K-3 or K-3 II?

We seem to have two alternatives here, as I mentioned in my EPZ review, just recently posted. But which variant would you buy?

The K-3 has a built in flash and is excellent all round. It also cost less than the new version.

The K-3 II has no flash, but it does have the new high resolution mode, a built in GPS unit and a built in astrotracer. The price is higher.

I'll put up a poll and we can see which one most of us would go for, just out of curiosity!

I have a K3 which is a great piece of kit. However even after a lot of information gleaning and changing of settings the AF has improved but tracking is still not great. I think it`s worth trading in a K30 which in comparison is very pedestrian and just doesn`t have the same IQ.

The K-3 mk1 would have to be massively cheaper than the mk2:

Reasons for the K-3ii
-dont use flash often
-built-in astrotracer = awesome
-improved SR
-other improvements are nice
-its a II not a I so it must be twice as good right?

I'm not interested in GPS or astro-tracer, would miss the flash (I use bif quite a lot for fill in and although I have a number of external flashes, don't really want to fill my pockets with one every time I go out travelling light) However, SR improvements, particularly in panning would be very useful, I find the getting a good sharp panned shot much harder with the K3 than my old K5

Don't use the build-in flash anywhere near enough to miss it; build in astrotracer - how cool is that! Not to mention improved AF and SR. The price difference is well worth the upgrades in my eyes. Little piggy bank on my desk is slowly filling up. Planning to treat myself to one for Christmas.

I'm very happy with my K-3, but the pixel shift mode on the K-3ii raises my curiosity, particularly for landscape images. If I had more time to do photography I may be tempted, but as it is my existing kit (K-3 and K-5iis) is more than good enough for my current use. If I were buying new? Not sure, it would depend on the price difference.

Regards
David

I'll take a plain vanilla K3 ..... extraordinary value (I love a bargain!), plus for me the built-in flash is an essential ingredient for the Pentax Flash system as a wireless controller / master flash.

I value the P-TTL aspects and convenience of the optical wireless triggering, as well as the important flash control aid in the distance / range indicator that the dedicated system provides, and don't want to move to a radio controlled manual system.

How has SR improved?

The SR system has been upgraded, which perhaps is what makes the high resolution mode possible.

K3 II for me. The price difference isn't huge, and the AF improvements (even if only slight) and SR improvements for panning are enough for me to pay that little bit extra.

Simon.

Think there should 3rd/4th options for voting: " I have a k-3 and will/will not be buying a K-3II"

I was just interested in how many would choose one or the other, so choose the one you would buy now if you didn't have a K-3 already.

I didn't vote for me, but I voted for Sue, who said she definitely wanted a flash built in.

I won't be buying either, as I don't have the money, or even the desire to buy a new body, but since I already have the Pentax GPS unit there would be little point in me forking out the extra for the K-3 II. Besides I would miss the onboard flash too much. It is useful as a quick fill flash or as a flash trigger.

Fair enough Gwyn, but if you feel inclined to vote that would be a vote presumably for the K-3?

I think what Gwyn said reflects how a lot of people would view this poll, i.e. they would not be temped to buy either body for a range of reasons - the approach maybe reflects the choices given to the Greeks on Sunday: neither option would meet really their needs, and so the whole approach is/was flawed.