K3 or K5 IIs as second body having already a K5IIs?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
audiobomber
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,163Gear list
Like?
Re: K3 or K5 IIs as second body having already a K5IIs?
In reply to joaquim hierro1, 5 months ago

joaquim hierro1 wrote:

audiobomber wrote:

The main difference is in auto-focus.

  • Prior to the K-3, the size of the Pentax AF points has been a constant complaint. The K-3 allows pinpoint accuracy in AF-S due to smaller points.
  • AF-C is improved immensely. The K-3 uses colour to track the subject, and 27 vs. 11 points for closer tracking. AF Hold control is an important feature, not available on previous Pentax bodies.
-- hide signature --

Dan

Thanks Dan for your reply.

what would be your choice for landscape and for portraiture.

I've noticed with the K5IIs some exaggerated or "cruel" red skin imperfections in some portraits. Could it be the lack of anti-aliasing filter? Could this be corrected using K3 with the filter "on"?

Landscape and portraiture are kind of opposites. Landscape shooters want corner to corner sharpness at small apertures, and often pump the colour/contrast. Portraits shooters value softer corners for subject isolation, like to blur skin detail, and want natural or even de-saturated colour/contrast. I rarely shoot portraits, and I've never shot a K-5 IIs, but here are my thoughts, for what they're worth.

  • I find skin tones from the K-5 family pretty horrible. White balance is to the cool side (too blue) and may be the reason you note the highlighted skin imperfections. The blue cast can make landscapes and water bodies look spectacular. Of course in raw images, an extra step of processing or a suitable import profile makes WB whatever you like.
  • The K-3 has more detail, always a plus for landscape, and can blur sharpness, sometimes desirable for portraits. If the subject is wearing fine patterned clothing, a blur filter can save you some work in post-processing. I've never tried to remove moiré, but I believe it is time consuming and never as good as not having had it in the first place. K-5 IIs owners say it is seldom a problem, but it depends on what you shoot. Even with the blur filter off, the finer pixel pitch of the K-3 is less likely to show moiré in the first place.
  • The K-3 also has three f2.8-sensitive AF points vs. only the center point in the K-5 IIs, which in theory should make it a little better for fast portrait lenses.
  • The K-3 has faster CDAF, with focus peaking (no FP on K-5 family).
  • Dual card slots are a great feature and can be a lifesaver for important shoots. Card failures are rare, but I've had a couple.

I waited for the K-3 and it was definitely the right choice for me, mostly due to more pixels for cropping bird photos, and superior AF-C for BIF and sports. If your finances allow it, I don't think you'd regret buying the latest and greatest.

-- hide signature --

Dan

 audiobomber's gear list:audiobomber's gear list
Pentax K-3 Sony a6000 Pentax K20D Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow