[mir]

Hi all,

If I can get a K-5 and a K-50 for roughly the same price and if video is not a priority will it not be a better buy to get the K-5?

Regards Michael

[pepperberry farm]

Hi all,

If I can get a K-5 and a K-50 for roughly the same price and if video is not a priority will it not be a better buy to get the K-5?

Regards Michael

yes - if you can swing for the K-5 II or II s, even better....

the K-5 series don't seem to have the same reliability issues the K-50 did...

[mir]

yes - if you can swing for the K-5 II or II s, even better....

the K-5 series don't seem to have the same reliability issues the K-50 did...

Very good info
/Michael.

[i_trax]

yes , my K-50 just died with solenoid failure,
my K-5IIs is still going strong and probably will go forever......

[UncleVanya]

The k-5 has 14 bit raw files vs 12 bit also. It uses a larger battery, has a grip available, and feels more premium. They share the same sensor technology.

The k-50 offers scene modes which can be helpful but anything they accomplish you can also if you are deliberate and exercise direct control over exposure. The k-50 also has some focusing improvements over the k-5. The k-5 has some problems focusing accurately in artificial light.

An older discussion:
K5 vs. K-50? - PentaxForums.com

[mir]

The k-5 has 14 bit raw files vs 12 bit also. It uses a larger battery, has a grip available, and feels more premium. They share the same sensor technology.

The k-50 offers scene modes which can be helpful but anything they accomplish you can also if you are deliberate and exercise direct control over exposure. The k-50 also has some focusing improvements over the k-5. The k-5 has some problems focusing accurately in artificial light.

I prefer build quality over features, especially when buying used

An older discussion:
K5 vs. K-50? - PentaxForums.com

That discussion seems to come to the same conclusion. More or less the same camera with a plus for build quality and bit depth of raw to K-5 and a plus for live view and focus peeping to K-50. I take build quality and higher quality of raw files every day over live view and focus peeping.

[UncleVanya]

I prefer build quality over features, especially when buying used




That discussion seems to come to the same conclusion. More or less the same camera with a plus for build quality and bit depth of raw to K-5 and a plus for live view and focus peeping to K-50. I take build quality and higher quality of raw files every day over live view and focus peeping.

Sounds like your priorities will align to the k-5. Enjoy the new camera.

[MSL]

I have a k-5. It feels great in my hand and it is built like a tank. The only reason I would consider a k-50 is that it has focus peaking, which is something I think I would find helpful for some shots. But I would only consider it as a second body, especially as the aperture control block failure can force you to use only manual lenses unless you get it repaired. If the k-50 does have better AF that might be another reason to consider, as it is something the k-5 struggles with at times.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Like stated, try to get a K-5II or better yet, a K-5IIs. The only thing that the K-50 offers over the K-5 series is focus peaking, but everything else is a lot better in the K-5II/IIs. Build, autofocus, & so forth & so on.

[reh321]

yes , my K-50 just died with solenoid failure,
my K-5IIs is still going strong and probably will go forever......

Is your K-50 truly dead, or simply unable to set apertures??

My K-30 no longer can control apertures, so I have a FA 28-105mm I carried around while the aperture control was slowly failing.

Sometimes I use the two together now, but most of the time I use the K-30 with the Takumars I now have.
I may retire it completely if I ever do get the “FF” camera I’m thinking of getting,
or maybe I’ll use the K-30 and the Takumars ‘forever’.

[Brathahn]

Like stated, try to get a K-5II or better yet, a K-5IIs. The only thing that the K-50 offers over the K-5 series is focus peaking, but everything else is a lot better in the K-5II/IIs. Build, autofocus, & so forth & so on.

I think OOC HDR is also alot better in the K-50, but i hardly ever used it. I would choose the K-5 because you don't have to worry about any hardware failures and it feels really really good. Its still capable yet it does not do everything for you. It has limitations like if the light is bad so you have to work around them and grow. Fow low light get a flash with extra focus assis light and it will work just fine. Graet cam to grow on. I noticed how i got worse with the K-3ii coz it was relative care free in low light so newer isnt always better

[i_trax]

Is your K-50 truly dead, or simply unable to set apertures??

My K-30 no longer can control apertures, so I have a FA 28-105mm I carried around while the aperture control was slowly failing.

Sometimes I use the two together now, but most of the time I use the K-30 with the Takumars I now have.
I may retire it completely if I ever do get the “FF” camera I’m thinking of getting,
or maybe I’ll use the K-30 and the Takumars ‘forever’.

Now i have two , K-30 + K-50 with not working solenoid.
You can not buy new white solenoid ( made in Japan ) any more.

They both work with manual lenses + with KAF4 lenses.

[ChristianRock]

I agree with the K-5 II and K-5 IIs suggestions... they would cost you about 100 dollars more than the original K-5.

Reasons: better autofocus, and they fixed the issue with focusing in artificial light.

For the artificial light autofocus alone, I would personally avoid the K-5, unless that is no concern to you. I had the K-r which also had these autofocus issue, and that lost me some pictures at a couple of critical moments.

So if these two are the only options, I personally would go against most people's opinion and actually say K-50. 14-bit RAW? Made no difference when I had the K-3, for what I shoot. The K-50 is also smaller and lighter and if you ever need a quick JPEG, the JPEG engine is better than the K-5 as well.

But a used K-S2 can be found for not too much more money and would be a better solution in that price range - if you are not afraid of changing a solenoid if the aperture block fails. I have a spare white solenoid in case mine fails, and I've already fixed a K-S1 for that same issue and it works great now.

If you would rather not bother with these kinds of things, I would just spend a little bit more and get the K-5 II or K-5 IIs.

[Des]

The only thing that the K-50 offers over the K-5 series is focus peaking, but everything else is a lot better in the K-5II/IIs. Build, autofocus, & so forth & so on.

The other significant thing the K-50 offers that the K-5 series doesn't is the ability to control aperture on KAF4 lenses, such as:
- HD Pentax-DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED PLM AW Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
- HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
(Full compatibility list here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/compatibility/Pentax+K-5/)

If you use a KAF4 lens on a K-5 series camera, it can only shoot wide open. (Some people are prepared to live with that with the DA 55-300mm f4.5-6.3 PLM, because they use it mainly at the long end and it is so good wide open.) Autofocus will work fine.

This should not be a dealbreaker if you don't have, and have no intention to use, a KAF4 lens.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

^ Ah yes! I had forgotten about the KAF4 lens compatibility with the K-50, something that the K-5 series lacks.