Revisiting a dilemma

Hi all. I've been struggling with the following choice for a year and half but I now need to make my mind up... K5II or K3? As far as I am concerned, the following seems to be factors...

K3
More megapixels... not that much of a bonus for me.
Faster AF... again, not that much of an issue for me.
Focus peaking... a plus point for me as I use old manual glass a great deal.

K5II
Nicer results when bringing stuff up out of the shadows.
Cheaper...!

Both
Good results at high ISO.

Does this seem fair to those who have used these two cameras? My decision would seem to hinge on focus peeking v. shadow details. As I am about to embark on a trip with the likelihood of lots of nighttime, long exposure, tripod-based work I'd like to make the right decision. Actually, I think the right decision is a 645Z but I cannot justify the £££££...!

Thanks, Kris.

Focus peaking is a splendid thing. It works really well on the K01
The K5ii stands up well against even the 645z for high ISO stuff, retaining saturation where the 645 retains details but looses saturation (irretrievably). Can't comment on the K3 but if you don't need the big files...

Difficult one Kris. I think you need them both

You've got the pro's and cons sorted with perhaps the exception of ISO

I have a K5 and a K3. Been mulling over upgrading the K5 to the K5IIs. Wouldn't get another K3. Though I also wouldn't part with the one I have

I like the K3 because the AF is an improvement on the K5. Because the increased megapixels allows me to crop more severely for wildlife and when uncropped packs in more detail.

The reason, I'd like to keep a K5 variant is because of its ability to bring back shadows which far surpasses that of the K3, and because it is much better in low light, high ISO situations. The K3 is fine when using a high ISO in good light. It is also fine when used in low light with a low ISO. But if I'm shooting wildlife just before dusk and have to up the ISO to 1600 to maintain a shutter speed of 1/400, with wide open aperture, then, I swap out the K3 for my K5.

There are alternatives to the K3 for focus peaking. The K30/K50 also do focus peaking and David(Trout) certainly treats his K30 as an equal to his K5/K3. I haven't read anything about their ability with shadows though.

Another alternative would be the K01 which you should easily get for less than £200 2nd hand. That may allow you to get both that and a K5II also. All under the price of a K3

Probably muddied the waters even more for you now

I think it depends on your final use.

If your main use is web and prints up to A3 with not much cropping, then the K-5 variants offer superb performance already. This is why we still have our K-5 bodies and will only upgrade when some failure forces itself upon us.

If you crop a good deal and still need A3 or larger prints, or even for web if you want to do severe cropping, then the K-3 offers more resolution. It also offers faster AF if that is an issue.

I would be happy with any Pentax DSLR from the K-5 onwards as a new purchase. In fact, we still happily use a K20D for studio work.

I have a K3 and K5llS and concur with Blythmans comments.

K5/K01/K30 are pretty much of a muchness for shadows I think. The K30 has proved a good choice for me - and has additionally let me retire the K01.

Hi,

Cropping wildlife seems the biggest issue to me. My understanding is that the K3 AF is the same improved - 3EV one put in the K5 Mk II.

Using my sons K3 over my K5 the biggest thing I noticed was the improved viewfinder, the better view of the viewfinder data as a spectacle wearer and the ease of manual focusing with a bright lens.

I see only £130 between the K3 and K5IIS now. Does that make the K5 IIS overpriced for a reason?

I have a K-5IIs and a K-3. I marginally prefer the K-3, it is an all round nicer camera to use and of course the extra resolution is welcome, but you need high quality lenses to make the most of this. Certainly on my K-3 the focussing is better than that on the K-5IIs, marginally faster and a little more accurate, which I've noticed particularly when taking photos of birds and insects. I also prefer the way the K-3 renders landscape images, it has a warmth that the K-5IIs lacks.

However both are superb cameras. I would add that the K-3's dynamic range has never been restrictive for me and I can successfully bring out shadow details in most shots. The K-3 is also less prone to blowing highlights than the K-5IIs is. Yes, the K-5 has marginally more dynamic range but the difference at low ISO's is not very great, and it is at low ISO's that mine is mostly used. I suspect that is the most important aspect in the decision - do you intend using it a lot at higher ISO's?

Regards
David

Kris, if you intend shooting a lot of images above ISO 1600 the K5lls will work very well. However, focus speed and accuracy is far better with the K3 and I would say ISO wise, below ISO 1000 there is very little difference between the K5lls and the K3. Overall, in my opinion and using both cameras, the K3 is the better camera.

Agree with all of this, I have yet to have a problem with blown highlights and bo problems pulling out shadow detail the K3's meter does an excellent balancing act of exposing to preserve both, the 77 Segment meter on the K5 is not always as accurate but the extra dynamic range in the shadows can pull an image out of the fire (Or the Bin!). I am spending much less time in front of my Eizo now, and more time actually shooting, since getting my K3...

I don't have a K5II to compare to now but the finer grain structure of the K3, is better for printing I find, it never seems to show up in print, only on screen at 100%, if you print a lot it may be important to you Kris?
I have found the K3 meter to be so good that I would recommend that camera even if it was the only difference between to two, I sometimes struggled with the K5/IIs, the K3 meter is a joy! K5's is not bad though and you'll know what yuor getting there I guess? (Nothing could ever be as bad as the D610!)

Thank you everyone. I thought long and hard and am now the proud owner of K3... The battery is charging!

K.

Hi kris
Enjoy your k3

I just won a bid for a K-5 IIs with the KatzEye screen swapped in. Now instead of peaking I have a Fresnel/split-prism viewfinder, like the good old days For a few extra dollars/pound/euro it can really change the equation... not that such a screen won't fit on a K-3 as well of course

Congrats Kris, I'm sure it will eventually prove to be the right choice
I must admit I do spend an annoying amount of time looking at K5IIs's on eBay!
I really don't need two bodies but having both still has great appeal, K3 is the better camera, no doubt in my mind about that though
Any problems give me P.M. Nothing I like discussing more than the intricacies of the K3 meter!
I'm still working on the focusing but the weather has turned nasty up here, ever since I got the K3 actually and there seems to be a distinct lack of that glowing ball in the sky at the moment, it having been replaced by localised flooding instead!

Congrats!

So does the K-3 use the same focusing screen as the K5/K5ii?