|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
05-07-2017, 04:22 AM
|
| |
Honestly having had both... If you know your technique, the K5 is the inferior camera in all aspects, including low light, the area where K3 is often said to be bad. The K3 is night and day difference for AF (in particular in low light where K5 is terrible), sharpness (you have much more possibilities to crop for wildlife as an example), overall reactivity, the flash system bug from K5 is solved, the metering and white balance are more accurate. All lenses AF, faster, including screw drive thanks to the faster motor.
Beware also to not mess up K5 and K5-IIs. The K5-IIs has already much improved sharpness than to the lack of low pass filter and also an AF that may not be that great but that work in low light.
In the APSC lineup the K3 (or K3-II that is basically the same camera) is the second best overall camera after the KP... And even, the KP mostly beat it in usability (lighter, better controls) and the improved sensor. For all the rest, the K3 is as good or better (1/8000 shutter, better autonomy, 2 SD cards...).
But it is true that the K5 apply lot of blur to the images at high iso that remove the noise and people often take the mistake to see their photos at 100% for details and obviously a a K3 with 24MP show a more magnified view with more noise (and also more details overall). But if you print or look at full screen, the K3 is quite capable.
My experience with K3 in low light vs K5 is that K3 can make sharp image. K5 can't. K3 AF is reliable in low light. K5 is not. K3 doesn't apply much noise removal and as such it need a raw editor with nice removal algorithms to shine. Latest lightroom would do the job but DxO with prime truely shine.
Few example of K3 high iso perf:
iso 8000
Arlequin by Nicolas, sur Flickr
iso 2000
Big Mamma by Nicolas, sur Flickr
iso 1600
Tattooist at work by Nicolas, sur Flickr
iso 3200
IMGP2891 by Nicolas, sur Flickr
iso 6400
IMGP2881 by Nicolas, sur Flickr
If you want to upgrade in APSC, the best offering in Pentax is the KP then K3.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
05-07-2017, 04:01 AM
|
| |
I agree there, if you made up your mind, then go on to the next thing. There no point to spent too much time on decisions... Do use the camera and enjoy it.
After you'll have used for quite some time, you'll see if you are satisfied or not with the photos you take and try to investigate what you could improve. Maybe improving your technique would give the most, but in some case a new, more fancy camera will be what you need.
But first, enjoy your new toy!
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
04-09-2017, 12:52 AM
|
| |
This also depend a lot what is important for you in a camera ;) For me K3 vs K5 is night an day because K3 had finally an AF that is decent. Work well in low light (only available starting K5-II), precise for shallow dof so AF is finally reliable for portraiture and decent AFC so sports/action work well. The AF is also overall must faster and accurate.
I consider AF to be one of the most important features in a camera so for me that's a huge improvement. Simply because you don't have time to fine tune your MF on moving subjects, because if the focus is on the wrong place, no other thing really matter and the photo go to trash.
I agree you don't care for MF lenses, but then I don't view K5 as particulary good on that. Slow Live View, no focus peaking, no EVF... You want to change the viewfinder to get one with some manual focus help and then yes the K5 can shine.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II
02-11-2017, 08:02 AM
|
| |
Any DSLR and associated lenses can make for stunning photos today... There no bad choice. What would make the difference, really is the subject, lighting, composition and the photographer eyes. In other words: you.
I had K5, now K3. K5 is an old but quite capable and sturdy camera. At a good price, this is likely one of the best camera you could have to begin in photography. The one thing where it struggle is autofocus. The autofocus is ok for most still subject in daylight but not that great for action/sport/low light/shallow dof. It is ok but basic. In Pentax land, K3 (but also K3-II, K1 and KP) have much much better autofocus. Maybe not at the level of the best of the best, but good enough. Understand still that in any brand to get great autofocus you would have to spend at least twice what a used K5 should cost you...
Sharpness of lenses is honestly a completely irrelevant factor theses day because all are sharp enough... The limitation of most lenses is the resolution of the camera used, meaning Canon/Nikon have had for years very expensive FF cameras and they get the best shapness benchmarks because theses multi thousand dollars camera allowed for sharper pictures. But in real life, nobody care. Only other photographer will ever ask you the gear used for a great photo. Except you zooming at 100% in your photo editor, nobody will ever see the difference between a sharp and not so sharp lens. A 16 or 36MP pixel camera neither.
Some people over there or on the internet will try to convince you that you'd see the difference in 30x40" prints (75cmx100cm) and larger if you stare at them wih a magnifying glass from 10" away. But nobody does that in real life.
Example DA55-300, an entry level Pentax lens by all mean not sharp, but as sharp as the competition in the same price range:
Morning Zebra by Nicolas, sur Flickr
DA55-300
Mwanza flat-headed rock agama by Nicolas, sur Flickr
Example, with DA15, a very small prime that many criticize for its slow apperture and lack of sharpness in reviews. Reality is that it manage to grab contrast and colors in a way few competitor manager to achieve... And it more than sharp enough:
DA15
IMGP0165 by Nicolas, sur Flickr
IMGP0153 by Nicolas, sur Flickr
Pentax design lens to be conveniant, practical and to make for beautifully rendered photos, not to please reviewers focussing on meaningless sharpness measures.
F135 a lens about to be 30 year olds, arguably noticably soft wide open... Is it really an issue or does it render portraiture just fine?
Body Painting by Nicolas, sur Flickr
FA77, on of the mythic Pentax prime lens that is both small, extremely sharp and make for lovely pictures. Many people from all brand would kill to get one
Girl watching by Nicolas, sur Flickr
From actual experience, on the exact same photo, your post processing skill, your screen or your choice of printer/paper or photo studio will have much more impact on the perceived image quality than if you have the sharpest lens ever of the kit lens. And much much more important that the rest are the subject, the lighting, the composition, the right moment rather than anything technical.
|
