K3 vs K3 ii

Like most I’m currently waiting to see what the new APS-C flagship has in store before making a decision.

But... I’ve been looking at used K3’s and K3 II’s. What are the differences between the two? And how do they compare to the K70 and KP. Been away from Pentax for a long time but thinking of returning to the light. My old camera was a KS2 for reference.

Thanks in advance.

I use the K-3 II and Sue uses the K-3 because she wanted the built in flash. Otherwise, they both take superb quality images.

---

Best regards, John

I use a K3, not a K3ii, because the K3ii didn't exist when I bought the K3. When the K3ii came out, the only major functional difference was built-in GPS instead of built-in flash. There were tweaks/improvements in other areas but no big changes, certainly not enough to make me think I would take better photos. As John says above, the K3 is capable of taking superb images. Ultimately, the choice between K3 and K3ii comes down to whether you want built-in flash of GPS. Of course, if someone else in the family also wants a new camera, it's always possible to follow John's example and get both...

Would I swap the K3 for a KP? No, lack of top LCD and second SD card slot overcomes gain in low light performance and flippy screen for me, but others may (and do) go the other way. And the promised flagship? At the moment, I can't think of what changes/improvements it might have that would be sufficient to wean me off the K3. However, different people have different photographic needs. And shiny new things can be a powerful lure that overcomes mere reason...

Steve

I think the Mk2 had Pixel shift as well?

In terms of pop up flash - I rarely used mine so that wouldn't be a glaring omission in my view.

---

AKA Welshwizard/PWynneJ
Assorted Pentax/Nikon/Mamiya stuff

Correct, pixel shift as well as a lack of AA filter

---

Gareth
Welsh Photographer

My outfit: K1 gripped - Pentax D FA 24-70mm - Sigma 70-200mm OS HSM - Pentax modified DA* 60-250mm f4 - Irix 15mm Firefly - Sigma 50-500mm - FA 50mm f1.4 - Tamron SP 90mm macro - Pentax AF 540 FGZ Ii

My Flickr
My PPG
My 500px

Neither the K3 nor K3ii has an anti-aliasing (AA) filter. That filter seems to be a thing of the past for modern cameras.

The K3 does not have pixel-shift, the K3ii does have it. It featured big in the initial marketing of the K3ii. Who actually uses it now, though??

Steve

Apart from testing it out, and proving that it does actually make for sharper images, I have never used it again because the slight increase in quality is one for pixel-peepers. But if you need it, then there it is.

---

Best regards, John

If the K3 or k3ii don't provide sufficient resolution it's more straight forward to use a larger format camera., eg K-1 or 645 without the faff. K-1 images will take quite a lot of enlargement before the image degrades making pixel shift somewhat superfluous.
Whether one wants to emulate a larger format with APS-C is another matter so suppose it's nice to have for those that want it!

---

John K

How large were the files from PS'd images? if they are 96MP plus files then it will be beyond a lot of older or poorly equipped computers to process the images. My i3 PC struggles with images from the K-1 and D810, but didn't for the K-3. If it struggles with 36MP, especially when I use Nik plug-ins such as Silver EfexPro2, i dread to think how long it would take to edit an image that is generated through pixel shift.

---

AKA Welshwizard/PWynneJ
Assorted Pentax/Nikon/Mamiya stuff

I always liked the idea of Pixel shift and thought I would use it a lot but as none of my favourite processing programmes can handle it I have never actually bothered.

---

No equipment list here but thanks for taking an interest. My Flickr

The JPEG file size is the same as any other image as far as I recall. The RAW one might be huge....Either way, the quality difference is there, but as said above, why not use a larger format if it's that critical? A 645Z would do very nicely.

Having said that, the K-1 is so good......

---

Best regards, John

Ok thanks guys for the help. So it seems they both have all the features I’d need. Just differences are pixel shift, flash or gps. One has an astrotracer built in correct? Is there any difference between it and the dedicated gps module? Either way I’ll wait until the new flagship is released to see if it’s worth it. Can’t wait.

Indeed, what's another 1/3/6/9 ? months.

---

No equipment list here but thanks for taking an interest. My Flickr

I can only dream of using a K3-II. I own one but I've never seen it so far. I bought it used from a fellow forum member and had it sent to some friends in UK to bring it to me in Spain when they returned in May. Unfortunately due to a serious leg injury, my friends haven't returned yet. Hopefully, they'll be back towards the end of October and I can play with it then. In the meantime, I still use my trusty K5 and K5-II, MX-1, and occasionally the K20D gets an outing. All still very capable cameras but I'm looking forward to seeing the images from The K3-II's 24Mp sensor. Sigh . . .

I could use an articulating screen though so I may be on the lookout for a KP soon

---

Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

Going back to the OP's original question concerning K3s vs K70 vs KP - any views?
I was hoping that K-new would answer my requirements but that seems less and less likely now I've seen the various Pentax produced videos.
It lacks a flippy screen and it's not likely to have improved video.
I have a KS2 and a K5iiS and I was hoping for something like a merger of these two with technical improvements.
Now the obvious suggestion would be the KP but I have tried one and for the first time in 60 years I picked up a Pentax which did not fall into my hands and feel comfortable.
So does the KP become more comfortable with use? Does the K70 offer any real improvement over the KS2?
Should I keep my money until a new consumer level body becomes available