Snappiness Photography ForumCamera Discussion: Digital CamerasAre the K-5II or the K-3 still wo …

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Are the K-5II or the K-3 still worth it?

#1 · July 24, 2023, 8:01 pm

Hey guys!

Those who have already read my introduction, know that I currently own a Canon EOS 5D Mark III and would like to switch to a Pentax K-5II or a K-3 and would like to ask you for your opinion/advice.

I like the 5D Mark III. It’s a great camera. But it just doesn’t feel right to me. It’s just not my camera, I guess. While thinking about something I did not want to think about, „selling the camera after owning it for only two months“, I realized that I didn’t need a full-frame sensor. So I thought about it. What camera that interests me has an APS-C Sensor?

And then the Pentax K-5/K-3s came directly into my mind, since I always liked them and was fascinated by the weather resistance and the backwards compatibility.

So now I want to buy an older Pentax, like the K-5II or a K-3, and have more money for the glass.

I have a few questions about both:

Can you still recommend both?
I have seen two K-5II that both had some dead pixels. Is this a common problem?
- Do they generally have common problems?
Are they comfortable for someone with rather large hands?

What are some good lenses that I should get at the start? (I will probably trade my existing Canon gear, I’m assuming that will make around 600€/663$)

Thanks for reading!
Pierre

#2 · July 24, 2023, 9:07 pm

Quote from Resiema on July 24, 2023, 8:01 pm

I have a few questions about both:

Can you still recommend both?

I have seen two K-5II that both had some dead pixels. Is this a common problem?

Do they generally have common problems?

Are they comfortable for someone with rather large hands?

What are some good lenses that I should get at the start? (I will probably trade my existing Canon gear, I’m assuming that will make around 600€/663$)

Basically I can recommend the K-5II and I probably would recommend a K-3 if I had some experiences with it.

The 16 MP sensor of the K-5 series is very capable, even with relatively high ISO. I don't hesitate to use ISO 3200 and images with ISO 6400 are usable. Ergonomics are perfect for me, but I've got fairly small hands - glove size 8...

The only caveat with the K-5 series is that KAF4 lenses can only be used wide open.

Dead pixels are common with every sensor over time. If they are not that many, then it isn't a big problem in my opinion. Dead, stuck or hot pixels can be removed in post processing, eg. with RawTherapee, ART or darktable.

For prime lenses I'd recommend the 35/2.8 Macro Limited. At the moment it's my preferred lens. If you don't need macro capabilities, then the cheaper 35/2.4 is a good choice from my perspective.

For zoom lenses my favourites are the 16-85/3.5-5.6, the 16-45/4 and the 18-135/3.5-5.6. The 20-40 limited has a good reputation, but I don't have experiences with that lens.

The old DA*16-50/2.8 SDM is prone to the SDM failure, but can be converted to screw drive. I sold mine, because my copy had fairly pronounced purple fringing and was rather soft, especially at the short end. Stopping down helped a bit, but at f/4 the 16-45 is good enough for me, and it's smaller and lighter than the DA*16-50.

Deleted user and Resiema have reacted to this post.

Veni, vidi, serravi.

#3 · July 25, 2023, 6:52 pm

Quote from Resiema on July 25, 2023, 6:52 pm

Quote from EckyH on July 24, 2023, 9:07 pm

Basically I can recommend the K-5II and I probably would recommend a K-3 if I had some experiences with it.

The 16 MP sensor of the K-5 series is very capable, even with relatively high ISO. I don't hesitate to use ISO 3200 and images with ISO 6400 are usable. Ergonomics are perfect for me, but I've got fairly small hands - glove size 8...

That's nice to hear! My old A37 also had a 16 MP Sensor, and I think that it's the same as the one in the K-5s and I always really liked the images and it was able to use high ISOs as well. I actually don't know my glove size, but I would say that it's around 10. (The biggest problem with my A37 was that the grip was to short so my small finger was always cramped under the body)

Dead pixels are common with every sensor over time. If they are not that many, then it isn't a big problem in my opinion. Dead, stuck or hot pixels can be removed in post processing, eg. with RawTherapee, ART or darktable.

I guess I should have been more specific, I didn't mean dead pixels on the sensor, but on the display. So both K-5II had some dead pixels on the display, which is something that wouldn't be that annoying but I just wanted to know if that is something common for the K-5 series.

For prime lenses I'd recommend the 35/2.8 Macro Limited. At the moment it's my preferred lens. If you don't need macro capabilities, then the cheaper 35/2.4 is a good choice from my perspective.

For zoom lenses my favourites are the 16-85/3.5-5.6, the 16-45/4 and the 18-135/3.5-5.6. The 20-40 limited has a good reputation, but I don't have experiences with that lens.

The 35/2.4 and the 16-45/4 seem like two really interesting options. I would also be interested in the 2.8 Macro Limited, but I think for the start the 35/2.4 could be enough. Thanks for these recommendations!

The old DA*16-50/2.8 SDM is prone to the SDM failure, but can be converted to screw drive. I sold mine, because my copy had fairly pronounced purple fringing and was rather soft, especially at the short end. Stopping down helped a bit, but at f/4 the 16-45 is good enough for me, and it's smaller and lighter than the DA*16-50.

E.

That's interesting to hear. Are Pentax' ultrasonic lenses fragile in general? I don't really need f/2.8, f/4 is good for me too, and I don't really think that I would miss the 5 mm focal length. 😂

Quote from Cory Maben on July 25, 2023, 5:36 pm

I can't speak to either of the Pentax bodies, I don't have much experience with Pentax. But I will say that finding and having a camera that "is yours", that feels good to shoot not only physically, but emotionally, having a camera that feels fun and enjoyable is an important aspect to consider about a camera. If you don't enjoy a camera you'll be less likely to actually do any photography.

You're definitely right, that's exactly what I was thinking. What's the point of having a "great" camera if I don't like it that much myself and don't have that much fun with it?

Since I got the Canon, I didn't go out to take pictures that often because somehow I didn't have the fun taking pictures like I usually do.

It always sucks to realize just after the return window closes that you want to get rid of something, but the way I look at it, selling the Canon for a loss and getting something you enjoy is a smaller loss of money than you'd have with the Canon sitting in the closet gathering dust.

This makes a lot of sense, I made a little loss, but I found a camera that I enjoy and someone else might enjoy the Canon. 🙂

Quote from EckyH on July 24, 2023, 9:07 pm

Basically I can recommend the K-5II and I probably would recommend a K-3 if I had some experiences with it.

The 16 MP sensor of the K-5 series is very capable, even with relatively high ISO. I don't hesitate to use ISO 3200 and images with ISO 6400 are usable. Ergonomics are perfect for me, but I've got fairly small hands - glove size 8...

That's nice to hear! My old A37 also had a 16 MP Sensor, and I think that it's the same as the one in the K-5s and I always really liked the images and it was able to use high ISOs as well. I actually don't know my glove size, but I would say that it's around 10. (The biggest problem with my A37 was that the grip was to short so my small finger was always cramped under the body)

Dead pixels are common with every sensor over time. If they are not that many, then it isn't a big problem in my opinion. Dead, stuck or hot pixels can be removed in post processing, eg. with RawTherapee, ART or darktable.

I guess I should have been more specific, I didn't mean dead pixels on the sensor, but on the display. So both K-5II had some dead pixels on the display, which is something that wouldn't be that annoying but I just wanted to know if that is something common for the K-5 series.

For prime lenses I'd recommend the 35/2.8 Macro Limited. At the moment it's my preferred lens. If you don't need macro capabilities, then the cheaper 35/2.4 is a good choice from my perspective.

For zoom lenses my favourites are the 16-85/3.5-5.6, the 16-45/4 and the 18-135/3.5-5.6. The 20-40 limited has a good reputation, but I don't have experiences with that lens.

The 35/2.4 and the 16-45/4 seem like two really interesting options. I would also be interested in the 2.8 Macro Limited, but I think for the start the 35/2.4 could be enough. Thanks for these recommendations!

The old DA*16-50/2.8 SDM is prone to the SDM failure, but can be converted to screw drive. I sold mine, because my copy had fairly pronounced purple fringing and was rather soft, especially at the short end. Stopping down helped a bit, but at f/4 the 16-45 is good enough for me, and it's smaller and lighter than the DA*16-50.

E.

That's interesting to hear. Are Pentax' ultrasonic lenses fragile in general? I don't really need f/2.8, f/4 is good for me too, and I don't really think that I would miss the 5 mm focal length. 😂

Quote from Cory Maben on July 25, 2023, 5:36 pm

I can't speak to either of the Pentax bodies, I don't have much experience with Pentax. But I will say that finding and having a camera that "is yours", that feels good to shoot not only physically, but emotionally, having a camera that feels fun and enjoyable is an important aspect to consider about a camera. If you don't enjoy a camera you'll be less likely to actually do any photography.

You're definitely right, that's exactly what I was thinking. What's the point of having a "great" camera if I don't like it that much myself and don't have that much fun with it?

Since I got the Canon, I didn't go out to take pictures that often because somehow I didn't have the fun taking pictures like I usually do.

It always sucks to realize just after the return window closes that you want to get rid of something, but the way I look at it, selling the Canon for a loss and getting something you enjoy is a smaller loss of money than you'd have with the Canon sitting in the closet gathering dust.

This makes a lot of sense, I made a little loss, but I found a camera that I enjoy and someone else might enjoy the Canon. 🙂

#4 · July 25, 2023, 7:58 pm

Quote from Daniel Gonzalez on July 25, 2023, 7:58 pm
It all depends.

It depends on your pace taking photos, on what do you expect from a camera and lenses and it depends on what are you shooting.

The K5 series are known by being a classic camera, they work great (I have a K5 since 9 years ago) and the Iso 80 capability plus how they manage shadows make them great cameras. (my dad an a friend also picked one copy after me recomending them this model). Now, is it particulary fast for sport? It's not. Is it capable? It is. But is not a Canon. Is it capable of doing landscape? Certainly but it's an APS-C body, with a 1.5x crop sensor, so it's not similar to shoot with a FF camera.

I do still have mine because I like it. And sometimes I bring it to the track with me. But not as often as before. It's slow pace and slower AF makes me take the K3 as a second body before the K5.

Now the K3 is great too. But it works different, it works more on the bright spectrum of images rather than the shadows. It has a bit better AF and a bit faster shutter (well, it takes more frames per second). Overall is a step further in the line, it's a newer generation.

Both cameras feel great in hand for my taste, I use both with battery grips, and I find them great in hand.

What I like from both is colour rendition, that they are weather sealed and that they have in body stabilization.

Now, can I ask why do you think about those 2 models specificaly? From the K5-II I have heard the "good one" is the K5-IIS, and from the K3's there's little to no difference between a K3 and a K3-II but I think my K3-II was slightly faster or more accurate in AF than the K3. Not by a big margin thought.

From the lenses they have reccomended you I have had the Pentax 16-45mm f4 and it is great. I just sold mine to buy a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 because it's a bit faster. But the Pentax worked great for me. You can also go for the DA plastic fantastics 35mm f2.4 and 50mm f1.8 if you are in a budget because they are performers at "cheap" like the 16-45mm f4. If you are looking for a mid telephoto lens or a big big telephoto lens I can reccomend the Pentax DA* 50-135mm f2.8, produces great images even stop down and yes the SDM motor is known fail BUT this lens (the 16-50mm I think is the exception to that, but please correct me if I am wrong) you can pass it to screw-mount AF and so you can still use and enjoy it.
I will throw the Pentax F series here also because there are great to superb lenses (i'm rthinking the F 50mm, the F28mm, the F 100mm, also the F 15mm (but the 135mm bang for the buck is the manual M 135mm f3.5) ) and zooms and very cost effective lenses in this fakily (like the 35-70mm) . But @James knows more than I do about the F Series and he even has some video/s about it (you can check it out here: https://www.snappiness.space/my-odd-obsession-with-pentax-f-series-prime-lenses/ and James will provide the video I hope)

I'd say two more things:

First of all is before jumping into Pentax please remember that there are fewer available options than in other systems, i'm talking about lenses and bodies, specially newer ones. But for example long telephoto lenses are quite hard to find (I know by experience) or expensive.

ANY (or almost any) information on lenses and bodies you can ever need you might most likely find it in Pentaxforums in their database. It has helped me A LOT during the years. Really. https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

So I hope this kind of helps in some way.

All the best!

It all depends.

It depends on your pace taking photos, on what do you expect from a camera and lenses and it depends on what are you shooting.

The K5 series are known by being a classic camera, they work great (I have a K5 since 9 years ago) and the Iso 80 capability plus how they manage shadows make them great cameras. (my dad an a friend also picked one copy after me recomending them this model). Now, is it particulary fast for sport? It's not. Is it capable? It is. But is not a Canon. Is it capable of doing landscape? Certainly but it's an APS-C body, with a 1.5x crop sensor, so it's not similar to shoot with a FF camera.

I do still have mine because I like it. And sometimes I bring it to the track with me. But not as often as before. It's slow pace and slower AF makes me take the K3 as a second body before the K5.

Now the K3 is great too. But it works different, it works more on the bright spectrum of images rather than the shadows. It has a bit better AF and a bit faster shutter (well, it takes more frames per second). Overall is a step further in the line, it's a newer generation.

Both cameras feel great in hand for my taste, I use both with battery grips, and I find them great in hand.

What I like from both is colour rendition, that they are weather sealed and that they have in body stabilization.

Now, can I ask why do you think about those 2 models specificaly? From the K5-II I have heard the "good one" is the K5-IIS, and from the K3's there's little to no difference between a K3 and a K3-II but I think my K3-II was slightly faster or more accurate in AF than the K3. Not by a big margin thought.

From the lenses they have reccomended you I have had the Pentax 16-45mm f4 and it is great. I just sold mine to buy a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8 because it's a bit faster. But the Pentax worked great for me. You can also go for the DA plastic fantastics 35mm f2.4 and 50mm f1.8 if you are in a budget because they are performers at "cheap" like the 16-45mm f4. If you are looking for a mid telephoto lens or a big big telephoto lens I can reccomend the Pentax DA* 50-135mm f2.8, produces great images even stop down and yes the SDM motor is known fail BUT this lens (the 16-50mm I think is the exception to that, but please correct me if I am wrong) you can pass it to screw-mount AF and so you can still use and enjoy it.
I will throw the Pentax F series here also because there are great to superb lenses (i'm rthinking the F 50mm, the F28mm, the F 100mm, also the F 15mm (but the 135mm bang for the buck is the manual M 135mm f3.5) ) and zooms and very cost effective lenses in this fakily (like the 35-70mm) . But @James knows more than I do about the F Series and he even has some video/s about it (you can check it out here: https://www.snappiness.space/my-odd-obsession-with-pentax-f-series-prime-lenses/ and James will provide the video I hope)

I'd say two more things:

First of all is before jumping into Pentax please remember that there are fewer available options than in other systems, i'm talking about lenses and bodies, specially newer ones. But for example long telephoto lenses are quite hard to find (I know by experience) or expensive.
ANY (or almost any) information on lenses and bodies you can ever need you might most likely find it in Pentaxforums in their database. It has helped me A LOT during the years. Really. https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

So I hope this kind of helps in some way.

All the best!

EckyH and Resiema have reacted to this post.

My social media: https://linktr.ee/F1photo

#5 · July 25, 2023, 8:42 pm

Quote from Resiema on July 25, 2023, 6:52 pm

So both K-5II had some dead pixels on the display, which is something that wouldn't be that annoying but I just wanted to know if that is something common for the K-5 series.

I don't know that. But at least it isn't as known as the failures of the early SDM, the aperture block failure of the K-30/K-50/K-500/K-S1/K-S2/early K-70 and the backfocus issue of the K10D. Neither my K-5IIm nor the K-5IIs have dead pixels on the display. Perhaps next time they'll show a dead pixel - who knows. 😉

The 35/2.4 and the 16-45/4 seem like two really interesting options. I would also be interested in the 2.8 Macro Limited, but I think for the start the 35/2.4 could be enough.

Imho the 35/2.4 is very good if you count in the price. Second hand you can get it here for less than 100€. My copy is reasonable sharp at f/2.4, better at f/2.8 and between f/4 and f/11 very good with the best part between f/5.6 and f/8 - regarding to centre sharpness.

I put the 16-45 into the same quality range as the 2.4/35: a bit plasticky, a bit sloppy, but optically good enough for me. And: it has a close focus distance of 28cm, even at 45mm focal length. The attached image is to show what you can expect (just the very basic scene referred workflow in darktable, not even lens correction nor noise reduction and I left the EXIF data in the JPEG). The bokeh of that lens is nothing to write home about.

Are Pentax' ultrasonic lenses fragile in general?

Let me answer that with a video:

And for the record a second one with a kit zoom lens:

Decide for yourself. 😉

As far as I know the early SDM AF tends to die prematurely. Some of that lenses can be converted to screw drive AF. At the moment I don't know which series of later SDM lenses are safe.

Uploaded files:

Resiema has reacted to this post.

Veni, vidi, serravi.

#6 · July 25, 2023, 9:03 pm

I have not heard of chronic failures with the K-5 or K-3 series cameras, so while there might be something here or there, they are mostly still all running like tanks.

Good advice here already so I won't repeat it, but I'm curious what lenses you have and like right now for Canon? Or liked in the past with Sony? Maybe we can help there find some Pentax alternatives.

Daniel Gonzalez and Resiema have reacted to this post.

Happy snappin' 🙂

#7 · July 25, 2023, 11:24 pm

Quote from grover on July 25, 2023, 11:24 pm
I have a K-5 II, K-3 II, and a K-1 II

I still use them all. In terms of output I can rarely tell which camera took which photo. That's not to say there is zero difference but in practical terms they are all very capable.

All my Pentax bodies have been reliable. The models I own aren't plagued with any known issues. In fact they have no issues.

Not much to add really but just to hammer home the point, don't expect good video or fast auto-focus. The newer the body the better the auto-focus. These are frequent criticisms about Pentax ( up until the K-3 III ) but honestly for the type of shooting I do I'm more than satisfied with the auto-focus and I never record video.

I haven't checked what the going price is for these bodies but if the K-3 isn't much more then I would go that route. I can get 13x19 prints out of my K-5 no problem but I have more "crop-ability" with my K-3. My K-3 II has GPS and my K-5 II has a built in flash and those two differences is basically what decides which one I'll use. If I had to pick one, I'd prefer built in GPS.

For Pentax APSC I have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and Sigma 10-20 f3.5. Both are HSM (auto focus motor built in) lenses and both are excellent. My 17-50 in particular is very, very sharp. Otherwise, I have a collection of Sigma and Tamron full frame prime's and zooms. The Tamron 70-200 is probably my most used lens on either APSC or FF. Don't expect to buy any new Tamron or Sigma lenses for Pentax because they abandoned the mount. The Sigma 50mm EX macro f2.8 is cheap and bloody sharp.

I know what you mean about "feel". The K-1 is my favorite camera ever but the small APSC bodies ( K-7, K-3, K-5 ) have the best ergonomics of any camera I've ever held ( IMO ). They K-1 has a tilt screen and is slightly bulkier which is an acceptable trade off for me.

Over the years I've concluded that no single camera is perfect at everything. I consider Pentax to be my favorite though and I'll grab one of my Pentax bodies before anything else if it suits my need ... which is to say: non-action stills photography where I'm prepared to carry around the bulk of a DSLR. For everything else I have another camera ( Olympus OM-D EM-5 II and Sony a6000 ) but I don't invest heavily in those systems.

Good luck!

I have a K-5 II, K-3 II, and a K-1 II

I still use them all. In terms of output I can rarely tell which camera took which photo. That's not to say there is zero difference but in practical terms they are all very capable.

All my Pentax bodies have been reliable. The models I own aren't plagued with any known issues. In fact they have no issues.

Not much to add really but just to hammer home the point, don't expect good video or fast auto-focus. The newer the body the better the auto-focus. These are frequent criticisms about Pentax ( up until the K-3 III ) but honestly for the type of shooting I do I'm more than satisfied with the auto-focus and I never record video.

I haven't checked what the going price is for these bodies but if the K-3 isn't much more then I would go that route. I can get 13x19 prints out of my K-5 no problem but I have more "crop-ability" with my K-3. My K-3 II has GPS and my K-5 II has a built in flash and those two differences is basically what decides which one I'll use. If I had to pick one, I'd prefer built in GPS.

For Pentax APSC I have a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and Sigma 10-20 f3.5. Both are HSM (auto focus motor built in) lenses and both are excellent. My 17-50 in particular is very, very sharp. Otherwise, I have a collection of Sigma and Tamron full frame prime's and zooms. The Tamron 70-200 is probably my most used lens on either APSC or FF. Don't expect to buy any new Tamron or Sigma lenses for Pentax because they abandoned the mount. The Sigma 50mm EX macro f2.8 is cheap and bloody sharp.

I know what you mean about "feel". The K-1 is my favorite camera ever but the small APSC bodies ( K-7, K-3, K-5 ) have the best ergonomics of any camera I've ever held ( IMO ). They K-1 has a tilt screen and is slightly bulkier which is an acceptable trade off for me.

Over the years I've concluded that no single camera is perfect at everything. I consider Pentax to be my favorite though and I'll grab one of my Pentax bodies before anything else if it suits my need ... which is to say: non-action stills photography where I'm prepared to carry around the bulk of a DSLR. For everything else I have another camera ( Olympus OM-D EM-5 II and Sony a6000 ) but I don't invest heavily in those systems.

Good luck!

Daniel Gonzalez, EckyH and Resiema have reacted to this post.

#8 · July 26, 2023, 12:14 pm

Quote from Resiema on July 26, 2023, 12:14 pm

Quote from red5isalive on July 25, 2023, 7:58 pm

The K5 series are known by being a classic camera, they work great (I have a K5 since 9 years ago) and the Iso 80 capability plus how they manage shadows make them great cameras. (my dad an a friend also picked one copy after me recomending them this model). Now, is it particulary fast for sport? It's not. Is it capable? It is. But is not a Canon. Is it capable of doing landscape? Certainly but it's an APS-C body, with a 1.5x crop sensor, so it's not similar to shoot with a FF camera.

That’s great to hear! It seems that the 16MP Sensor is really nice.

Thankfully I don’t do sports neither do I shoot other fast moving objects like that, so the rather slow won’t be annoying.

Now, can I ask why do you think about those 2 models specificaly? From the K5-II I have heard the "good one" is the K5-IIS, and from the K3's there's little to no difference between a K3 and a K3-II but I think my K3-II was slightly faster or more accurate in AF than the K3. Not by a big margin thought.

I ask about these two models because they seem to be really good price-performance wise. I always really liked their design and the images they produce. I asked about the K-5II and K-3 because I think they would fit well in my price range. (With the K-5II I would be able to focus more on buying good lenses and the K-3 for the more modern body)

If you are looking for a mid telephoto lens or a big big telephoto lens I can reccomend the Pentax DA* 50-135mm f2.8, produces great images even stop down and yes the SDM motor is known fail BUT this lens (the 16-50mm I think is the exception to that, but please correct me if I am wrong) you can pass it to screw-mount AF and so you can still use and enjoy it.

That could be a lens that I would add to my purchase list, but I don’t need a tele for the start. 🙂

I will throw the Pentax F series here also because there are great to superb lenses (i'm rthinking the F 50mm, the F28mm, the F 100mm, also the F 15mm (but the 135mm bang for the buck is the manual M 135mm f3.5) ) and zooms and very cost effective lenses in this fakily (like the 35-70mm) . But @James knows more than I do about the F Series and he even has some video/s about it (you can check it out here: https://www.snappiness.space/my-odd-obsession-with-pentax-f-series-prime-lenses/ and James will provide the video I hope)

That seems like another great option! I like using old manual primes, using them takes patience sometime, but it is worth it IMO. (I will definitely check out James‘ video about them)

I'd say two more things:

First of all is before jumping into Pentax please remember that there are fewer available options than in other systems, i'm talking about lenses and bodies, specially newer ones. But for example long telephoto lenses are quite hard to find (I know by experience) or expensive.

ANY (or almost any) information on lenses and bodies you can ever need you might most likely find it in Pentaxforums in their database. It has helped me A LOT during the years. Really. https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

So I hope this kind of helps in some way.

All the best!

Yes, you can see that Pentax is a bit of a niche player. But I personally don't mind, I even see that as an advantage, because you can get the equipment cheaper 😉

It definitely helped me! Thank you very much 😊

Quote from red5isalive on July 25, 2023, 7:58 pm

The K5 series are known by being a classic camera, they work great (I have a K5 since 9 years ago) and the Iso 80 capability plus how they manage shadows make them great cameras. (my dad an a friend also picked one copy after me recomending them this model). Now, is it particulary fast for sport? It's not. Is it capable? It is. But is not a Canon. Is it capable of doing landscape? Certainly but it's an APS-C body, with a 1.5x crop sensor, so it's not similar to shoot with a FF camera.

That’s great to hear! It seems that the 16MP Sensor is really nice.

Thankfully I don’t do sports neither do I shoot other fast moving objects like that, so the rather slow won’t be annoying.

Now, can I ask why do you think about those 2 models specificaly? From the K5-II I have heard the "good one" is the K5-IIS, and from the K3's there's little to no difference between a K3 and a K3-II but I think my K3-II was slightly faster or more accurate in AF than the K3. Not by a big margin thought.

I ask about these two models because they seem to be really good price-performance wise. I always really liked their design and the images they produce. I asked about the K-5II and K-3 because I think they would fit well in my price range. (With the K-5II I would be able to focus more on buying good lenses and the K-3 for the more modern body)

If you are looking for a mid telephoto lens or a big big telephoto lens I can reccomend the Pentax DA* 50-135mm f2.8, produces great images even stop down and yes the SDM motor is known fail BUT this lens (the 16-50mm I think is the exception to that, but please correct me if I am wrong) you can pass it to screw-mount AF and so you can still use and enjoy it.

That could be a lens that I would add to my purchase list, but I don’t need a tele for the start. 🙂

I will throw the Pentax F series here also because there are great to superb lenses (i'm rthinking the F 50mm, the F28mm, the F 100mm, also the F 15mm (but the 135mm bang for the buck is the manual M 135mm f3.5) ) and zooms and very cost effective lenses in this fakily (like the 35-70mm) . But @James knows more than I do about the F Series and he even has some video/s about it (you can check it out here: https://www.snappiness.space/my-odd-obsession-with-pentax-f-series-prime-lenses/ and James will provide the video I hope)

That seems like another great option! I like using old manual primes, using them takes patience sometime, but it is worth it IMO. (I will definitely check out James‘ video about them)

I'd say two more things:

First of all is before jumping into Pentax please remember that there are fewer available options than in other systems, i'm talking about lenses and bodies, specially newer ones. But for example long telephoto lenses are quite hard to find (I know by experience) or expensive.

ANY (or almost any) information on lenses and bodies you can ever need you might most likely find it in Pentaxforums in their database. It has helped me A LOT during the years. Really. https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/

So I hope this kind of helps in some way.

All the best!

Yes, you can see that Pentax is a bit of a niche player. But I personally don't mind, I even see that as an advantage, because you can get the equipment cheaper 😉

It definitely helped me! Thank you very much 😊

Daniel Gonzalez has reacted to this post.

#9 · July 26, 2023, 12:24 pm

Quote from Resiema on July 26, 2023, 12:24 pm

Quote from EckyH on July 25, 2023, 8:42 pm

Quote from Resiema on July 25, 2023, 6:52 pm

So both K-5II had some dead pixels on the display, which is something that wouldn't be that annoying but I just wanted to know if that is something common for the K-5 series.

I don't know that. But at least it isn't as known as the failures of the early SDM, the aperture block failure of the K-30/K-50/K-500/K-S1/K-S2/early K-70 and the backfocus issue of the K10D. Neither my K-5IIm nor the K-5IIs have dead pixels on the display. Perhaps next time they'll show a dead pixel - who knows. 😉

Hmm maybe it was just a coincidence that both of them had dead pixels on the display.

The 35/2.4 and the 16-45/4 seem like two really interesting options. I would also be interested in the 2.8 Macro Limited, but I think for the start the 35/2.4 could be enough.

Imho the 35/2.4 is very good if you count in the price. Second hand you can get it here for less than 100€. My copy is reasonable sharp at f/2.4, better at f/2.8 and between f/4 and f/11 very good with the best part between f/5.6 and f/8 - regarding to centre sharpness.

I put the 16-45 into the same quality range as the 2.4/35: a bit plasticky, a bit sloppy, but optically good enough for me. And: it has a close focus distance of 28cm, even at 45mm focal length. The attached image is to show what you can expect (just the very basic scene referred workflow in darktable, not even lens correction nor noise reduction and I left the EXIF data in the JPEG). The bokeh of that lens is nothing to write home about.

That is really cool to hear! So you could do some macro with the 16-45? And that centre sharpness of the 35/2.4 sounds exciting too.

Are Pentax' ultrasonic lenses fragile in general?

Let me answer that with a video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo61t5fH6Qw

And for the record a second one with a kit zoom lens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uszGZejleE4

Decide for yourself. 😉

As far as I know the early SDM AF tends to die prematurely. Some of that lenses can be converted to screw drive AF. At the moment I don't know which series of later SDM lenses are safe.

E.

That's what I mean! It's so amazing how the Pentax cameras pass the toughest conditions without any problems.

So the SDM AF in the early models are kinda fragile compared to other Pentax lenses? Noted.
When converted to screw drive AF, are they much slower than with the faulty SDM?

Quote from EckyH on July 25, 2023, 8:42 pm

Quote from Resiema on July 25, 2023, 6:52 pm

So both K-5II had some dead pixels on the display, which is something that wouldn't be that annoying but I just wanted to know if that is something common for the K-5 series.

I don't know that. But at least it isn't as known as the failures of the early SDM, the aperture block failure of the K-30/K-50/K-500/K-S1/K-S2/early K-70 and the backfocus issue of the K10D. Neither my K-5IIm nor the K-5IIs have dead pixels on the display. Perhaps next time they'll show a dead pixel - who knows. 😉

Hmm maybe it was just a coincidence that both of them had dead pixels on the display.

The 35/2.4 and the 16-45/4 seem like two really interesting options. I would also be interested in the 2.8 Macro Limited, but I think for the start the 35/2.4 could be enough.

Imho the 35/2.4 is very good if you count in the price. Second hand you can get it here for less than 100€. My copy is reasonable sharp at f/2.4, better at f/2.8 and between f/4 and f/11 very good with the best part between f/5.6 and f/8 - regarding to centre sharpness.

I put the 16-45 into the same quality range as the 2.4/35: a bit plasticky, a bit sloppy, but optically good enough for me. And: it has a close focus distance of 28cm, even at 45mm focal length. The attached image is to show what you can expect (just the very basic scene referred workflow in darktable, not even lens correction nor noise reduction and I left the EXIF data in the JPEG). The bokeh of that lens is nothing to write home about.

That is really cool to hear! So you could do some macro with the 16-45? And that centre sharpness of the 35/2.4 sounds exciting too.

Are Pentax' ultrasonic lenses fragile in general?

Let me answer that with a video:

And for the record a second one with a kit zoom lens:

Decide for yourself. 😉

As far as I know the early SDM AF tends to die prematurely. Some of that lenses can be converted to screw drive AF. At the moment I don't know which series of later SDM lenses are safe.

E.

That's what I mean! It's so amazing how the Pentax cameras pass the toughest conditions without any problems.

So the SDM AF in the early models are kinda fragile compared to other Pentax lenses? Noted.
When converted to screw drive AF, are they much slower than with the faulty SDM?

#10 · July 26, 2023, 12:36 pm

Quote from James Warner on July 25, 2023, 9:03 pm

I have not heard of chronic failures with the K-5 or K-3 series cameras, so while there might be something here or there, they are mostly still all running like tanks.

That‘s great! I guess that some defects like dead pixels on the display are just some rare cases.

Good advice here already so I won't repeat it, but I'm curious what lenses you have and like right now for Canon? Or liked in the past with Sony? Maybe we can help there find some Pentax alternatives.

So right now I own three lenses for Canon: The 50mm 1.8 STM, the 28-80 3.5-5.6 USM I and the Sigma DG 70-300 4-5.6. But most of the time I only use the 50 1.8, as the other two blur too quickly and are not as sharp as the 50mm.

On the A-Mount I really liked the Minolta AF 50 1.7, the Minolta AF 70-210 f4 (The infamous beercan), the Minolta 75-300 4.5-5.6 (The big beercan) the Minolta 28-105 3.5-4.5 and I sometimes liked to use the Walimex 8mm Fisheye. (I still have all of those lenses as both my father and I own them, and I shoot my old Minoltas from time to time)

For now, a standard zoom, such as the 16-45 and a prime lens would be enough for me.

However, I would like to know if there are lenses similar to my favorite A-mount lenses for Pentax. 🙂

Are the K-5II or the K-3 still worth it?

Recent forum posts