K3 Vs K3 Mk.11

Can anyone confirm if the K3mk11 justifies the extra cost, I do not anticipate photographing stars so that facility would be an extravagant extra.
I am more interested in image quality

may i ask what you are useing at the moment
as i went straight for the k3ii i just said sod it chris had the offer on the k3ii which bought it to the same price as the k3
its basicly the same camera with out the flash but do you really need a popup flash

Nikon D800E, great image quality on a tripod, but a brute for a 64yo to carry around.
Would prefer a pop up flash, however shooting mainly landscapes I thought the increased pixel facility would enhance my main interest or is it just a marketing con ?

isant the 800e ff

The 3.5 main differences are:
GPS, so logging of location of camera if you want to turn it on, plus astrotracing without the need for the O-GPS1 addon.
Pixel Shift high quality mode
Better SR, offering 1 extra stop of stabilisation. (4.5 vs 3.5 on the K-3 original)
Better software of tracking AF apparently.

Apart from that, they're essentially the same camera.
No inbuilt wifi, or floppy/twisty screen.

Regarding the resolution component of IQ, the K-3II is worth considering for the pixel shift alone; no, it's not a marketing con - especially as the latest provided software (DCU 5.5.1) incorporates the motion correction function from the K-1 which works fine with the K-3II. As you're a tripod man, this will assist in your landscape pictures - it does mine. The other pieces of IQ (contrast, colour rendition) have always been Pentax strong points.

In-body shake reduction is good, and the AF tracking is improved over the K-3.

But then, I am biased!

Already committed to a K3mk2, and yes the D800E is FF, that is the second FF camera and quite honestly I will not miss the advantages over crop sensor. I will be following all those who have invested in the K1, some apparently appear to be trying to raise funds by selling kit