K5 vs k30 vs k5 ii

sts95 · 12-17-2012, 09:06 AM

I recently had a K-30 for a few weeks and after consistently having soft pictures realized through testing that I had FF issues. I compensated through AF micro adjustment, but all my lenses were are the far end of the adjustment scale which pointed me to the camera and gave me concern on ability to adjust future lenses. I really did love the camera, but returned it and just ordered a K-5 since I found it online for just over $700. I paid $640 for the k-30, so I thought the minimal uplift in price was worth the more professional feel of the K-5. That said, I'm aware of the AF issues regarding decisiveness of focus and tungsten low light complaints, so as I write this, I sit here and ponder if I should bite the bullet and go the extra $$ for a K-5 ii.

Questions:

- Are there serious enough issues with the K-5 that would make me question my investment?
- Beyond better AF, what are the other improvements in the K-5 ii that are worth the extra money? (Video?)
- Is the K-30 a better camera than the K-5 for stills due to improvements that make it closer to the K-5 ii? (Low light video on the K-30 was unusable)

Anvh · 12-17-2012, 09:20 AM

1) I at least don't have any issues with the AF of the K5 and i know i'm not the only one.
2) better LCD screen and... bigger buffer i believe for the rest the improvements are scientific almost.
3) k-30 has slightly better AF and shoot better JPEGS but when it comes to RAW the K5 is better, it has a bigger buffer, silent shutter and 14 bit RAW.

**interested_observer** · 12-17-2012, 12:27 PM

- Are there serious enough issues with the K-5 that would make me question my investment? - For me, there are very few issues. I am very happy with my K5. It would be nice to have focus peaking, but LiveView up on a tripod at 8x-10x works very well. The additional sharpness of loosing the AA filter - I don't know the jury is still out on that one. Low light AF - what lens purchases I have been making are manual focusing - so that does not matter that much (refer to the LiveView comment).

- Beyond better AF, what are the other improvements in the K-5 ii that are worth the extra money? (Video?) It think that its the rear screen and have not tried the viedo, yet - and I have had the camera for almost a year now.

- Is the K-30 a better camera than the K-5 for stills due to improvements that make it closer to the K-5 ii? (Low light video on the K-30 was unusable) - I can comment since I have not seen a K30...

Mr. A.S. · 12-17-2012, 12:55 PM - **1 Like**

It is bad that Pentax didn't make camera models under name "Only for masterpieces pictures". For example, "Only for masterpieces" for $600, "Only for masterpieces" for $900 and "Only for masterpieces" for $1200. Then every photographer, looking in the purse, would be able to choose a camera, not thinking about AF, LCD screen, Video and other unnecessary things in photography.

It's Pentax K-30 + Carl Zeiss 50mm/2
Camera and picture not masterpieces.
But I like it.

Last edited by Mr. A.S.; 12-17-2012 at 04:50 PM.

pinholecam · 12-17-2012, 10:58 PM - **1 Like**

- Are there serious enough issues with the K-5 that would make me question my investment?
>> Never had a FF/BF issue on my K5 (2yrs usage); Users in the States may have a different opinion (this problem seems to come most from US; Prevalence of tungsten lighting??).

- Beyond better AF, what are the other improvements in the K-5 ii that are worth the extra money? (Video?)
>> AF is better in low light which can make a big difference to some. AF in normal light is supposed to be improved with the new module

- Is the K-30 a better camera than the K-5 for stills due to improvements that make it closer to the K-5 ii? (Low light video on the K-30 was unusable
>> The K30 is a better camera in AF accuracy; LV; LV focus speed; video; peaking; weight. The K5 is better in handling, build.
DR and 14/12bit RAW is subjective and hard to tell. (personally, I think its not worth losing hair over)
K5IIs is the better overall camera between the 3 for still images.

I had K5 (2yrs); Now I have K30.
I've tried K5IIs on a couple of occasions.

trarmstrong · 01-25-2013, 10:02 PM

Originally posted by pinholecam

- Are there serious enough issues with the K-5 that would make me question my investment?
>> Never had a FF/BF issue on my K5 (2yrs usage); Users in the States may have a different opinion (this problem seems to come most from US; Prevalence of tungsten lighting??).

- Beyond better AF, what are the other improvements in the K-5 ii that are worth the extra money? (Video?)
>> AF is better in low light which can make a big difference to some. AF in normal light is supposed to be improved with the new module

- Is the K-30 a better camera than the K-5 for stills due to improvements that make it closer to the K-5 ii? (Low light video on the K-30 was unusable
>> The K30 is a better camera in AF accuracy; LV; LV focus speed; video; peaking; weight. The K5 is better in handling, build.
DR and 14/12bit RAW is subjective and hard to tell. (personally, I think its not worth losing hair over)
K5IIs is the better overall camera between the 3 for still images.

I had K5 (2yrs); Now I have K30.
I've tried K5IIs on a couple of occasions.

My two biggest concerns for the K-30 is the louder shutter sound and the built quality. Right now there is a $200 difference between them (thanks to the new K-5 ii) so it makes it harder to decide. Thanks.

Pheo · 01-26-2013, 04:10 AM

And there I was, about to post this question, but without the K5 piece, I'm pondering trading in my K-30 +18-135mm against a K5ii

What do people think to that? Pointless? I do shoot some low light stuff, hence wondering about it (plus I can't seem to shift the 18-135mm lens at the moment!) - I'd get £525 trade in for the two.

Kunzite · 01-26-2013, 05:37 AM

Originally posted by Mr. A.S.

It is bad that Pentax didn't make camera models under name "Only for masterpieces pictures".

I would expect that from Sigma, to complement their "Art" lens series

I'm quite tempted by the K-5 IIs myself, not really satisfied with the K-5's accuracy (an early sample, and I know later ones are better); but the K-5 II(s) seems to be exactly what I hoped the K-5 would be. The only thing that holds me back is the thought that, if I'd go for it, Pentax will launch a new, better, more desirable camera next day.

trarmstrong · 01-26-2013, 05:15 PM

Is the accuracy that bad? I never have used a Pentax SLR before (very interested individual with no good camera stores near by) so I can't try it out.

Would the accuracy be better on the K-30?

The only thing stopping me from getting the K-30 is the loud shutter.

Adam · 01-26-2013, 05:24 PM

Originally posted by trarmstrong

Is the accuracy that bad? I never have used a Pentax SLR before (very interested individual with no good camera stores near by) so I can't try it out.

Would the accuracy be better on the K-30?

The only thing stopping me from getting the K-30 is the loud shutter.

No, it's not. In practice you won't be able to tell the difference between the viewfinder AF of the K-5 and K-30. The K-5 II is a bit more decisive with slow lenses, and it can focus in much less light than other other two, however. The speed is still about the same for most practical purposes. Don't miss our in-depth reviews of the K-30 and the K-5 IIs for more info!

trarmstrong · 01-26-2013, 06:41 PM

What about your in-depth review of the K-5, lol. Thanks, I'll check it out.

gjtoth · 01-26-2013, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by trarmstrong

Is the accuracy that bad? I never have used a Pentax SLR before (very interested individual with no good camera stores near by) so I can't try it out.

Would the accuracy be better on the K-30?

The only thing stopping me from getting the K-30 is the loud shutter.

Personally, I don't find the the shutter on the K-30 loud. Nor, do I find the build quality to be inferior. "Loud" is a relative term. Loud compared to an Abrams tank firing?

I certainly would not let that ONE "niggle" keep me from buying a great camera. That's borders on silly.

Kunzite · 01-27-2013, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by trarmstrong

Is the accuracy that bad? I never have used a Pentax SLR before (very interested individual with no good camera stores near by) so I can't try it out.

As I said, my K-5 was (is) an early sample, and it was worse (side by side testing) than other K-5s. It's more about me losing trust in it, than about how the late K-5 models are working (however, I like the idea of diffractive AF optics, from the K-5 II).
Something similar happened with the K10D; the early samples had issues, yet the late ones were much better.

dperreno · 01-27-2013, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by gjtoth

Personally, I don't find the the shutter on the K-30 loud. Nor, do I find the build quality to be inferior. "Loud" is a relative term. Loud compared to an Abrams tank firing?

I certainly would not let that ONE "niggle" keep me from buying a great camera. That's borders on silly.

Although shutter noise wasn't even on my checklist when I bought my K-5, it has turned out to be my favorite "feature." I am amazed each and every time that I take a picture at just how quiet and effortless it feels. It especially comes in handy when taking pictures of my kids in stage performances, I turn off the rear display and the people in the row in front of me don't even know I'm taking pictures. Now, is that a sound reason to buy the K-5 over the K-30? Probably not, but it sure is something you'll appreciate once you have it!

trarmstrong · 01-27-2013, 07:21 PM

i just can't ultimately justify the extra cost of the K-5 compared to the K-30 over shutter noise. As the previous poster said, that is silly.

12-17-2012, 09:06 AM	#1
sts95 New Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 2	K5 vs k30 vs k5 ii I recently had a K-30 for a few weeks and after consistently having soft pictures realized through testing that I had FF issues. I compensated through AF micro adjustment, but all my lenses were are the far end of the adjustment scale which pointed me to the camera and gave me concern on ability to adjust future lenses. I really did love the camera, but returned it and just ordered a K-5 since I found it online for just over $700. I paid $640 for the k-30, so I thought the minimal uplift in price was worth the more professional feel of the K-5. That said, I'm aware of the AF issues regarding decisiveness of focus and tungsten low light complaints, so as I write this, I sit here and ponder if I should bite the bullet and go the extra $$ for a K-5 ii. Questions: - Are there serious enough issues with the K-5 that would make me question my investment? - Beyond better AF, what are the other improvements in the K-5 ii that are worth the extra money? (Video?) - Is the K-30 a better camera than the K-5 for stills due to improvements that make it closer to the K-5 ii? (Low light video on the K-30 was unusable)

01-26-2013, 05:24 PM	#10
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,593	Originally posted by trarmstrong Is the accuracy that bad? I never have used a Pentax SLR before (very interested individual with no good camera stores near by) so I can't try it out. Would the accuracy be better on the K-30? The only thing stopping me from getting the K-30 is the loud shutter. No, it's not. In practice you won't be able to tell the difference between the viewfinder AF of the K-5 and K-30. The K-5 II is a bit more decisive with slow lenses, and it can focus in much less light than other other two, however. The speed is still about the same for most practical purposes. Don't miss our in-depth reviews of the K-30 and the K-5 IIs for more info! Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K5 vs K30?	CTR01	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	135	06-22-2014 06:26 AM
K30 Grip vs K5 Grip	CMG	Pentax K-30 & K-50	9	11-26-2012 01:45 AM
K30 vs K5 in relation to video	paranoia23	Video Recording and Processing	38	11-24-2012 07:08 AM
Choose A Pentax K30 Vs K5	Barnster	Pentax DSLR Discussion	85	07-13-2012 01:03 AM
K5 vs 5D Mark II - Wow, the K5 is insane!	crossover37	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	88	04-29-2011 10:54 PM

12-17-2012, 09:20 AM	#2
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	1) I at least don't have any issues with the AF of the K5 and i know i'm not the only one. 2) better LCD screen and... bigger buffer i believe for the rest the improvements are scientific almost. 3) k-30 has slightly better AF and shoot better JPEGS but when it comes to RAW the K5 is better, it has a bigger buffer, silent shutter and 14 bit RAW.

12-17-2012, 12:27 PM	#3
interested_observer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,707	- Are there serious enough issues with the K-5 that would make me question my investment? - For me, there are very few issues. I am very happy with my K5. It would be nice to have focus peaking, but LiveView up on a tripod at 8x-10x works very well. The additional sharpness of loosing the AA filter - I don't know the jury is still out on that one. Low light AF - what lens purchases I have been making are manual focusing - so that does not matter that much (refer to the LiveView comment). - Beyond better AF, what are the other improvements in the K-5 ii that are worth the extra money? (Video?) It think that its the rear screen and have not tried the viedo, yet - and I have had the camera for almost a year now. - Is the K-30 a better camera than the K-5 for stills due to improvements that make it closer to the K-5 ii? (Low light video on the K-30 was unusable) - I can comment since I have not seen a K30...

12-17-2012, 12:55 PM - 1 Like	#4
Mr. A.S. Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 401	It is bad that Pentax didn't make camera models under name "Only for masterpieces pictures". For example, "Only for masterpieces" for $600, "Only for masterpieces" for $900 and "Only for masterpieces" for $1200. Then every photographer, looking in the purse, would be able to choose a camera, not thinking about AF, LCD screen, Video and other unnecessary things in photography. It's Pentax K-30 + Carl Zeiss 50mm/2 Camera and picture not masterpieces. But I like it. Last edited by Mr. A.S.; 12-17-2012 at 04:50 PM.

12-17-2012, 10:58 PM - 1 Like	#5
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	- Are there serious enough issues with the K-5 that would make me question my investment? >> Never had a FF/BF issue on my K5 (2yrs usage); Users in the States may have a different opinion (this problem seems to come most from US; Prevalence of tungsten lighting??). - Beyond better AF, what are the other improvements in the K-5 ii that are worth the extra money? (Video?) >> AF is better in low light which can make a big difference to some. AF in normal light is supposed to be improved with the new module - Is the K-30 a better camera than the K-5 for stills due to improvements that make it closer to the K-5 ii? (Low light video on the K-30 was unusable >> The K30 is a better camera in AF accuracy; LV; LV focus speed; video; peaking; weight. The K5 is better in handling, build. DR and 14/12bit RAW is subjective and hard to tell. (personally, I think its not worth losing hair over) K5IIs is the better overall camera between the 3 for still images. I had K5 (2yrs); Now I have K30. I've tried K5IIs on a couple of occasions.

01-25-2013, 10:02 PM	#6
trarmstrong New Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 10	Originally posted by pinholecam - Are there serious enough issues with the K-5 that would make me question my investment? >> Never had a FF/BF issue on my K5 (2yrs usage); Users in the States may have a different opinion (this problem seems to come most from US; Prevalence of tungsten lighting??). - Beyond better AF, what are the other improvements in the K-5 ii that are worth the extra money? (Video?) >> AF is better in low light which can make a big difference to some. AF in normal light is supposed to be improved with the new module - Is the K-30 a better camera than the K-5 for stills due to improvements that make it closer to the K-5 ii? (Low light video on the K-30 was unusable >> The K30 is a better camera in AF accuracy; LV; LV focus speed; video; peaking; weight. The K5 is better in handling, build. DR and 14/12bit RAW is subjective and hard to tell. (personally, I think its not worth losing hair over) K5IIs is the better overall camera between the 3 for still images. I had K5 (2yrs); Now I have K30. I've tried K5IIs on a couple of occasions. My two biggest concerns for the K-30 is the louder shutter sound and the built quality. Right now there is a $200 difference between them (thanks to the new K-5 ii) so it makes it harder to decide. Thanks.

01-26-2013, 04:10 AM	#7
Pheo Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Brighton, United Kingdom Photos: Gallery Posts: 311	And there I was, about to post this question, but without the K5 piece, I'm pondering trading in my K-30 +18-135mm against a K5ii What do people think to that? Pointless? I do shoot some low light stuff, hence wondering about it (plus I can't seem to shift the 18-135mm lens at the moment!) - I'd get £525 trade in for the two.

01-26-2013, 05:37 AM	#8
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Mr. A.S. It is bad that Pentax didn't make camera models under name "Only for masterpieces pictures". I would expect that from Sigma, to complement their "Art" lens series I'm quite tempted by the K-5 IIs myself, not really satisfied with the K-5's accuracy (an early sample, and I know later ones are better); but the K-5 II(s) seems to be exactly what I hoped the K-5 would be. The only thing that holds me back is the thought that, if I'd go for it, Pentax will launch a new, better, more desirable camera next day.

01-26-2013, 05:15 PM	#9
trarmstrong New Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 10	Is the accuracy that bad? I never have used a Pentax SLR before (very interested individual with no good camera stores near by) so I can't try it out. Would the accuracy be better on the K-30? The only thing stopping me from getting the K-30 is the loud shutter.

01-26-2013, 06:41 PM	#11
trarmstrong New Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 10	What about your in-depth review of the K-5, lol. Thanks, I'll check it out.

01-26-2013, 07:01 PM	#12
gjtoth Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Louisville, Kentucky, USA Posts: 1,962	Originally posted by trarmstrong Is the accuracy that bad? I never have used a Pentax SLR before (very interested individual with no good camera stores near by) so I can't try it out. Would the accuracy be better on the K-30? The only thing stopping me from getting the K-30 is the loud shutter. Personally, I don't find the the shutter on the K-30 loud. Nor, do I find the build quality to be inferior. "Loud" is a relative term. Loud compared to an Abrams tank firing? I certainly would not let that ONE "niggle" keep me from buying a great camera. That's borders on silly.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-27-2013, 11:20 AM	#13
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by trarmstrong Is the accuracy that bad? I never have used a Pentax SLR before (very interested individual with no good camera stores near by) so I can't try it out. As I said, my K-5 was (is) an early sample, and it was worse (side by side testing) than other K-5s. It's more about me losing trust in it, than about how the late K-5 models are working (however, I like the idea of diffractive AF optics, from the K-5 II). Something similar happened with the K10D; the early samples had issues, yet the late ones were much better.

01-27-2013, 11:58 AM	#14
dperreno Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: SE Michigan Posts: 28	Originally posted by gjtoth Personally, I don't find the the shutter on the K-30 loud. Nor, do I find the build quality to be inferior. "Loud" is a relative term. Loud compared to an Abrams tank firing? I certainly would not let that ONE "niggle" keep me from buying a great camera. That's borders on silly. Although shutter noise wasn't even on my checklist when I bought my K-5, it has turned out to be my favorite "feature." I am amazed each and every time that I take a picture at just how quiet and effortless it feels. It especially comes in handy when taking pictures of my kids in stage performances, I turn off the rear display and the people in the row in front of me don't even know I'm taking pictures. Now, is that a sound reason to buy the K-5 over the K-30? Probably not, but it sure is something you'll appreciate once you have it!

01-27-2013, 07:21 PM	#15
trarmstrong New Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 10	i just can't ultimately justify the extra cost of the K-5 compared to the K-30 over shutter noise. As the previous poster said, that is silly.