[columbus]

If interested in astrotracer the O-GPS1 or upcoming O-GPS2 would add that functionality to other cameras. I have both a K-3+O-GPS1 and a K-3ii and use them both for astrophotography along with a broken K-500. Either the K-3 or K-3ii is used with astrotracer and some big glass and the other along with the K-500 are put on my little equatoral.

Of all the features that I thought I would like the pixel shift on the K-3ii is something I rarely use as to get the most out of it one has to have ideal conditions or have situations where one can discard outliers. It does work really well to show what can be done with what is now an old body especially when paired with absolutely great glass.

I lucked out I guess as I paid $400 for my K-3 and a bit more than a year later paid $400 for the K-3ii and a bunch of accessories that it came with that I was planning on getting. Both cameras had low shutter counts, with the K-3 having only like 2300 (I want to say it was 2315) on it and the K-3ii having less than 6000 (I forget but I know it was less than 10,000).

I am definitely interested in astro tracer, and I know that the O-GPS1 can be hard to come by. Good to know that a newer version is planned. Hopefully it will work with the K-5 bodies. I've been really impressed looking at test photos for pixel shift, but you're right, it would have to be perfect conditions.

---------- Post added 09-02-2021 at 07:21 PM ----------

I agree. I upgraded from the K10D to a K-5IIs. Not really 'from', because I still have the K10D and will keep it until it dies. The colors from its CCD sensor are great IMO. I seldom used it above ISO 400 because of noise becoming unacceptable to me. I set the ISO on the K-5IIs to top out at 1600. It's a marvelous camera, and very highly regarded here on PF. I can wholeheartedly recommend it.

When looking at used cameras, keep in mind that The K-5II / K-5IIs shutter is rated for a life of 100,000 clicks. (I bought mine with about 30,000 clicks on it.) The listing should mention how many clicks are on the shutter so you can judge remaining life. If it doesn't mention it, be sure to ask. The K-3 / K-3II shutter is rated at 200,000 clicks. So, 100,000 would be at mid-life. These numbers are only estimates of course.

You don't mention what lens/lenses you have. The best cameras will produce lousy images if you use a lousy lens. My K10D came with the original version of the 18-55mm kit zoom. I was never happy with the images it produced, and quickly decided to upgrade. I got a Sigma 17-70mm DC Macro; it was a huge improvement.

Thanks for the reminder about the shutter count, I do remember that the K-3 had an increased rating.

I got into photography during college, so I really didn't have the money to invest on higher quality lenses. I mostly used the DA 16-45mm f4, which I plan on keeping. I also have a few manual lenses from the 70s and would like to get into repairing/cleaning older lenses as I enjoy tinkering. I would also love to invest in some higher quality modern lenses.

[aslyfox]

these articles might be worth a read

Astrophotography Series Announcement
A six-part tutorial series
By K David in Articles and Tips on Feb 22, 2015

Read more at: Astrophotography Series Announcement - Articles and Tips | PentaxForums.com

[kypfer]

I don't think I would necessarily need the extra MP on the K-3 as I have never really made prints larger than 11x14 with my K10d. How large can the K-5 reasonably go for something to hang on the wall?

The K-5 manual p200 quotes 14x17" (A2) from a 16Mpixel image and 10x12" (A3) for a 10Mpixel image, so at 11x14" from your K10d you may have been "stretching" things a bit, by that standard, but, if you're happy with the results, a K-5 image will go proportionally larger (or you can crop that much more and still get the same result

[stevebrot]

K-3 or K-3II

I upgraded from a K10D to my K-3 spring of 2014 after seven years of ownership. It is fully compatible with all Pentax D and D FA lenses as well as the current model Pentax flash. If it were to die today, my desire would be to find a K-3II to take its place.

Note: Don't be afraid of the increased sensor resolution. I only have one lens* that did not benefit from the headroom and even the larger file size was not too big a pill to swallow.


Steve

* The 18-55 kit lens that came with the K10D does not exactly shine on the K-3.

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 09-02-2021 at 05:06 PM.

[ChristianRock]

Sorry if I missed something but I don't think a budget was discussed?
You can find a KP for around 600 or so. For your areas of concern, high ISO and AF, it's likely a good recommendation - the K-3III of course being the next step up but at 3x the price.

[columbus]

Sorry if I missed something but I don't think a budget was discussed?
You can find a KP for around 600 or so. For your areas of concern, high ISO and AF, it's likely a good recommendation - the K-3III of course being the next step up but at 3x the price.

I'd like to keep it under $300 for a new camera body, but that could be stretched a little bit.

[dbs]

Hi Columbus

Do you wish to buy later PLM lenses ?
The K 3 would be my choice if so .
I use a K5 ii and no problems but can not use PLM's to there fullist

[Fogel70]

I will also recommend K3 or later so the camera will be compatible with all new lenses.
K5 II or older are not compatible with the electro-magnetic aperture in KAF4 lenses, which most new lenses most likely will be.

[bilybianca]

I have never really made prints larger than 11x14 with my K10d. How large can the K-5 reasonably go for something to hang on the wall?

I never had the K10D, but the K20D. It gave me my only award-winning photo, and the prize was a 20X30" print of the photo. If looked at at 10 cm distance, of course it's not razor sharp, but if looked at from 1 meter or farther, it doesn't leave anything to wish for.
In spite of the award-winning photo, I never fell in love with the K20D. Too big for my liking. So eventually I upgraded to a K-5. What an upgrade! I don't think you'd be dissapointed with a K-5, that can be had for a price much lower than what it "should be", taking it's quality into consideration. I would't hesitate to print large from it, if I ever take a photo worth it again. I have later on purchased a K-1, and use them both side by side. The K-1 has more modern features like pixel shift and astro tracer, but it doesn't belittle the K-5 at all.

But of course the point about newer lenses not being compatible with the K-5 is valid.

Kjell

[aslyfox]

. . . But of course the point about newer lenses not being compatible with the K-5 is valid.

Kjell

Pentax K-mount Lens Compatibility Chart
Copyright 2006-2020 Mosphotos.com. All rights reserved.

The Pentax K-mount Camera Lens Compatibility Chart

[columbus]

Hi Columbus

Do you wish to buy later PLM lenses ?
The K 3 would be my choice if so .
I use a K5 ii and no problems but can not use PLM's to there fullist

I don't really see myself dropping cash on the newest lens tech honestly.

[MossyRocks]

I am definitely interested in astro tracer, and I know that the O-GPS1 can be hard to come by.

If you are really interested in doing astrophotography my question to you is what lens or lenses do you want to use when doing it? If you are using smaller lighter lenses where the lens+camera combination is coming in at less than 6 or 7 pounds I would recommend getting a little equatorial instead. I got the sky watcher star adventurer pro pack (has everything you will want to get started) about a year ago for like $400. I can use it with my smaller glass (300mm f/4 and smaller) without issue and get good results. So while it costs about double the O-GPS1 but the consistency between shots is a lot better with the star adventurer and also when things are framed up one can gather more shots as you don't have to reframe. However it takes a bit more time to get up and rolling with it and it does take some effort to get it polar aligned. The longer the lens the better the polar alignment needs to be. Also that little equatorial can't handle my big glass but astrotracer can use it but at 400mm I can only reliably get 20s exposures.

[columbus]

If you are really interested in doing astrophotography my question to you is what lens or lenses do you want to use when doing it? If you are using smaller lighter lenses where the lens+camera combination is coming in at less than 6 or 7 pounds I would recommend getting a little equatorial instead. I got the sky watcher star adventurer pro pack (has everything you will want to get started) about a year ago for like $400. I can use it with my smaller glass (300mm f/4 and smaller) without issue and get good results. So while it costs about double the O-GPS1 but the consistency between shots is a lot better with the star adventurer and also when things are framed up one can gather more shots as you don't have to reframe. However it takes a bit more time to get up and rolling with it and it does take some effort to get it polar aligned. The longer the lens the better the polar alignment needs to be. Also that little equatorial can't handle my big glass but astrotracer can use it but at 400mm I can only reliably get 20s exposures.

Thanks for the insight, I don't plan on immediately jumping into astro, since I don't really have a suitable lens yet. I am mostly interested in more of the landscape astro/milky way style at this point.

[MossyRocks]

since I don't really have a suitable lens yet. I am mostly interested in more of the landscape astro/milky way style at this point.

For that kind of astro you likely will be using a wide or ultrawide lens and some of the benefit of astrotracer does get lost some as longer exposures will result in imperfect tracking along the edges and corners of the shot. For that type I use a 12mm f/2.8 lens that I can run wide open and will take great 15s shots untracked. Now if you want to instead to some stitched panoramas using like a 35mm or a 50mm then astro tracer works well with those lenses but you will have problems with them blurring the foreground objects as it tracks the night sky. Once one get into more "normal" sized lenses, like a 28mm or longer, astrotracer works quite well but you don't need special lenses in those focal lengths. Even an old S-M-C 50/1.4 Takumar or DA 35/2.4 will provide good results. I run my 50/1.4 at f/2.8 when doing astro with it and I did use my DA35/2.4 wide open and got not awful results when I used it. Even my old S-M-C 28/3.5 Takumar does well for astro at f/4. So like I said one doesn't need special lenses unless you are really at the far ends of the focal length spectrum.

[columbus]

For that kind of astro you likely will be using a wide or ultrawide lens and some of the benefit of astrotracer does get lost some as longer exposures will result in imperfect tracking along the edges and corners of the shot. For that type I use a 12mm f/2.8 lens that I can run wide open and will take great 15s shots untracked. Now if you want to instead to some stitched panoramas using like a 35mm or a 50mm then astro tracer works well with those lenses but you will have problems with them blurring the foreground objects as it tracks the night sky. Once one get into more "normal" sized lenses, like a 28mm or longer, astrotracer works quite well but you don't need special lenses in those focal lengths. Even an old S-M-C 50/1.4 Takumar or DA 35/2.4 will provide good results. I run my 50/1.4 at f/2.8 when doing astro with it and I did use my DA35/2.4 wide open and got not awful results when I used it. Even my old S-M-C 28/3.5 Takumar does well for astro at f/4. So like I said one doesn't need special lenses unless you are really at the far ends of the focal length spectrum.

That makes sense, thanks for the insight!