I've a K30 and I'm really impressed at how well it recovers both shadow and highlight detail - it's miles better than my K7 was. While the 14 bit on a K5 should be able to recover some more at either end, I really wouldn't see it as a selling point - I'm sufficiently impressed by the implementation of the sensor and processor in the K30/50 to be able to recommend it. I also love the blue colour of my K3 body [/quote]He He, I'd forgotten about the colour thing hmm[/quote]-------------------------------------------------
I've got the K30 and bought it rather than a K5 mainly on price at the time, plus focus peaking. High ISO is about the same as well. It is extremely good. Not massively different to the K5 in IQ from what I can make out but obviously less sophistication and I would say there is a certain something about K5 pics that do lift it slightly above.
Dave

-----------------------------------------------
Yep, that's about the long and the short of it.

I didn't at all take that the wrong way - it's a perfectly fair question.

The main thing is the K-5 AF, since aeroplanes in flight (and to a lesser extent birds) are what I like photographing most of all. I've got massively fed up with the low proportion of keepers I get. I have a ridiculous number of shots where the timing and exposure are fine, it's just enough OOF to not make the cut.

So the main thing is that I want the AF to be a lot better than the K-5.

However, I also shoot at lowish light dance events, where I need ambient light rather than flash, so I need as short an exposure as possible. So high-ISO performance and accurate focusing is also important. Ultra fast AF with tracking isn't quite so important, but it does need to be accurate.

I'm not too bothered about the run of the mill stuff, I'm sure the K-3 is very good. But it's a big outlay, so I don't want the K-3 to be just a little bit better at the things I like the most - I want it to be a major step forward.

I don't want to get the K-3, discover it's still not really enough of a step forward, and then end up changing brands, although of course the D7200 will probably be out by then, and leapfrog in front again, so it may be a much easier decision in 6 months time.

Or it may not, I don't know. All I do know is that I've massively lost my whole photography mojo, and that I'm not getting any younger.[/quote]A fair comment Chris.

Each system has its plus sides. For certain shoots I wasn't getting the results I wanted from my Pentax kit so I invested in a second brand alongside my Pentax kit.

That's not recommended. It's expensive and the issue of lens/FOV duplication is high on the "against" list.

Ultimately it's a choice you alone have to make as Pentax only users cannot comment on WRT, using other brand kit.

I'm a life long Pentax user but refuse to be at at disadvantage in some areas.

Go with the kit that provides your required results, not what you like.

Photographers will respect your work, not your kit.

Best regards[/quote]Totally agree with both comments. Sticking with anything just because of brand loyalty over results is little pointless. I had my K10 for years because it did what I needed, then I went K7 mainly because of the shutter being very quiet compared to the 10 loud slap! Then I went IIs because of the noise in the 7, the evolution was working in my favour [/quote]--------------------------------------------
Exactly. It just depends where you are and where you want to be. From my perspective with the K30 now I will pick up marginal high iso performance benefits but at a much higher resolution, a quieter shutter, probably better Af plus a lot more. So worth it for me I think.
Dave

Excellent.

Has anyone noticed the striking resemblance between author of
"The Cynic's Photographer", Ambrose Bierce

Ambrose Bierce




Smeggypants





Shurely shome mistake

-------------------------------------------
We should worry. You seen those Canon 7d and 70D dynamic range and high ISO figures! Imagine how they're feeling if they put as much weight on DXO marks as we seem to!

Yes, would make sense.

----------------------------------------
As a keen bird photographer I should get the most advantage,apparently, by changing to the Nikon D7100. But I can live with the inferior AF for BIF. There aren't really any other advantages I can see in real world photography and for this type of activity some disadvantages with the Nikon for me. For starters I reckon I could sell my K30 and all my Pentax stuff and get about £2600. So if I switched to Nikon that would leave me about £1850 to rationalise my current lenses and accessories. SO for £1850 I need to get equivalent quality Nikon VR stabilised lenses to replace 18-250mm, A WR DA* 300,A WR 100mm Macro, A 50mm prime,Sigma 150-500, an AF 1.5x converter and a dedicated PPTL flash.
If someone tells me that's doable I'll think about it for more than 5 minutes. Anyone who has bought a second hand car should know by now it's not the trade in value but the cost to change that matters.
Dave

https://www.pentaxuser.com/news/ricoh-in-store-days-start-tomorrow-766

Seem to be missing the mass population of London and the S.E not to mention, East, North, Scotland and other areas. I didn't realise there were so many potential sales in the South and West. Perhaps that's where the rich live

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Believe me - they won't notice! When I think of some of the very average wedding photos I've seen the families drool over I wouldn't lose any sleep over it-------------------------------------------
John will like this quote from the second review and I agree!
"Life is too short to start looking for moiré."

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Believe me - they won't notice! When I think of some of the very average wedding photos I've seen the families drool over I wouldn't lose any sleep over it