[mdcall]

Hi Pentaxians.

As an advanced amateur, I am looking to upgrade from my K-5 II to either a K-70 or used K-3 II. I have multiple lenses from vintage lenses to an SMC Pentax-DA 18-270 mm (walk-around lens) to a DA ED AL Limited 15mm.

When not doing family photos, I do mostly landscapes and studio macros. I do non-professional portraits periodically.

Main differences that I wondering whether they make a difference:
--ISO
--Autofocus points (11 on K-70; 27 on K-3 II)
--Processor: Prime M II vs. Prime III in the K-3 II
--Articulating screen on K-70
--Metering sensor: 77 sensor on K-70; 86k pixel on K-3 II: does this make a significant difference?
--Stated shutter life (not specified vs. 200,000 on K-3 II)
--GPS (a nice bell and whistle for the K-3 II, but I'm not sure I really need it--never used GPS on my gear before)
--Top LCD: I like this on my K-5 II; will I miss it on the K-70?
--Dust removal - Sensor shake on K-70 vs ultrasonic for K-3 II

Any thoughts you have would be greatly appreciated!

[VictorDA]

Hi, I can't comment first hand on the K-70, never used one. It seems a fine camera but reliability is lower than on higher-tier bodies, the solenoid failure seems to be a real and widespread issue.
I used to have and love a K-3II, and can really vouch for that body. If you don't miss the onboard flash, there is nothing not to like IMO. My main arguments for getting this body were:

--Stated shutter life (not specified vs. 200,000 on K-3 II)
--GPS (a nice bell and whistle for the K-3 II, but I'm not sure I really need it--never used GPS on my gear before)
--Top LCD: I like this on my K-5 II; will I miss it on the K-70?

The GPS especially was new in that generation, although I can't say I "need" it, I still like to have all my shots geotagged and be able to find back a nice off-path location years later (or the reverse: find all pictures taken in a certain area easily).
I can add that it is really rugged and comfortable to use, and takes D-LI90 batteries same as your K-5II.
You can see my conclusion is clear The only thing I think you may miss from the K-70 is the flippy screen (which for me doesn't matter, but might be important to you).

Now, take a step back: do you really need to upgrade? What are you looking to improve? Because the K-5II is still a fine camera today... The K-3II is faster and has higher resolution, but I did not find my pictures to be improved from the switch. If I had not "lost" my K-5 back in 2017, I probably would have skipped the K-3II generation and gone straight to K-1

[AfterPentax Mark II]

Do not rule out the fantastic KP, which is much closer in quality to the K-3II, if not better. I own a K-3II and a KP and IQ IMNSHO of the KP is better. The K-3II is like the K-5 a flagship, the K-70 entry level and the KP is the one with K-3 genes and some genes of the K-1.

[kypfer]

I "upgraded" from a K-5 to a K-70 for the greater resolution … in that respect it was a success, allowing me a greater crop factor for my wildlife photography, (no need to try to get as close and risk disturbing the subject).
The a/f "seemed" to be superior as well, but I never did any direct comparisons.
The low light sensitivity was a revelation
The fully articulated screen can be advantageous under certain (awkward) situations … low-level macro and high angle astro spring to mind.
For the quoted "family photos, landscapes and studio macros" I don't think you'll notice the difference, 'cept possibly as mentioned for the macro!
I missed the top LCD. I got used to checking in the viewfinder 'cos I found using the rear screen inconvenient.
Now my K-70 is "semi-retired", (good fortune has allowed me to further upgrade for my wildlife photography), I'll more often use my K-5 as a knock-about "general purpose snapper" simply because I find it easier to handle (better ergonomics).


The question that really needs to be asked :- "What aspect of your current camera are you dissatisfied with?"
I wanted more resolution and better a/f … my upgrade path gave me those features.
When I don't "need" the extra features my *istDL2 can still deliver
For the OP's requirements I don't see any significant advantage.

[Papa_Joe]

Pentax K-70 Review - Versus Other Bodies | PentaxForums.com Reviews

[Not a Number]

The controls are slightly different on the K-70 vs the K-5ii and K-3ii, e.g. the functions on the 4 way controller. Something to consider if you are going to continue to use both bodies. Longer learning curve.

[UncleVanya]

No experience using a k70 or k3iii own the original k3 and a KP. I previously owned the k50 which shares the aperture control issue with the k70. I skipped the k3ii because I wanted the onboard flash more than the gps. The k3ii offers one image quality advantage over the k3 - pixel shift - but the k70 also brings that.

The k70 and KP share a lot of the same dna as far as low light performance. Both also provide pixel shift which should work well in macro work. The k70 articulating screen might fit with macro work better than the tilt only screen of the KP even though in most shooting I prefer a tilt screen myself.

It is also true the aperture control system of the k70 can fail more often than any issues with the KP that I am aware of. This can be fixed with a diy repair.

It’s honestly a tough call.

It really seems like these factors would be the ones you need to concentrate on:

How much does higher iso performance matter? (If you value this the k70 is the better option)

How willing to replace the solenoid in a diy repair are you? (K-3ii if this doesn’t seem like you will be willing to do this)

Is buying new important? (K70)

Does the articulating screen matter? (K70)

Do you want a battery grip? (K3ii)

Do you want an onboard flash or gps more? (K70 for flash, k3ii for gps)

Shutter sound. (K3ii Is quieter si understand it)

Top lcd (although the k3ii wins on this measure I owned a k50 after the k100s and found that not having this was a very small inconvenience at most. On my KP I do not miss it. The tilt screen helps. )

Only you know which of these might make you crazy or happy.

[wadge22]

takes D-LI90 batteries same as your K-5II

I think that may be a big factor, assuming everything else still seems like a tossup.

It's a larger capacity battery (1860 vs 1050 mAh).
You already have at least one. Having a backup battery or two (and spare charger) is great. Now, if you'll be selling your current camera along with it's battery, that may not apply so much.
Even still, the larger battery is nice: not only can you use the camera longer on one charge (I've left my charger behind mid-vacation, but been able to make it through the end of the trip (the Yellowstone end, no less) with 1 fully and 1 half charged Li90 for my K1). Even if you're not doing that very frequently, it will be easier to keep the battery in that %30-%70 charge zone, which should extend it's lifespan. Smaller batteries equal more cycles equals shorter lifespan. The price difference between the two batteries is not much (US$50 Li109 vs $55 Li90 at B&H).

Just one factor, of course, and if some other factor sticks out to you as more important I wouldn't let the battery difference affect your decision much. But if it's a coin flip otherwise, that could be the decider.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

The K-70 for high ISO image quality (3200 to 12800), but the K-3II for reliability, build, & everything else.

It's a no brainer for me. If I was limited to those 2 cameras, I'd get the K-3II hands down. It's built like a tank. I'd get a K-70 later if I had money to spare.

[luftfluss]

I have both a K-3 II (plus battery grip) and a K-70. They are such complementary bodies that I don't know if I could choose one over the other.

[mdcall]

Wow, everyone. I'm new to pentaxforums.com and it's wonderful to have such a community of helpful, experienced photographers! Thank you all so much for your thoughts. And please, if any others have input, please share! This is extremely beneficial to me!

[aslyfox]

first the disclaimer, I claim no particular expertise I'm just someone who posts a lot

there are reasons why the K 3 family are top level professional grade DSLRs

and reasons why the K 70 and KP aren't

Pentax K-3 III vs. Pentax K-3 II vs. Pentax KP vs. Pentax K-70 - Pentax Camera Comparison - PentaxForums.com

you must decide which features are important and which are not

what is your hurry?

perhaps an " experienced " K 3 III might be found

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/24-photographic-equipment-sale/?security...d+States&all=1

or at a price discount in the future which could fit your budget

[mdcall]

first the disclaimer, I claim no particular expertise I'm just someone who posts a lot

there are reasons why the K 3 family are top level professional grade DSLRs

and reasons why the K 70 and KP aren't

Pentax K-3 III vs. Pentax K-3 II vs. Pentax KP vs. Pentax K-70 - Pentax Camera Comparison - PentaxForums.com

you must decide which features are important and which are not

what is your hurry?

perhaps an " experienced " K 3 III might be found

The Pentax Marketplace | Buy & Sell Pentax Cameras and Lenses (United States) - PentaxForums.com

or at a price discount in the future which could fit your budget

Thank you, Aslyfox. I'm not in a real hurry, but my budget is <$1,000. So I was thinking the K-3 III won't get down that low for at least a couple more years. My K-5 II is great. A real workhorse (as much as an amateur can work a DSLR). I've just been thinking that now might be a good time to step up in the equipment. I'd still hold onto the K-5 II, but since I've purchased a couple nicer lenses lately, I was wanting to match them with a nicer body.

Thanks for the link to the comparison. I thought you could compare only three bodies for some reason. Putting all four on one screen really helps.

[ZombieArmy]

I personally think the KP has the makings of a cult classic. It's just such a unique and wonderful camera to use and I'd pick it any day over a K-3II.

About your concern with the top LCD, I don't really care personally. I think you forget about it pretty quick. I don't even use it on my K-5IIs. Rather have more dials.

[Fila]

--Stated shutter life (not specified vs. 200,000 on K-3 II)

With my K-50 dying after +-30.000 photos (after being repaired under warranty at +- 5.000 photo's) I stay clear from K-[357]0's
(I am just in process of choosing KP or K-3 III)