K5 vs K3

Merry Christmas Everyone!

I'm considering upgrading from my K5 to a K3 In the near future & wondered if any members had views on it being a worthy upgrade from the K5. I've always been happy with my K5 but feel if clearer sharper images are possibly with the K3 I'd be eager to get one. On paper it looks like a great bit of kit.

I only really shoot landscapes so bear that in mind & have thought about going full frame but that's a bit out of reach for me so would love to hear people's thoughts on this. If anyone has owned both I'd be keen to know about your experiences.

The lenses I use are the Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6, Pentax 17-70 f4 & Tamron 70-200 f2.8

Thanks Tom

Hi Tom,
frankly I feel that you will benefit more from upgrading your lenses, especially since you shoot landscapes I think If I were in your shoes I will definitely look for some primes instead of K3.
Martin

There is a huge difference in detail from the K-5 to the K-3. If that's what's important to you, then it will make a difference.

Thanks for the replies!

I had thought about a 14mm pentax prime but having read some reviews I'm not sure that the image quality it produces is going to be much of an improvement on what I already have. I often shoot wide angle so not really sure what else is available?

Obviously there is the 12-24 pentax but would that be a better with the k5 than the sigma on a k3?

The Samyang 14mm f2.8 UMC is excellent in resolution, and all for less than £300. There's plenty of discussion about it on this forum, just search for 'Samyang 14mm'. And there are many examples of its use on the K7 on my portfolio also - please check 'em out .... link

It is Manual focus, not much of a concern at 14mm really, but it has the advantage on Pentax of an 'A' setting on the aperture ring, giving full auto-exposure control.

Hi Tom, I used to have a K-5 a short while ago and still have a K-5iis. I sold the K-5 when I bought a K-3; the K-3 is a big step up from a K-5 and is also quite a leap from the K-5iis. The K-5 is still a great camera, but it's not in the same league as the K-3. It's not just the extra image detail, there are a host of other reasons why the K-3 is so much better, including faster operation, focus peaking in live view, AA filter simulator, better AF, slightly brighter viewfinder, dual SD cards, better metering, more accurate colour reproduction and the list goes on.

I think it's a little spurious to start asking questions like 'would the 12-24 be better on a K-5 than the Sigma 10-20 would be on a K-3'. Apples and Pears spring to mind, a fairer comparison would be the relative merits of the two lenses on the same camera. The 12-24 is a superb lens and I can tell you that using this on the K-3 in comparison to the same lens used on the K-5iis reveals that the lens is capable of significantly more resolution than it was revealing on the K-5iis, the difference is quite dramatic. Other lenses I own have seen similar results when used on the K-3, in particular my old Pentax-M 28mm F3.5 has gained a new lease of life, the detail it produces on the K-3 has surprised me.

Also, there has been a lot of comment about image noise on the K-3, i.e. that it is worse than the K-5 series. In practical everyday use this is pretty much a non-issue, there may be a little more noise, but it cleans up easier and is not intrusive.

In short, I would say that there is no doubt at all that the K-3 is a worthy upgrade from a K-5, the only question is whether the additional outlay is worth it for you.

Regards
David

Thanks again for the replies everyone.

I think I may go with the body first & then maybe get my hands on a 12-24 or a prime or 2 later on.

I'm fairly happy with the quality I get from the k5 so from what I have heard the k3 should improve on that. The dual sad ports are an attraction for me as well.

I have wondered how the samyang lenses perform & it looks like you have got some good results with it Nigel!

Cheers t

£1300 would buy some very nice lenses and these make a big difference regardless of camera body.

I know the temptation is, to use that horrible phrase, "upgrade" your DSLR, but I'd be tempted to look at what you want to do with the images. If you regularly crop heavily or make really big, printed enlargements, then I'm sure you'd benefit from a K3. If, however, you rarely print and like to view images on a computer screen, then I should imagine your K5 is more than adequate.

As you shoot mainly landscapes, I'd look carefully at David Storm's list of K3 improvements and consider whether they would improve your photography. £1300 is a greal deal of money to spend on a hobby, although I realise these things are relative.

Good luck whatever you decide to do.

You should seriously consider upgrading your lenses first. The K-3's resolution is really among the best there is, but to really benefit from it, you absolutely need first class lenses.

You would certainly see an improvement with the lenses you have, but you wouldn't get the full benefit of the K-3.

Upgrading your lenses might bring the resolution of the K-5 close to the K-3's resolution with average lenses.

I'm getting the swings & roundabouts feeling between the k5 & better lens or k3 & my lens.

The k3 apparently has a smaller dynamic range than the k5 not sure if I would notice the difference.

Very true - the lens is a crucial element and can have a dramatic effect on every camera body. Camera 'resolution' is a difficult thing to nail precisely in a discussion. It's not just about the number of pixels and how large that number will allow prints to be made at a certain DPI. That issue is going to be important for some, but I'm guessing those that really need it for this specific purpose are spread fairly thinly these days.

Its also about 'perceived resolution', and there's plenty of reports around documenting this as increased with the K3. But we have ways and means of adjusting and controlling perceived resolution with any camera. The type of sharpening techniques and how they are applied to your images will play a part in what you can extract from your shots.

You mentioned the Samyang 14mm Tom, and some of my shots with it ... It has an extremely high technical resolution that would benefit and complement any camera, and no doubt would be a stunning combination with a K3. However, what is most important in an image is infinitely variable. Many of my shots with the Samyang have been praised, and many have been criticised, for all sorts of things ... but never for a lack of sharpness or 'resolution' - and that's with the humble K7

Not sure why your lens line-up is being criticized as being unsuitable for a K-3!

The Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 is a good versatile wide angle lens.

The Pentax 17-70 has been described as the most desirable standard zoom lens in the current Pentax lens line-up.

The Tamron 70-200 f2.8 is said to have excellent optical quality and a very good macro capability.

To be honest you may find other lenses are better in certain circumstances but yours are better in others. The suggestion to switch to primes is fine, but they aren't zooms and some say the zooms perform better for them! It's what you're happy with and can afford. Perhaps buying the most expensive lenses gives some a certain satisfaction, but others swear by old second hand manual lenses purchased for peanuts off ebay. So if you feel the desire then get a K-3 you won't be disappointed. You can always change your lenses in due course in any event but you may not want or need to.

David Storm is first-rate landscape photographer and I don't think he finds that there's a problem with the K3's dynamic range, although I think I read that the K5 series is as good as it gets in this respect.

I'm sure that if you really feel that the K3 is for you, this shouldn't be a deal-breaker (as they say.) Shoot in RAW and you've got a lot of head-room anyway.

He hasn't hit high summer at midday yet

Thanks for all the feedback guys. I'm surprised that I even got a reply today.

I have a pentax-a 50mm f1.7 on its way & I'm planning to find another old school prime or 2 when I find them at the right price.

Think I'm going to go have a look at a k3 & see what I think.

Thanks again guys