (i think?) and therefore the prices i've seen are a bit higher. Still:

Pros:
-24MP
-Articulated screen
-8 FPS
-24 RAW Buffer
-No AA filter

Cons:
51200 ISO -not a con per se, but not an upgrade in any way that we can see on a spec sheet
Fixed screen
Seemingly the best of the three regarding battery life, but not quite there with the K-5

My take

This has been get a bit tiring the last days, as there's so much i can't really tell from cameras from a specsheet, so maybe a KP has the greatest ISO range but can't handle the noise since too soon or things like that, so here's where i need your help. Money and specs get me pointing to the Pentax K-70 as it looks the best option, even with an 11 RAW buffer that, even being slower and shallower than the K-5 one, should be enough as i don't really recall bursts over 2 seconds anyway and 1.83s of burst shooting seems about right to me.

Battery life is a real concern to me though, so i'd like to hear real experiences about those numbers, My shooting consists almost in its entirety on car meets, track days and drift sessions, the reason i'd ideally want a rather fast camera (both on burst speed and through-the-roof-ISO capabilities mean). I've been able to go through that on a single K-5 battery, ending of course with a depleted indicator and spare energy for at most 100 more shots, i consider that stellar and i wouldn't mind having to use two batteries if those are going to last around the same, but 3 to 4 batteries on a single day -with the money that means- would hurt a little. I was this ****er tho.

Just as a punch list:

- 24 MP seems to be mandatory on this case, so i'll take 24MP
- Rather long battery life, even if not quite as good as K-5, but not ourtight a quarter of it
- Same or better ISO performance than the K-5
- I'd like a wiggly screen too but it can be sacrificed if the K-3 turns out to be much better (K-3 II prices around here are hovering the KP prices so i left it off the question)

Sorry for this extremely long post of mine, i hope i can redeem myself answering long posts too

[kypfer]

Can't comment on the K-3, but having "moved" from a K-5 to a K-70 and now to a KP I can recite a few pro's and con's


Both the K-70 and the KP feel significantly more "cramped" in the hand than the K-5, due, primarily, to the incorporation of the articulated screens effectively reducing the space available on the right-hand side of the rear of the camera. Options are available to de-activate the various buttons and switches so that they don't get operated accidently, but it's all a bit of a compromise.
Both the K-70 and the KP, especially the KP, have lower battery capacity than the K-5, making a second battery almost de rigeur if you're likely to want more than 300 shots in a "session".
Both the K-70 and the KP are streets ahead of the K-5 in image quality at high ISO's ... probably not an issue for a portrait/landscape photographer who rarely ventures above 400asa, an absolute boon for a wildlife photographer who wants high shutter speeds with a long lens in poor light.
The 27-point a/f in the KP is rather more adept than either of the other cameras at keeping up with a moving subject.
The K-70 and the KP are extremely configurable (and you thought the K-5 was complicated) ... be prepared to spend some considerable time with the users' manual if you want to get the most out of either of them.
Both the K-70 and the KP use a different remote switch to the K-5 ... the KP doesn't have any infra-red remote capability, the K-70 i/r receiver is only on the front of the camera. However, both the KP and the K-70 have remote wi-fi capability.

Both the K-70 and the KP have different HDMI outputs to the K-5 ... the KP especially needing a difficult-to-find "SlimPort" adaptor whereas the K-70 "just" needs a different cable.
There's probably more, but that's all I can think of at the moment


Enjoy!

[CapitanXeon]

Can't comment on the K-3, but having "moved" from a K-5 to a K-70 and now to a KP I can recite a few pro's and con's


Both the K-70 and the KP feel significantly more "cramped" in the hand than the K-5, due, primarily, to the incorporation of the articulated screens effectively reducing the space available on the right-hand side of the rear of the camera. Options are available to de-activate the various buttons and switches so that they don't get operated accidently, but it's all a bit of a compromise.
Both the K-70 and the KP, especially the KP, have lower battery capacity than the K-5, making a second battery almost de rigeur if you're likely to want more than 300 shots in a "session".
Both the K-70 and the KP are streets ahead of the K-5 in image quality at high ISO's ... probably not an issue for a portrait/landscape photographer who rarely ventures above 400asa, an absolute boon for a wildlife photographer who wants high shutter speeds with a long lens in poor light.
The 27-point a/f in the KP is rather more adept than either of the other cameras at keeping up with a moving subject.
The K-70 and the KP are extremely configurable (and you thought the K-5 was complicated) ... be prepared to spend some considerable time with the users' manual if you want to get the most out of either of them.
Both the K-70 and the KP use a different remote switch to the K-5 ... the KP doesn't have any infra-red remote capability, the K-70 i/r receiver is only on the front of the camera. However, both the KP and the K-70 have remote wi-fi capability.

Both the K-70 and the KP have different HDMI outputs to the K-5 ... the KP especially needing a difficult-to-find "SlimPort" adaptor whereas the K-70 "just" needs a different cable.
There's probably more, but that's all I can think of at the moment


Enjoy!

Nice to have a point of reference!

On my instance;

-I already had to buy a grip for the K-5 as my pinky would hit the lens release button at all times, which after some hours can get bothersome. About disabling switches, the absolutey one i'd like to know about is the combined power/stills/video button, which i think can be an issue coming from a K-5.

-As my K-5 isn't dead yet, i will probably figure out a way to test endurance on a real environment without ending dead on my tracks. Also that time, joined with the corona full stop, will allow me to buy batteries at a slower rate.

-Not a wildlife photographer, but i've had to chase a car at night while running on two wheels. Probably will come handy with my not-at-all 18-135mm lens. Cars go brr very fast!

-After all the complains i've heard about bad autofocus on the K-5 on that matter, i've never had an issue chasing a car on track with it. Except when i bump someone's head with a 55-300, but that's a different issue

-I'm hoping to get the user manual with the camera, but even if i don't, i have enough time in my hands to try the camera and, definetely, to look at the K-70 Pentax Forums manual if available.

-Uhm...i did lose the remote for my K-5 so i've been resorting to the temporizer. I might get accomodated to having a "limited" IR ability, but i definetely have my phone with me at all times. Does WiFi let you see pictures in the camera though?

-I have the MiniHDMI cable for my K-5, if it's the same cable i'm covered, but if i'm not, it's not a high priority issue at this current time. That'd be more a video-guy issue if i'm not mistaken?

All i'm getting is that, doesn't matter which camera i get, it will probably be, at least, better than the K-5, something that conforts me to be honest at the thinking that i would be spending a rough sum of money anyway if i decided to send mine for repairs.

Hi folks!

This is something i've been thinking about in the past

I currently have a very trusty Pentax K-5, which apart from the pink pixels on video (that i don't even use), has been an absolute performer.

Now, currently sitting at around 68000 shots, looks like it's nearing its EOL as the noises in the shitter box, although esporadic, have been a bit more frequent. I know there's still life left in it, but i'm not confident it will reach 100k actuations, so i'm already thinking on getting a second body to be prepared when this one dies.

I have three possible models hovering my head, which are the following:

Pentax KP
I'm not interested in jumping into the full frame boat yet, and even if i wanted, most of my lenses are APS-C so i'd have the same resolution in a K1 that i have in a K5.
Also, we don't K-new specs (not that i could afford it anyway) so currently the KP is the absolute best camera i would buy into the Pentax ecosystem.

Pros:
-24MP
-Up to 819200 ISO (usable images under 6400 make me happy, which is what the K5 delivers me)
-7 FPS (same as K5)
-Pixel shift
-UHS I support
-Bendy screen
-Software AA filter

Cons:
-Extremely short battery life (or that's what some say, i'd need your help here, i've been able to get 1300 shots out of a single K5 genuine battery while it's rated at half)
-No top LCD (can't say if it's an issue with a main screen pointing up?)
-Unless i get an extreme deal, probably not affording it
- max speed at "only" 1/6000 - i've seen myself shooting rather frequently at 1/8000 for some reason, mostly on extremely sunny days, i might have to spend a while looking into ND filters
-8 RAW Buffer

Neutral:
Wifi and smartphone control, nice to haves, but absolutely don't care about it - been sending pictures of my screen from racetracks with great results for the matter

Pentax K-70
This is one model that has caught my attention, as i could afford it and spec-wise looks like it can do almost everything the KP can do

Pros:
-24MP
-Up to 102400 ISO (again, while it works well under 6400, i'm completely fine)
-Pixel shift
-UHS-I support
-Bendy screen
-Software AA filter
-i might be able to afford it

Cons:
-Again, short battery life that could be mis-stated or somehow exaggerated on my camera
-No top LCD, but again, does it matter with an articulated screen?
-11 RAW Buffer -i don't know if it got bumped up with an update though

Neutral:
6FPS, slower than the K-5 but not by a margin i would care much
Wifi and smartphone control, nice to haves, but absolutely don't care about it - been sending pictures of my screen from racetracks with great results for the matter

Pentax K-3
While a bit older, the K-3 still has the "flagship carisma" from when it came out (i think?) and therefore the prices i've seen are a bit higher. Still:

Pros:
-24MP
-Articulated screen
-8 FPS
-24 RAW Buffer
-No AA filter

Cons:
51200 ISO -not a con per se, but not an upgrade in any way that we can see on a spec sheet
Fixed screen
Seemingly the best of the three regarding battery life, but not quite there with the K-5

My take

This has been get a bit tiring the last days, as there's so much i can't really tell from cameras from a specsheet, so maybe a KP has the greatest ISO range but can't handle the noise since too soon or things like that, so here's where i need your help. Money and specs get me pointing to the Pentax K-70 as it looks the best option, even with an 11 RAW buffer that, even being slower and shallower than the K-5 one, should be enough as i don't really recall bursts over 2 seconds anyway and 1.83s of burst shooting seems about right to me.

Battery life is a real concern to me though, so i'd like to hear real experiences about those numbers, My shooting consists almost in its entirety on car meets, track days and drift sessions, the reason i'd ideally want a rather fast camera (both on burst speed and through-the-roof-ISO capabilities mean). I've been able to go through that on a single K-5 battery, ending of course with a depleted indicator and spare energy for at most 100 more shots, i consider that stellar and i wouldn't mind having to use two batteries if those are going to last around the same, but 3 to 4 batteries on a single day -with the money that means- would hurt a little. I was this ****er tho.

Just as a punch list:

- 24 MP seems to be mandatory on this case, so i'll take 24MP
- Rather long battery life, even if not quite as good as K-5, but not ourtight a quarter of it
- Same or better ISO performance than the K-5
- I'd like a wiggly screen too but it can be sacrificed if the K-3 turns out to be much better (K-3 II prices around here are hovering the KP prices so i left it off the question)

Sorry for this extremely long post of mine, i hope i can redeem myself answering long posts too

The K-3 has not an articulated screen as you stated in the cons, opposite to what you stated in the pros. A K-3 is from the same club as the K-5: the flagship club. So is the K-3II. But somewhere out there are also nicely priced K-5II camera's. I would go for a K-3 because it is much more what you are used to. K70 and the KP are perhaps more sub flagship and the distance between your K-5 and the K70 in terms of handling is probably the greatest. If you go for a reasonable priced K5II(s) than you have a real back-up camera with the same feel. If really want 24mp go for a K3. In my country the price difference between K3 and the K3II is minimal. So that is why K3II might be an option unless you want a pop-up flash. An articulated screen looks like being handy, but it is also a weak point in a camera, more chance of damages, failure etc.

[microlight]

One thing I found moving from the 16MP K-5 to the 24MP K-3II was that an adjustment in technique was necessary to maintain sharpness, as 24MP is less forgiving.

[CapitanXeon]

The K-3 has not an articulated screen as you stated in the cons, opposite to what you stated in the pros. A K-3 is from the same club as the K-5: the flagship club. So is the K-3II. But somewhere out there are also nicely priced K-5II camera's. I would go for a K-3 because it is much more what you are used to. K70 and the KP are perhaps more sub flagship and the distance between your K-5 and the K70 in terms of handling is probably the greatest. If you go for a reasonable priced K5II(s) than you have a real back-up camera with the same feel. If really want 24mp go for a K3. In my country the price difference between K3 and the K3II is minimal. So that is why K3II might be an option unless you want a pop-up flash. An articulated screen looks like being handy, but it is also a weak point in a camera, more chance of damages, failure etc.

Indeed, i'm going to edit that point on the K-3, as it slipped through. Thanks a lot for pointing it out.
Thing is, i'm looking around and i've spotted a brand new K-70 for 399 from a guy that seemingly bought four for a project that never came to life, and probably he's dangling for money. I wouldn't doubt on recovering 1600€ back so i totally get what he's doing. And, if it's a scam -unlikely from a seller with 459 sells from 2005-, Paypal has me covered, so...i'm not really really really worried at that.

For what you say, the only one K5IIs that seems to be around EU on eBay is 627€, while a K3 runs for 459€ and the K5II sets me back 384€, all of them used. At 399 brand new, the K-70 looks at me like a sensible buy.
For my part, i couldn't care less about the built in flash, but when you are on a stance car meet with cars touching the ground with the whole underside of the car instead of the wheels, sometimes you end up like an & trying to get the composition right, so the articulated screen would definetely be handy for me. At the end, the K-1 demonstrated that a movable screen shouldn't be weak!

One thing I found moving from the 16MP K-5 to the 24MP K-3II was that an adjustment in technique was necessary to maintain sharpness, as 24MP is less forgiving.

I'm quite aware of that, as even replacing very bad lenses on the K-5 for better models has made me aware that better tools will only enhance your work as long as you know how to use them. If it makes taking pictures more exigent, i'm all in to improve!

[kypfer]

Nice to have a point of reference!

On my instance;

-I already had to buy a grip for the K-5 as my pinky would hit the lens release button at all times, which after some hours can get bothersome. About disabling switches, the absolutey one i'd like to know about is the combined power/stills/video button, which i think can be an issue coming from a K-5.

-As my K-5 isn't dead yet, i will probably figure out a way to test endurance on a real environment without ending dead on my tracks. Also that time, joined with the corona full stop, will allow me to buy batteries at a slower rate.

-Not a wildlife photographer, but i've had to chase a car at night while running on two wheels. Probably will come handy with my not-at-all 18-135mm lens. Cars go brr very fast!

-After all the complains i've heard about bad autofocus on the K-5 on that matter, i've never had an issue chasing a car on track with it. Except when i bump someone's head with a 55-300, but that's a different issue

-I'm hoping to get the user manual with the camera, but even if i don't, i have enough time in my hands to try the camera and, definetely, to look at the K-70 Pentax Forums manual if available.

-Uhm...i did lose the remote for my K-5 so i've been resorting to the temporizer. I might get accomodated to having a "limited" IR ability, but i definetely have my phone with me at all times. Does WiFi let you see pictures in the camera though?

-I have the MiniHDMI cable for my K-5, if it's the same cable i'm covered, but if i'm not, it's not a high priority issue at this current time. That'd be more a video-guy issue if i'm not mistaken?

All i'm getting is that, doesn't matter which camera i get, it will probably be, at least, better than the K-5, something that conforts me to be honest at the thinking that i would be spending a rough sum of money anyway if i decided to send mine for repairs.

OK ... no battery grip available for the K-70. The power/stills/video switch is only a problem (to me) if I try to use it for a depth-of-field check, a feature I've been used to since forever At least the KP only has on/off functionality on that switch!
User manuals in pdf format are available from the Ricoh/Pentax website Support | RICOH IMAGING so you can get a copy for a preview. The manual is also on the CD that comes with the camera, which is worth having for the "Digital Camera Utility" software. A bit cryptic, admittedly, but very good "for free" if you need it. The cameras should come with a printed manual as well, but this may be a problem if buying second-hand.
Dunno about wi-fi and pictures on a 'phone ... I don't have a "smart" 'phone *?!?!?!* but it works very well with the free aftermarket software on my Windows laptop.
The "mini" HDMI cable for the K-5 is different to the "micro" HDMI cable for the K-70 ... and probably different again to the cable required to fit the "SlimPort" adaptor for the KP! I've recently "discovered" the in-camera "digital filters", but trying to work on the camera screen just doesn't do justice to the results, so I connect the camera directly to the computer screen with the HDMI cable. Not to everyone's taste, but quite nice in some circumstances, given appropriate subject matter.

[normhead]

The K-3 has one huge advantage over the K-P for for wildlife and action sots. A 24 shot buffer withe 8fps being also a little better. But the K-3 is the worst camera Pentax mades since before the K-5 for noise. I actually prefer the K-5 to the K-3 where noise and dynamic rage are involved.

The K-70 and K-P both have the accelerator chip which is a great every day thing. However I've read of a shooter shooting small birds who who noticed resolution loss going to an accelerator chip camera and found it counterproductive to capturing fine detail. I haven't tested this myself as I don't have an accelerator chip camera, but for him it was an issue important enough to switch systems to avoid.

That being said, if I were buying today, the tilt screen on the K-P and the updated AF would be my selling points for the K-P. And those points will be relevant 10 years from now if you keep the camera that long.. IMHO.

I rarely think it makes sense to buy something not as good as the alternative. Over the life of the camera which I would expect to be a least 5 years, I would expect the cost per year of use difference to be minimal.

Especially if one of those factors leads you to bail early and buy another camera before you would have otherwise.

I keep my K-3 because of the longer battery life, and battery compatibility with my other two DSLRs.
Faster FPS and bigger buffer.

I'd get a K-P for pixel shift
Tilting back screen
The accelerator chip.

All other things as far as I know are about equal.

[aslyfox]

the OP might want to add the K 3 II to the list of possibilities

it has certain advantages over the K 3.

KP vs. K 3 II vs. K70 vs K 3

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-cameras-compared/?c1=Pentax+KP&c2...&c4=Pentax+K-3

[CapitanXeon]

I've looked around, specially with the aslyfox addition of the comparison tool (didn't know that feature).

I can get a KP new for 749, which isn't too much over the 400€ that the deal K-70 would set me back if i were to upgrade anyway. I doubt that any camera that's better than the K-5 will hamper me, but that something to consider, yes.
Whatever i do, i really want to be sure that if i replace my camera, it's going to be an upgrade while i'm at it, and if the K-3 is worse than the K-5 with noise (something isn't always a non issue with the K-5), i'm definetely not going there. Don't know about the K3 II tho.

As for the accelerator chip, reading here one would think that the accelerator chip would work well for me, as i won't be extremely dependant on seeing small details -say uh, that random bug stuck in your car that would get removed in pp anyway- but i'd probably need a cleaner image shooting with a tele on dark situations, for example.

I will think this a bit more through. At the end, the current situation is allowing my body to rest, as well as my camera and having fewer expenses also helps a bit. I might delay this until the corona is over, until the body is over, or until the K-new comes out, which should also get the prices down a bit on second hand gear. Also, if the K-new came somehow near the price of the KP, that would be a significant way to either get a cheaper KP or get a K-new. (Has been any rumor on its price point tho? realistically i would expect it to be between the KP and the K1)

If it dies maybe i think about selling it for parts or repair to offset the cost of a newer body too.

My current choices are

-Spend right now on the K-70 and have both bodies until the k-5 dies
-Wait some months and save for a KP
-Wait some more months until the K-new launch, hoping the K-5 doesn't die, and buy a cheaper KP/K-new
-Wait some more months until the K-new launch, hoping the K-5 doesn't die, secure a contract with pentax in the meantime, and get a k-new for free

[gatorguy]

Indeed, i'm going to edit that point on the K-3, as it slipped through. Thanks a lot for pointing it out.
Thing is, i'm looking around and i've spotted a brand new K-70 for 399 from a guy that seemingly bought four for a project that never came to life, and probably he's dangling for money. !

Do it. I've had both, and still have two K-70's. I eventually sold the KP. The ergonomics of the K-70 are much better IMHO and in practice the results from the KP and K-70 are identical. With that said I did like the additional bracketing options on the KP, tho I didn't use them more than a very few times. The menu on the KP is a bit better too IMO. None of those things were enough to cover for the far too shallow grip, cramped controls and my biggest pet peeve the horribly misplace back-button focus that too often was the green button instead.

For that great price of 400 I wouldn't hesitate.

[normhead]

$400 for a K-70... well then, that changes everything.

[CapitanXeon]

$400 for a K-70... well then, that changes everything.

I mean, i kinda thought that the price point was a dead giveaway, but i wanted to know how well each camera works in every regard, prices apart, kinda like we assumed all cameras cost the same. If at 400€ i'm going to get a buttload of noise and an useless autofocus worse than the K-m i first had, i'm completely prepared to spend more, but if the K-70 will work on *my* key areas as well as a KP, there's no point on spending more.

[normhead]

Getting a K-70 at a price like that makes a lot of other things unimportant. We were picking at niggling little points, but in terms of all factors considered, these cameras are all close enough that best deal wins. I've seriously considered buying all of them, but never got the deal I wanted.

They all have their limitations but honestly, none I can't work around.
Although with my K-3 the work around was buy a K-1, (no pixel shift, no tilting screen, worst l low light performance of the bunch)

[gatorguy]

Although with my K-3 the work around was buy a K-1, (no pixel shift, no tilting screen, worst l low light performance of the bunch)

I spent 4 hours hiking this morning with a K-1/DA*200 combo in hand for the most part (a K-70 on a Spider Holster, waiting on the full-size pin for the K1). My right arm knows I did it too.