This is why I prefer my K-5II over the K-3

I have had a few PM's recently asking about doing aircraft with the K-3 over the K-5 (II) so I took both cameras to the Yeovilton Air Day on Saturday as I wanted to compare a few things. I shot the K-5II with the 60-250mm (and sometimes 1.4x) and the K-3 with the 50-500mm OS.

As usual with Yeovilton the conditions aren't great, especially on a clear sunny day as you are more or less shooting into the sun all day which causes havoc with the metering but here is a before and after picture taken with the K-5II combo ... I have the same sort of picture taken on the K-3 and although sharp I cannot get anywhere near the quality when lifting shadows as much as I had to here.

Before


Belgian F-16 Fighting Falcon - Before by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr

After


Belgian F-16 Fighting Falcon - After by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr

Hi Mike, I've mentioned this before using Lightroom compared to the original K5. Are you using Lightroom?

Instead of lifting shadows have you tried adjusting the exposure locally with the adjustment brush for the K3? I find noise creeps in very quickly using that option. Be interested in your thoughts

My son went to Yeovilton as well, Mike. Not my sort of thing so he borrowed my K100 with the Samsung 50-200.

Most shot in RAW with the lens on manual focusing and exposure on P.
Guess who had to help with the processing?

I like aircraft, particularly old ones but (like birds and butterflies) I'm not interested in photographing them.

I told him he needed a K3 and a Bigma but now you've put me off (Good, save a few bob!)

It's an interesting debate, the K-5 has a little more latitude for bringing out shadow detail and is a little better at higher ISO's, but I still prefer to use my K-3 over the K-5IIs. The AF is more accurate (on my copies it is, I'm not claiming this is the case generally) and I like the way the sensor renders images. The K-3 also gives better cropping ability due to the increased resolution.

They are both fine cameras, I don't think most people would have too many complaints with either of them for general photography, of course this may be different for particular areas of specialisation such as the one highlighted by Mike in this thread.

Regards
David

I use Lightroom and Elements Alan but as they both use the same raw converter I'm guessing it will mean the same outcome. I will give the adjustment brush a try but lifting shadows is much the easiest option for me as I edit on a laptop using a mouse. Maybe I should try a pen and tablet.

Indeed they are David, the K-3 is an excellent all round camera and the AF is certainly better .. the extra crop is very handy for air show photography as well. Just a shame it hasn't got the same ISO and dynamic range capability but then I suppose if it did then that wouldn't leave Pentax anything to upgrade on the K-2 (apart from AF tracking)

Why would you need to use AF when photographing Airplanes.

Could you not set your lens to infinity and leave it at this setting?

Regards, Horst