Initial thought on new K3

It's clearly a personal thing ... And probably also about what anyone is most used to, and the muscles get sort of conditioned to feel comfortable with certain things. I find the vertical holding position with the grip to be exactly the same as for the landscape position, plus the buttons and dials fall exactly under the fingers in the same way. A quick flip of the camera supported by the left hand is all it takes, and I value this exactness of the grip and finger positions.

To me the movement of rotating the wrist onto the top of the vertical camera feels like a contortion.

This is surely one of those debates that has something to do with Marmite ....

the thing is do you use your left or right eye as that can make a lot of difference, my strongest eye is my left so when i tilt the camera to portrait, being right handed, my hands are in exactly the same operating poition as landscape , so left underneath for support and right now resting on top with thumb and fingers not having to move at all plus i can still back button focus.

Ha I was thinking the same thing. If you rotate the camera clockwise (as viewed from the back, looking through the lens, normal shooting position) then yes your wrist has to bend backwards.

If you rotate anticlockwise though, there's barely anything in it position wise, as your wrist simply rises across to your forehead, in a very natural ergonomic position.

Not for me it isn't, that's why I use a grip, its not as if a grip weighs a great deal and really improves the portrait orientation for me. The K3 battery life is also significantly less than my K5, so that is another bonus of using a grip. Of course I don't do a lot (any?) street shooting so the bulk is not an issue. Although I do have a few primes, a lot of my shooting is with fast zooms, so a small body is not a great benefit for my way of work. Actually I found the k20D and grip a really nice fit for my smallish hands

Thanks folk, some interesting opinions. Also, as someone pointed out, the weight is primarily down to the lens. The Sigma comes in at almost 1.5Kg as opposed to the K3 at a mere 800g.

Fascinated by the opposing opinions of using a grip. I got mine as part of the deal, probably wouldn't have bought one otherwise. I'd always read that it helped to balance the camera with a heavy lens. Not used it enough with/without to form an opinion. However, one area that almost makes it worth it's weigh is the fact that it takes 6 AA batteries. Not that I ought to need them as I now have 4 batteries but you never know ...

I think for me the grip does make shooting in portrait a bit more comfortable. It might even facilitate the use of the various button and dials. Butthat said, I don't have a problem without a grip.

I guess I have a fun time ahead learning

I have two Pentax K3's and also single versions of each of the K5 variations. Yet in each and every possible shooting environment: studio, outdoor at any temperature, etc (even with any camera setting). I've found that the Pentax K3 by far has considerably better battery life.

But the Pentax K3 gets even better in worse weather, one of the best performing interchangeable lens cameras in bad weather, especially rain, or especially when it gets cold. I've literally tested it out in -40 celsius for extended periods, even had it completely buried in snow. It started to show some very minor signs, but still worked just fine.

Btw a marketing tool that has not yet been used (hope to see it as a marketable feature in full-frame sometime soon). That Pentax WR does even better than any of the flagship Nikons (even full-frame, with exception to the non flagship Nikon AW)

Have just been pointing and shooting at everything trying to get used to the different feel of the K3. Loaded the photos onto the pc and had a look.

Taken through the kitchen window with the Sigma 70-200mm at 200mm. ISO400, f8 and 1/400sec. Shot in RAW (DNG), with a bit of Lightroom PP and converted to jpg. This is a 100% crop and to me that looks reasonably sharp.

Not my experience at all. Over the past 6 months I have found that my K3 will take 700-1000 shots on one charge, whereas my K5 was closer to 1200 to 1500, both using my "normal" settings. I don't do a huge amount of reviewing or using the built- in flash. I have recently taken to using continuous medium setting on my K3 to stop the buffer filling so quickly. ( I take a lot of photographs on railway charters. Locomotive run pasts can last several minutes and a few burst of 5 -6 frames soon fill the buffer! Us steam photographers are quite keen on the perfect "rods-down" and a high frame rate can be useful I achieving this) I always carry a couple of spare batteries even when using a grip, no complaints about the stamina of the K3 but the K5 just went on for ever on one charge!