pixelsmithy

I had no Pentax lenses when I chose Pentax for my first DSLR over Canikon. My reasons for doing so were: Loved the combination of in-body shake reduction and that they retained backward mount compatibility for all previous AF and MF K-mount lenses, and had the same flange to sensor distance as screwmount lenses.

I love playing with legacy glass and didn't figure I could afford many new AF lenses. Since then I've upgraded bodies 5 or 6 times. My current K-3 II has everything I loved about the previous bodies plus the innovative user-selectable AA filter (by default OFF, but there if you need it), the Pixel Shift Resolution (for still subjects), and built-in GPS and AstroTracer capability. Canon and Nikon can't duplicate any of that functionality because it leverages the in-body Shake Reduction system. I've now got a range of good AF glass including the Pentax 16-45mm f/4, the FA 77mm f1.8 Limited (WHAT a LENS!) and Sigma EX models from 10-20mm to the BIGMA. SO GLAD I picked Pentax.

I agree with mayurgogoi

Last time I looked (yesterday) Dx0Mark had not evaluated the K-30 yet. Has that changed? *LOOKS* Nope, all they have is specs. K-30 is 12 bit and K-5 is 14 bit. No way is the K-30 going to surpass the K-5.

It is a similar sensor, although apparently not the SAME sensor as the K-5. Also, the K-30 only does 12-bit RAW as opposed to the K-5 with 14-bit RAW. More data to work with, which you see especially in the superior dynamic range of the K-5.