Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-24-2016, 05:27 AM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 77
Pentax k1 versus k3 real difference?

I posted a thread recently on lenses for a k3, though are looking to find some information on the k1 versus the k3, and what the real advantages are apart from megapixels/ and it being full frame.

With my focus on full body and 3/4 portraits only for the web, plus the amount of lenses available for k3 crop and overall $$ range versus k1, am i missing out on much by not having the k1 or in image quality? Any feedback would be great

10-24-2016, 05:35 AM - 1 Like   #2
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
Well, the full frame is a big deal in environmental portraiture. Basically with the K1 you get the ability to shoot with less depth of field with wider angle lenses. Being full frame gives it better high ISO and also means it has a slower frame rate. It also has better tracking auto focus than the K3.

It is definitely a better camera than the K3 but whether those differences are important to you only you can tell.
10-24-2016, 05:41 AM - 1 Like   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Boston,MA
Posts: 258
If you have lots of legacy K mount glass, then K1 is really nice; high ISO and DR are significantly better on the k1. AF speed and SR are also slightly better than the K3.
However I don't think you'll see noticeable image quality jump from K3 to K1 unless you need to do huge prints. I think a K3 plus a few good APSC glass should be enough.
10-24-2016, 05:44 AM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ffking's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Old South Wales
Posts: 6,029
Although the OP says apart from being full frame, I'd add one other advantage of bigger sensors in general, which is the smoother gradation of hues and shades, which is quite a plus in terms of portraiture - but whether that would survive the cramping of sRGB for the web is perhaps debatable

10-24-2016, 05:53 AM - 1 Like   #5
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,186
There are all sorts of things, like flip screen, more total MP, faster AF, FF sensor and viewfinder, dual card slots, higher ISO range.
The K-3 has faster burst mode and is slightly smaller.
Pentax K-1 vs. Pentax K-3 vs. Pentax 645Z - Pentax Camera Comparison - PentaxForums.com

But! If you personally dont feel the need to upgrade, then dont. Buy lenses instead. You should only upgrade when you can name the specific features that you want/need. Well, or if you have too much money laying around, then go for it

QuoteOriginally posted by yozza Quote
With my focus on full body and 3/4 portraits only for the web, plus the amount of lenses available for k3 crop and overall $$ range versus k1, am i missing out on much by not having the k1 or in image quality? Any feedback would be great
For portraits you might be able to get "bigger bokeh" on the K-1, since it is FF. The DoF would appear to be more shallow. But you would also need an FF portrait lens, and those are not cheap. You can look on Flickr and 500px and the sample photo gallery on this forum and compare the photos taken with K-3 and K-1. If you can spot a difference that is important to you, then you might want to think about it
10-24-2016, 07:27 AM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
DW58's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Rural Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,061
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
There are all sorts of things, like flip screen, more total MP, faster AF, FF sensor and viewfinder, dual card slots, higher ISO range.
Doesn't the K-3 have dual card slots?
10-24-2016, 07:34 AM - 1 Like   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,913
One reason to stay with the K-3 vs K-1 may be be if you never plan to shoot important work above ISO 1600 (give or take a stop).

At ISO 100, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between K-3 and K-1, but above ISO 1600, K-1 high-ISO performance is much better than K-3.

ISO 1600+ shooting with either device is probably not that relevant to portrait shooting though, I guess. But then again, unpredictable natural light, or shooting interior scenes, sometimes pushes portraiture into high-ISO.

10-24-2016, 07:36 AM   #8
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,186
QuoteOriginally posted by DW58 Quote
Doesn't the K-3 have dual card slots?
Yes, it does! Sorry for the inaccuracy
10-24-2016, 08:03 AM   #9
Veteran Member
joergens.mi's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 408
QuoteOriginally posted by yozza Quote
With my focus on full body and 3/4 portraits only for the web, plus the amount of lenses available for k3 crop and overall $$ range versus k1, am i missing out on much by not having the k1 or in image quality? Any feedback would be great
I think for your purpose there is no difference between the two cameras. Yes the K-1 is the more advanced camera, but your purpose is the web, typically 2.3 to 8 Megapixels (1920*1200 or 3840x 2160), therefore the K3 will be more than sufficient. Your portrait-range is from 38 mm to 200 mm with an APSC-camera.
10-24-2016, 08:16 AM   #10
csa
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
csa's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Montana mountains
Posts: 10,133
QuoteOriginally posted by DW58 Quote
Doesn't the K-3 have dual card slots?
Indeed it does!
10-24-2016, 08:43 AM   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,611
QuoteOriginally posted by yozza Quote
I posted a thread recently on lenses for a k3, though are looking to find some information on the k1 versus the k3, and what the real advantages are apart from megapixels/ and it being full frame.

With my focus on full body and 3/4 portraits only for the web, plus the amount of lenses available for k3 crop and overall $$ range versus k1, am i missing out on much by not having the k1 or in image quality? Any feedback would be great
The K3 is a very capable camera and produced some amazing images for me. I did own the K3 and the K5IIs and sold both in favor of K1.

Reason number one was that I shoot landscapes and print big prints. The additional resolution, better dynamic range and low ISO performance are better on the K1. The articulating screen is a godsend. Another big reason was that I could finally use my full frame lenses at their intended focal lengths. The price difference between K1 and K3 is significant. There are less full frame lenses available vs. lenses for APSc cameras and again the prices are higher accordingly for full frame lenses. Overall the full frame system (body plus lenses) will cost you more and only you can determine if your needs warrant the use of FF vs. APSc.
10-24-2016, 09:47 AM - 1 Like   #12
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by yozza Quote
I posted a thread recently on lenses for a k3, though are looking to find some information on the k1 versus the k3, and what the real advantages are apart from megapixels/ and it being full frame.

With my focus on full body and 3/4 portraits only for the web, plus the amount of lenses available for k3 crop and overall $$ range versus k1, am i missing out on much by not having the k1 or in image quality? Any feedback would be great
The 8 FPS of K-3 and the 23 image buffer make it better for sports, action and wildlife shooting, sometimes.

The cost of lenses for the K-1 is simply mind numbing. I ordered mine a few weeks ago and started shooting, but, there was no bundled kit lens. Anything you can use as a kit is expensive, and compared to my APS_c lens selection completely lacking in functionality.

The k-1 has the 15-30, for APS-c I have the Sigma 8-16.
The K-1 has the 28-105, the K-1 has the 16-85, but also has the 18-135 which I use. Until there is a 28-200 equivalent to my 18-135 I won't really have a walk around lens for it. That's just disappointing given that walk around images in the field is what it's designed for.

However, the K-1 has given new life to my 50 macro. I didn't like the lens on APS_c. I love it on the K-1. And I have pressed an old FA 35-80 into use but, honestly with such limited range, I'm usually happier walking around with the 50 on the camera and the 60-250 ready to put on the camera.

I've posted on my preference of the K-3 for birding here
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/332292-k-1-k-3-birding.html

But I have to add to that, I'm walking around with a K-1 in my hands for basic images, with the K-3 and DA*200 and 1.4 TC in a shoulder bag on my hikes. As much as I thought the K-1 would be a studio camera for me, and the second camera out of the bag, , it's made it's way out of the bag and into my hands as my camera of first choice, everywhere except wildlife and birding or on long hikes where I only take one body. The K-3 still wins hands down for portability and keeping your weight down.

From my perspective , you don't lose much with a K-3, but that doesn't mean you won't appreciate a K-1 if you decide to go that way. Just be prepared to pay when it comes to acquiring glass.
10-24-2016, 09:50 AM - 1 Like   #13
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
macman24054's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Axton, VA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 461
If we are talking about 8 bit jpeg for online use the the K3 is overkill. The K1 would be like taking a cannon to knife fight!!!
10-24-2016, 09:55 AM   #14
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by macman24054 Quote
If we are talking about 8 bit jpeg for online use the the K3 is overkill. The K1 would be like taking a cannon to knife fight!!!
Regardless of what you post on online, you still have to look at it on a monitor for post processing
But you're right, and really, I bought the K-3 for frame rate and buffer size, for on-line portraits a K-5 or K-5ii will get it done. My wife still uses her K-5 and sees no reason to change. The K-5 has better Dynamic Range than a K-3 and as far as I'm concerned, better colour. My K-1 replaced my K-5, not my K-3. To a certain extent, you're talking different cameras for different purposes.

To buy a K-3 you have to ask, do I need 8 FPS and a 23 shot buffer, and the 1.5x long lens advantage. That's what I bought mine for. If you don't need those things and you don't need the resolution of the K-1, a K-5 series camera will save you a pile of money.

Last edited by normhead; 10-24-2016 at 10:16 AM.
10-24-2016, 10:03 AM   #15
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
macman24054's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Axton, VA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 461
Jokes aside I would have to agree with Norm on the K5
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, k1, k1 versus k3, k3, lenses, pentax k1, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K5iis versus K1 ISO range Wild Mark Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 06-27-2016 12:11 AM
Bali Reverie - A Pentax K1 real World review pinholecam Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 10 06-23-2016 09:45 PM
Pentax K1 / K3 Live View Depth of Field Preview sdgreen Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 12 05-20-2016 09:56 AM
Laboratory tests versus Real-life usage: Are Pentax lenses being misrepresented? KDAFA Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 58 05-04-2013 08:00 AM
Olympus E-P1 versus Pentax K-x in real life test jct us101 Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 4 07-02-2011 07:46 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:46 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top