Why is there so many K3 for sale

I'm also torn between the K-3 and K70. I definitely want to upgrade from the K-50 soon, but what can those cameras do that my little K-50 cant? Just curious on your opinions.

I had completely forgotten about pixel shift -- guess what I shall be doing tomorrow ........

I want to upgrade from a K30 some time soon - and had almost decided on a K1, but now I am not so sure.

This might help ....... https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-1/8 It is the image quality page of DPReview's lab test for the Pentax K1.



You can use the drop downs to change one of the cameras compared to the K50 and another to the K70, like this ........



Comparing those images on screen is not really fair, because they are all different sizes - so, you could download the RAWs. I did that for ISO 12800, because one of my main reasons for considering the K1 was high ISO performance. I then corrected white balance in Lightroom, set the correct lens profile for each image and then exported JPEGs that were 5400 pixels wide, which allows an 18" wide print at 300ppi, which is the biggest I ever print. I then took a 600 pixel square crop from each of the JPEGs.

You might find the results interesting ....


This is for a Pentax K50


This is for the full frame Pentax K1


This is for the Pentax K70

Please draw your own conclusions but mine, for what they are worth, are that:

* Both the K1 and K70 completely blow away the K50 at ISO12800

* The K70 is MUCH closer to the K1 than I had expected

* The K1 has a significant amount of moire in the crop - but the K70 doesn't. It is possible that the K70 was set to use moire reduction, but if that was the case, a version without that set could be sharper than this crop.

* Only default noise reduction was used in Lightroom, so optimising noise processing could produce better results

My bottom line here is that the K70 is startlingly better, at high ISO, than I had expected it to be. I think it just might have become my favourite to replace my now ageing K30.

Hope this helps
Andrew

Andrew, thank you so much for this information!

Yes, thanks, its a good clear comparison and the differences are there to see. The K70 obviously punches well above its weight in the IQ / Value ratios, and probably will represent an extraordinary bargain over time, as indeed the K50 has done before it.

However, whilst instructive from a theoretical point of view, the comparison is distinctly odd to my mind .... its limited to the sensor output of course, but really, could any one, individual photographer seriously be considering one or other between the K70 and K1 ?!? They are not intended for the same type of person at all .... they are miles apart in so many aspects .... cost, size / weight, customisations and options etc....so much so that I can't see how anybody could simultaneously be interested in them, unless for two distinctly independant photographic purposes (eg K1 for serious work, and K70 for casual / family use).

I have little interest in what marketing folks "intend" cameras to be used for - or what functionality is included in a camera. My main concern is IQ and especially at high ISO.

Andrew

But a camera is so much more than a sensor in a box. And it is often the physical aspects, controls and interfaces, accessory options and technical photographic aids included that will ensure the best capture. For me, I would still regard the K7 as a superior camera to the K70.

Hi Nigel.
I can see your points in the first 2 sentances however, whilst I appreciate that you have a vested interest, I'm puzzled as to where the K7 excels over the K70 ?
Can you please put me out of my misery ?
Thanks
Peter

Different strokes for different folks ....

For me, a camera is only as good as the output I can produce from it. If I can get decent usable shots at ISO 25,600 from camera A but not from camera B then in my book A is better than B - no matter how many extra bells and whistles B happens to have.

Andrew

Probably my angle on it is well known around here, and of course I like to play a little of the devils advocate ... ... Bit I do truly believe what I'm saying. I see a camera as an image capture device and the sensor is only a part of that.

Specifically, I place great value on many traditional high end SLR features, such as build and construction quality, durability, a bigger size and weight (that means the grip), the extra controls and battery options of the grip, refinements like mirror up and remote control, the wireless flash control ability, dedicated switches and levers for metering, AF modes, focus point selection, etc. Also things like burst speed and info-mational aids in the interface .... These are all aspects of a cameras image capture abilities that I value highly, even more so than pure sensor output.

I suppose to put it simply ....I would have to move to a K5II, K3 or K1 to get a camera I would regard as a significant improvement over my the K7. The output quality improvement I would get from other options in the range, eg K50, K-S1, K-S2, K70 would be negated in my view by the loss of any number of those other important features I mentioned above.

I owned a KX then a KR before moving to a K5 and last year a K3. The entry models have upped specs since then with real pentaprisms and weather seals BUT have inferior noisy shutters, inferior sensor shake to clean method, and more plastic and less ergonomic bodies to name a few. I don't think the top models are easier to use BUT they can reward handsomely in time if you really are in to this hobby. If you don't need the higher quieter longer life shutters, don't need all the mirror up, remote settings etc or all the sockets for grips, microphones, external power etc then fair enough. I couldn't go back to base models although I would like a slightly lighter K3 III camera please Ricoh next time.

I agree with most of that - and that the K70 lacks some of K3 IIs attractive features - but it does have mirror lock, WiFi, pixel shift technology and 4.5 stop IBIS. It is also available - which a K3 III is not.

If a K3 III is launched any time soon, it might well become my favoured option. The price of the body isn't that important to me - but IQ is, which rules out all Pentax bodies apart from the K1 and K70.

Andrew

The entry level models might have plastic panels but they are still extremely well made and are an advantage to me as I tend to prefer a lighter camera if possible - I'm finding most of my photography is travel photography!
But at the end of the day I'm with Andrew - IQ is most important!
Have I seen somewhere that with the K70 they have improved noise reduction in the sensor?

A self-confessed gear head, eh? Therein lies the difference.

Andrew