I was looking to buy a Pentax K-5 in the next couple of months. But with the announcement of the new K-30 im now currently questioning that decision. Is there any reason to go for the more expensive K-5 apart from an extra 1 fps over the new K-30?

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The Neocamera comparison omits mention of the K-30's 12-bit readout, compared to the K-5's 14-bit readout. \$\endgroup\$
    – coneslayer
    Commented May 28, 2012 at 12:10
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Oh, and we have a question on 12-vs-14-bit-raw: photo.stackexchange.com/questions/17616/… \$\endgroup\$
    – mattdm
    Commented May 29, 2012 at 3:15

2 Answers 2


As you can see from a side-by-side feature comparison, the K-5 has a few advantages — 14-bit processing, somewhat faster shutter, a few more modes on the dial. It has a top LCD screen, and it has a magnesium-alloy body. On the other hand, the K-30 has some improvements of its own. Whether these things are compelling to you is a personal decision, but as Digital Photography Review says in their hands-on-preview:

... we can't imagine Pentax expects to sell many K-5s once the K-30 reaches shop shelves.

The K-5 is basically over as a new model, and of course the speculation is rampant on what will replace it. Pentax will surely release something at the K-5's former over-$1000 price point *, and given how exciting the K-30 looks, that will be another hard decision all over again if you wait another few months. (Waiting for that is not my recommendation — my suggestion is to buy a camera and start using it, as the advantages of a real camera in the hand beat two fantasy cameras in the bush every time.)

You may want to consider a used K-5 — it's likely a lot of those will be coming on the market as the technology-generations dance plays out, and the close comparison with the low-priced K-30 will probably mean those are quite affordable. You might even go for a used K-7, which has most of the same features but an older (capable but more noisy) sensor, and spend your budget on lenses.

* I'm leaving this as-is because it's inherently a point-in-time question, but for what it's worth, the K-3 replaces the K-5, and now the rumor mills are on to speculating about what might replace that. It's a never-ending game.


As a former Pentax K-5 user, I can tell you that it has better video quality than a Pentax K-S2. The reason is that it uses older compression with a much higher bitrate and shake reduction has fewer axis "motors" (linear motors).

What about the K-30? I'm not sure, but I think from that model Pentax changed the compression and bitrate.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.