Visit MPB Visit MPB Visit MPB

worth upgrade k5IIs to K-3

percy
Posted 21/05/2014 - 16:33 Link
How about the ability to crop an image tighter with the higher resolution available on the K-3 . . . . do those of you who have gone from the K-5 to the K-3 find that to be a worthwhile advantage?
davidstorm
Posted 21/05/2014 - 21:49 Link
I'm not going to get into the debate about the IQ benefits or otherwise of a K-3 vs. a K-5 as it has been done to death on here already. I have both K-5IIs and K-3 and find that I instinctively reach for the K-3 every time I go out to take photographs as it is such a great camera to use. The increased resolution is very helpful in lots of situations, for me it increases the distant details in landscapes and brings real benefits when photographing flowers or insects in macro mode, especially when cropping the image, which I do try to avoid, but sometimes it is necessary.

The only time I don't instinctively reach for the K-3 is when I'm going somewhere with dim light. In such conditions my first choice is the K-01, purely because of its high ISO capabilities and the fact that I like to use the focus peaking in live view with old MF lenses, like the M50 F1.4.

My K-5IIs is getting used much less since I got the K-3, it remains a great camera, but not quite as great as the K-3 and is relegated to backup duties!

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
Edited by davidstorm: 21/05/2014 - 21:49
RalphHardwick
Posted 21/05/2014 - 22:55 Link
drobbia wrote:
I'm impressed with images of k-3. If you upgraded from K5IIs was it worth it?

Drobbia what kind of photography do you do and what lenses do you currently use?

As I said I have both cameras and a range of pentax lenses, I would be happy to ry and produce some side by sides for you to compare
---------------------------------------------------------------------
CaptureLight Ltd
flickr
"I carry a camera to capture memories and the occasional photograph worthy of sharing"
NeilP
Posted 21/05/2014 - 23:51 Link
percy wrote:
How about the ability to crop an image tighter with the higher resolution available on the K-3 . . . . do those of you who have gone from the K-5 to the K-3 find that to be a worthwhile advantage?

Yep! Had a few fairly heavy crops (30% of original) on small birds which has given nice results.

Here is one from the weekend on Skomer.

cropped and reduced from 1000ish pixels on long edge to 800.
Comment Image
spotted flycatcher by Neil Phillips, on Flickr

Uncropped image (reduced to 800pix long edge)
Comment Image
spotted flycatcher uncropped by Neil Phillips, on Flickr
Edited by NeilP: 21/05/2014 - 23:57
davidstorm
Posted 21/05/2014 - 23:57 Link
One thing to bear in mind with the K-3 is its superior handling of metering, colour and white balance, compared to the K-5. I have found colours to be rendered better and more accurately on the K-3.

Also, if you are a P-TTL flashgun user, the K-3 is in another league. It works great with P-TTL flash, there's no element of 'hit and miss', unlike the K-5.

As Neil says, the cropping ability can be a bonus. Also I've found the K-3 very accurate with AF, although to be fair, the K-5IIs is also good and probably the equal of the K-3.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
Smeggypants
Posted 22/05/2014 - 03:15 Link
davidstorm wrote:
I'm not going to get into the debate about the IQ benefits or otherwise of a K-3 vs. a K-5 as it has been done to death on here already. I have both K-5IIs and K-3 and find that I instinctively reach for the K-3 every time I go out to take photographs as it is such a great camera to use. The increased resolution is very helpful in lots of situations, for me it increases the distant details in landscapes and brings real benefits when photographing flowers or insects in macro mode, especially when cropping the image, which I do try to avoid, but sometimes it is necessary.

The only time I don't instinctively reach for the K-3 is when I'm going somewhere with dim light. In such conditions my first choice is the K-01, purely because of its high ISO capabilities and the fact that I like to use the focus peaking in live view with old MF lenses, like the M50 F1.4.

My K-5IIs is getting used much less since I got the K-3, it remains a great camera, but not quite as great as the K-3 and is relegated to backup duties!

Regards
David

how often do you print images and if you do at what size?
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
bwlchmawr
Posted 22/05/2014 - 06:37 Link
MattyH wrote:
I did the whole K5 to K5iis to K3, Every time

Is the K3's image quality better then the K5's? No, but it's different if you know what I mean...

There is just something about a photo taken on a K5...

5 months with my K3 has me wanting to buy another K5.

You're as bad as me, Matty. Kind of "the grass is always greener" but in reverse. Six months with a K5 made me source another K100D which (apart from sparing my beloved but over-worked K10 from more actuations) has been my constant photographic companion recently.

As you say re. the K5, I think there's something about a photo taken on a CCD sensor, not necessarily better, but different. Of course, at high ISOs the K5's in a different league, but how often do I need that?

Sorry, I've just realised this is not helpful at all and does nothing to address the original question, except maybe to suggest that: a) don't expect a new camera to make you a better photographer and b) perhaps the camera you already own is the one you really need.
Best wishes,

Andrew

"These places mean something and it's the job of a photographer to figure-out what the hell it is."
Robert Adams
"The camera doesn't make a bit of difference.  All of them can record what you are seeing.  But, you have to SEE."
Ernst Hass
My website: http://www.ephotozine.com/user/bwlchmawr-199050 http://s927.photobucket.com/home/ADC3440/index
https://www.flickr.com/photos/78898196@N05
Blythman
Posted 22/05/2014 - 07:23 Link
percy wrote:
How about the ability to crop an image tighter with the higher resolution available on the K-3 . . . . do those of you who have gone from the K-5 to the K-3 find that to be a worthwhile advantage?

Posted this to demonstrate but no-one seemed interested

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/sedge-warbler-49294
Alan


PPG
Flickr
percy
Posted 22/05/2014 - 08:21 Link
Blythman wrote:
percy wrote:
How about the ability to crop an image tighter with the higher resolution available on the K-3 . . . . do those of you who have gone from the K-5 to the K-3 find that to be a worthwhile advantage?

Posted this to demonstrate but no-one seemed interested

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/sedge-warbler-49294

I did see that and thought it's a great example to demonstrate
1) the ability to crop/isolate small parts of an image
2) an alternative to a longer lens
ChrisA
Posted 22/05/2014 - 09:48 Link
Blythman wrote:
percy wrote:
How about the ability to crop an image tighter with the higher resolution available on the K-3 . . . . do those of you who have gone from the K-5 to the K-3 find that to be a worthwhile advantage?

Posted this to demonstrate but no-one seemed interested

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/sedge-warbler-49294

I missed this - zoikes, that's quite a crop.
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
drobbia
Posted 22/05/2014 - 21:20 Link
I use a K-x, and IIs, lenses, Tamron 18-200 and Pentax 50 mm 1.4 if you have time ck. my gallery here. I like quirky images, Landscapes , some closeup work. I also use in my studio to record completed works on paper to trammellartworks.com, I'm a watercolorist and pastellist and photos almost always begins my work. Yes, I would like to see some side x sides and please except my thanks in advance , tg
RalphHardwick wrote:
drobbia wrote:
I'm impressed with images of k-3. If you upgraded from K5IIs was it worth it?

Drobbia what kind of photography do you do and what lenses do you currently use?

As I said I have both cameras and a range of pentax lenses, I would be happy to ry and produce some side by sides for you to compare

Edited by drobbia: 22/05/2014 - 21:23
davidstorm
Posted 22/05/2014 - 21:43 Link
Smeggypants wrote:
how often do you print images and if you do at what size?

Why do you ask Smeggy? My post was not aimed at comparing IQ between the K-3 and the K-5 variants, I was focussing on the way the cameras feel to use and also the cropping ability of the K-3, which I notice when taking pics of things like flowers and insects.

I don't print very often but I have a selection of images in frames on our walls. I don't sell my pics and when I do print it is A4 or A3.

Regards the K-3, I just find it a nice camera to use and find that the metering and colour rendition are better than the K-5IIs, the focussing seems to be about the same. K-5IIs is a great camera, I just like the K-3 a bit better, but I don't think it's leagues ahead in IQ.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
RalphHardwick
Posted 22/05/2014 - 21:46 Link
I must admit I used my K5iis yesterday and did miss the K3. I can't quite put my finger on it but it does 'feel' nicer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
CaptureLight Ltd
flickr
"I carry a camera to capture memories and the occasional photograph worthy of sharing"
davidstorm
Posted 22/05/2014 - 22:02 Link
Blythman wrote:
percy wrote:
How about the ability to crop an image tighter with the higher resolution available on the K-3 . . . . do those of you who have gone from the K-5 to the K-3 find that to be a worthwhile advantage?

Posted this to demonstrate but no-one seemed interested

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/sedge-warbler-49294

I've just posted a comment. Didn't see the post earlier as I was abroad at the time and had very little time to visit the site. It does sort of bear out what we've been saying about cropping with a K-3.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
tyronet2000
Posted 27/05/2014 - 11:21 Link
Quote:
With out dragging up too much old ground at very high ISO, 12800 and above, the noise is worse on a K-3

As someone who doesn't take photos in the dark, what circumstances would an iso of 12800 and above be used. I think the max I've ever used was 3200 in the Velvet Caves, Valkenburg.

Expect to get a K3 when the price plummets on release of the FF everyone is waiting for
Regards
Stan

PPG
Edited by tyronet2000: 27/05/2014 - 11:22

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.