KP Rented vs. K-1 II

**jawats** · 07-22-2019, 06:24 PM

All,

For a wedding shoot this past week, I rented a KP. My normal camera is a K-3. I have to say, I found the KP acceptable, but also a bit small for my hands, and (truth be told) a bit light. I really enjoy the heft and size of my K-3. I suspect that, if I upgrade, I will be looking towards a K-1. Has anyone used both KP and K-1? Or K-3 and K-1? The dimensions are similar, and the weight of the K-1 II is more, but not excessively so. Plus, the additional MP seems like a good thing.

Thoughts from anyone who has used both?

MarkJerling · 07-22-2019, 06:50 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by jawats

All,

For a wedding shoot this past week, I rented a KP. My normal camera is a K-3. I have to say, I found the KP acceptable, but also a bit small for my hands, and (truth be told) a bit light. I really enjoy the heft and size of my K-3. I suspect that, if I upgrade, I will be looking towards a K-1. Has anyone used both KP and K-1? Or K-3 and K-1? The dimensions are similar, and the weight of the K-1 II is more, but not excessively so. Plus, the additional MP seems like a good thing.

Thoughts from anyone who has used both?

I've not used a KP, but I went from the K-5 (which is nearly identical in size and weight to the K-3) to the K-1II. The K-1II feels only slightly bigger than the K-5, and is heavier, but not unpleasantly so.

**bkpix** · 07-22-2019, 09:11 PM - **1 Like**

I've used a K-1 and KP side by side, though not for a wedding. My sense is the KP is a good deal more nimble than the K-1 and would be easier to use to cover an event. The K-1 felt slow, both to autofocus and to write images to the card, though i suppose with practice I could get used to it. I also like the smaller look of the KP for shooting people; it comes across as more casual.

MarkJerling · 07-23-2019, 02:55 AM - **3 Likes**

I've only shot the one mountaintop wedding with the K-1II and it did a bloody good job.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

robert52 · 07-23-2019, 04:32 AM - **3 Likes**

Just wondering if you own a K3 why did you rent a KP? Thanks

Sandy Hancock · 07-23-2019, 07:23 AM - **1 Like**

I had a K-3, and currently use a KP and two K-1 bodies, both of which are now converted to the Mark II.

If you prefer a meatier body, and are willing to invest into the cost and weight of full frame glass, I would definitely recommend the K-1. I use the KP predominantly for travel (mainly with Limited primes) and to add extra reach with telephoto lenses. It works especially well with the DFA150-450.

But like robert52, I also wonder why you went for a rented KP over your K-3 for a wedding. Unless it was for a second body of course, which I would consider essential for such an event.

But seriously, if weddings are going to be a thing for you, the full frame body is the way to go.

pete-tarmigan · 07-23-2019, 08:15 AM - **1 Like**

I find the K-3 too small for my hands, but that was easily solved by attaching the battery grip. The K-1 is big enough for my hands, but I still like using the battery grip on this body so that the heel of my hand can take some of the weight when I mount the FA* 400 mm f/5.6 on it.

Unregistered User · 07-23-2019, 10:08 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by pete-tarmigan

I find the K-3 too small for my hands, but that was easily solved by attaching the battery grip. The K-1 is big enough for my hands, but I still like using the battery grip on this body so that the heel of my hand can take some of the weight when I mount the FA* 400 mm f/5.6 on it.

Also, the KP (in the U.S.) comes with three detachable/replaceable grip panels, small, medium, and large. I found it to be too small with the small grip panel that comes on the camera, but replacing it with the large panel made the difference. I've ordered, but not received, the BG-7 battery-grip, and I expect that will make a world of difference. It will also add weight (or to use your term, "heft"), more flexibility in shooting, and much greater battery life. The camera can be told to use the grip battery first and only use the one in the camera (which is impossible to get to if the grip's installed) after that one's depleted. The camera and grip both use the same battery as the K-50, but the grip can also support the battery that fits the K-1. (Apparently it does NOT, as reported by some, accept AA alkaline batteries.)

The K-1's a workhorse and the extra resolution is terrific. But the KP's agile and quick, easy to use and carry around, and takes great pictures (half again the pixel count of the K-50 in the same surface area of sensor). I like 'em all. For weddings, I'm thinking that the outdoorsy-formal shots with a tripod, use the K-1; for rolling around in the aisle on your belly as the wedding party approaches, use the KP.

restlesssoul · 07-23-2019, 12:49 PM - **1 Like**

I find the K1 while undoubtedly a great camera to be a 'brick' compared to the K5. Last 2 trips (iceland and antarctica) I took the K1 with K5 as backup and ended up taking loads more pictures with the K5 than the K1. Familiarity may have been a factor but K5 just seems more comfortable to carry around. Of course shooting weddings is different than hiking/shooting from zodiacs.

**jawats** · 07-23-2019, 03:20 PM - **1 Like**

All,

Thanks for the advice and your thoughts. The KP was a "backup" / "second shooter" for the wedding, in the event the K-3 had issues. As it did not, I gave it to my wife, who took some lovely pictures with an 18-300 Sigma I scored from an auction site. I've never had concerns with the weight or size of the K-3...the KP just felt too small and light.

The other thing I like about the K-1 is that it seems like it would have greater use in astrophotography settings.

Looking at the two, the K-1 II seems to go for about $1,600 used. The KP is about $800 used - half the price. However, I am not sure there are so many advantages in the KP over the K-3 that I would want to upgrade from the 3 to the P.

Perhaps I'll just get a film 645 or 67 or 6x7 and have some film fun. :P

---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:22 PM ----------

Also, the single card slot in the KP made me very nervous. I love the dual slots in the K-3, often using two 128gb cards in tandem, for backup. I see the K-1 ii has two slots.

---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:23 PM ----------

Originally posted by MarkJerling

I've only shot the one mountaintop wedding with the K-1II and it did a bloody good job.

Those are beautiful! Have you used it for nature scenes or anything like?

---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:25 PM ----------

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

I had a K-3, and currently use a KP and two K-1 bodies, both of which are now converted to the Mark II.

If you prefer a meatier body, and are willing to invest into the cost and weight of full frame glass, I would definitely recommend the K-1. I use the KP predominantly for travel (mainly with Limited primes) and to add extra reach with telephoto lenses. It works especially well with the DFA150-450.

But like robert52, I also wonder why you went for a rented KP over your K-3 for a wedding. Unless it was for a second body of course, which I would consider essential for such an event.

But seriously, if weddings are going to be a thing for you, the full frame body is the way to go.

I am not sure if weddings are going to be a thing or not. The reaction to the photos was quite good, and I may see more requests coming my way. In such a case, I would want a K-1, I think. Also, I use quite a few older lenses like the Tamron Adaptall line, which have no issues with the FF, I think.

---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:27 PM ----------

Originally posted by restlesssoul

I find the K1 while undoubtedly a great camera to be a 'brick' compared to the K5. Last 2 trips (iceland and antarctica) I took the K1 with K5 as backup and ended up taking loads more pictures with the K5 than the K1. Familiarity may have been a factor but K5 just seems more comfortable to carry around. Of course shooting weddings is different than hiking/shooting from zodiacs.

Yesssss. I suspect riding about in a Zodiac in frigid temps with salt spray, etc., for long periods made one happy with a much lighter camera.

Unregistered User · 07-24-2019, 04:54 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jawats

All, ...
Looking at the two, the K-1 II seems to go for about $1,600 used. The KP is about $800 used - half the price. However, I am not sure there are so many advantages in the KP over the K-3 that I would want to upgrade from the 3 to the P.
...
Also, the single card slot in the KP made me very nervous. I love the dual slots in the K-3, often using two 128gb cards in tandem, for backup. I see the K-1 ii has two slots. ...

Two card slots is a big advantage. I tell the K-1 to store raw on one (128GB) and jpeg on the other (64GB). I'm a big believer in redunancy as backup.

However, I'd point out that the KP is now selling, new, for less than $800. Given the price reduction, I figure they're either planning to phase out that model or replace it with a "mark II" version.

robtcorl · 07-28-2019, 07:38 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by MarkJerling

I've only shot the one mountaintop wedding with the K-1II and it did a bloody good job.

I suspect the shooter had a great deal to do with that.
So nice, they look like paintings!

MarkJerling · 07-28-2019, 04:27 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by jawats

All,
Those are beautiful! Have you used it for nature scenes or anything like?

Thank you!

Here's a barn near home. And a full size crop from that photo. Just to show how you can crop an image from the K-1II.

MarkJerling · 07-28-2019, 04:27 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by robtcorl

I suspect the shooter had a great deal to do with that.
So nice, they look like paintings!

Thank you Bob!

Unregistered User · 07-29-2019, 04:47 AM

Having received and installed the battery grip on the KP, I can state with assurance that it, unlike the K-50, cannot accept AA batteries, but it can take the LI109 like the KP and K-50, but can also take the LI90, the stronger battery used in the K1 and K3. However, with the BG7 battery grip installed on the camera (along with the largest grip adapter attached) and a largish cylinder sticking out of the front with heavy glass in it, it is not as light and nimble as the stripped KP.

I went out to visit my new tractor, yesterday, 40 mi. W. of where I live (the backhoe attachment is back-ordered), and took the back roads to get home. I stopped off along the way and took a bunch of pictures with the KP with the grip and the DA* 55mm attached. What an experience! That is a great camera! I haven't done the arithmetic to figure out which is actually greater in resolution, the K-1 or the KP (not number of pixels, but number of pixels per square unit of surface area), but they're certainly in the same class, and my initial perception is that the KP comes out better, despite the physically smaller sensor.

Right now, if I could have only one camera, it would be the KP. (By the way, I'm one of the K-1 die-hards who elected to forego the "upgrade".)

07-22-2019, 06:24 PM	#1
jawats Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 756	KP Rented vs. K-1 II All, For a wedding shoot this past week, I rented a KP. My normal camera is a K-3. I have to say, I found the KP acceptable, but also a bit small for my hands, and (truth be told) a bit light. I really enjoy the heft and size of my K-3. I suspect that, if I upgrade, I will be looking towards a K-1. Has anyone used both KP and K-1? Or K-3 and K-1? The dimensions are similar, and the weight of the K-1 II is more, but not excessively so. Plus, the additional MP seems like a good thing. Thoughts from anyone who has used both?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
KP vs K-70 - to KP or not to KP, that is the question	OldChE	Pentax DSLR Discussion	28	11-02-2019 05:29 AM
Rented a K-1, What Should I Know?	BDrew	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	22	07-27-2019 02:14 PM
First Three Days with Kay Pi (KP) - KP vs. K-1 - infos and settings	acoufap	Pentax KP	10	05-27-2018 09:09 PM
Top 10 Most Popular Lenses - Rented in the UK	Winder	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	4	01-14-2018 11:56 AM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs.......	Steelski	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM

07-22-2019, 06:50 PM - 2 Likes	#2
MarkJerling Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: May 2012 Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 20,406	Originally posted by jawats All, For a wedding shoot this past week, I rented a KP. My normal camera is a K-3. I have to say, I found the KP acceptable, but also a bit small for my hands, and (truth be told) a bit light. I really enjoy the heft and size of my K-3. I suspect that, if I upgrade, I will be looking towards a K-1. Has anyone used both KP and K-1? Or K-3 and K-1? The dimensions are similar, and the weight of the K-1 II is more, but not excessively so. Plus, the additional MP seems like a good thing. Thoughts from anyone who has used both? I've not used a KP, but I went from the K-5 (which is nearly identical in size and weight to the K-3) to the K-1II. The K-1II feels only slightly bigger than the K-5, and is heavier, but not unpleasantly so.

07-22-2019, 09:11 PM - 1 Like	#3
bkpix Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Creswell, Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 568	I've used a K-1 and KP side by side, though not for a wedding. My sense is the KP is a good deal more nimble than the K-1 and would be easier to use to cover an event. The K-1 felt slow, both to autofocus and to write images to the card, though i suppose with practice I could get used to it. I also like the smaller look of the KP for shooting people; it comes across as more casual.

07-23-2019, 04:32 AM - 3 Likes	#5
robert52 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: At the pimple of bum of life Posts: 264	Just wondering if you own a K3 why did you rent a KP? Thanks

07-23-2019, 07:23 AM - 1 Like	#6
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	I had a K-3, and currently use a KP and two K-1 bodies, both of which are now converted to the Mark II. If you prefer a meatier body, and are willing to invest into the cost and weight of full frame glass, I would definitely recommend the K-1. I use the KP predominantly for travel (mainly with Limited primes) and to add extra reach with telephoto lenses. It works especially well with the DFA150-450. But like robert52, I also wonder why you went for a rented KP over your K-3 for a wedding. Unless it was for a second body of course, which I would consider essential for such an event. But seriously, if weddings are going to be a thing for you, the full frame body is the way to go.

07-23-2019, 08:15 AM - 1 Like	#7
pete-tarmigan Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Conception Bay South, New-fun-land Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,272	I find the K-3 too small for my hands, but that was easily solved by attaching the battery grip. The K-1 is big enough for my hands, but I still like using the battery grip on this body so that the heel of my hand can take some of the weight when I mount the FA* 400 mm f/5.6 on it.

07-23-2019, 10:08 AM - 2 Likes	#8
Unregistered User Guest	Originally posted by pete-tarmigan I find the K-3 too small for my hands, but that was easily solved by attaching the battery grip. The K-1 is big enough for my hands, but I still like using the battery grip on this body so that the heel of my hand can take some of the weight when I mount the FA* 400 mm f/5.6 on it. Also, the KP (in the U.S.) comes with three detachable/replaceable grip panels, small, medium, and large. I found it to be too small with the small grip panel that comes on the camera, but replacing it with the large panel made the difference. I've ordered, but not received, the BG-7 battery-grip, and I expect that will make a world of difference. It will also add weight (or to use your term, "heft"), more flexibility in shooting, and much greater battery life. The camera can be told to use the grip battery first and only use the one in the camera (which is impossible to get to if the grip's installed) after that one's depleted. The camera and grip both use the same battery as the K-50, but the grip can also support the battery that fits the K-1. (Apparently it does NOT, as reported by some, accept AA alkaline batteries.) The K-1's a workhorse and the extra resolution is terrific. But the KP's agile and quick, easy to use and carry around, and takes great pictures (half again the pixel count of the K-50 in the same surface area of sensor). I like 'em all. For weddings, I'm thinking that the outdoorsy-formal shots with a tripod, use the K-1; for rolling around in the aisle on your belly as the wedding party approaches, use the KP.

07-23-2019, 12:49 PM - 1 Like	#9
restlesssoul Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Bermuda Posts: 41	I find the K1 while undoubtedly a great camera to be a 'brick' compared to the K5. Last 2 trips (iceland and antarctica) I took the K1 with K5 as backup and ended up taking loads more pictures with the K5 than the K1. Familiarity may have been a factor but K5 just seems more comfortable to carry around. Of course shooting weddings is different than hiking/shooting from zodiacs.

07-23-2019, 03:20 PM - 1 Like	#10
jawats Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2017 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 756 Original Poster	All, Thanks for the advice and your thoughts. The KP was a "backup" / "second shooter" for the wedding, in the event the K-3 had issues. As it did not, I gave it to my wife, who took some lovely pictures with an 18-300 Sigma I scored from an auction site. I've never had concerns with the weight or size of the K-3...the KP just felt too small and light. The other thing I like about the K-1 is that it seems like it would have greater use in astrophotography settings. Looking at the two, the K-1 II seems to go for about $1,600 used. The KP is about $800 used - half the price. However, I am not sure there are so many advantages in the KP over the K-3 that I would want to upgrade from the 3 to the P. Perhaps I'll just get a film 645 or 67 or 6x7 and have some film fun. :P ---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:22 PM ---------- Also, the single card slot in the KP made me very nervous. I love the dual slots in the K-3, often using two 128gb cards in tandem, for backup. I see the K-1 ii has two slots. ---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:23 PM ---------- Originally posted by MarkJerling I've only shot the one mountaintop wedding with the K-1II and it did a bloody good job. Those are beautiful! Have you used it for nature scenes or anything like? ---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:25 PM ---------- Originally posted by Sandy Hancock I had a K-3, and currently use a KP and two K-1 bodies, both of which are now converted to the Mark II. If you prefer a meatier body, and are willing to invest into the cost and weight of full frame glass, I would definitely recommend the K-1. I use the KP predominantly for travel (mainly with Limited primes) and to add extra reach with telephoto lenses. It works especially well with the DFA150-450. But like robert52, I also wonder why you went for a rented KP over your K-3 for a wedding. Unless it was for a second body of course, which I would consider essential for such an event. But seriously, if weddings are going to be a thing for you, the full frame body is the way to go. I am not sure if weddings are going to be a thing or not. The reaction to the photos was quite good, and I may see more requests coming my way. In such a case, I would want a K-1, I think. Also, I use quite a few older lenses like the Tamron Adaptall line, which have no issues with the FF, I think. ---------- Post added 07-23-19 at 03:27 PM ---------- Originally posted by restlesssoul I find the K1 while undoubtedly a great camera to be a 'brick' compared to the K5. Last 2 trips (iceland and antarctica) I took the K1 with K5 as backup and ended up taking loads more pictures with the K5 than the K1. Familiarity may have been a factor but K5 just seems more comfortable to carry around. Of course shooting weddings is different than hiking/shooting from zodiacs. Yesssss. I suspect riding about in a Zodiac in frigid temps with salt spray, etc., for long periods made one happy with a much lighter camera.

07-24-2019, 04:54 AM - 1 Like	#11
Unregistered User Guest	Originally posted by jawats All, ... Looking at the two, the K-1 II seems to go for about $1,600 used. The KP is about $800 used - half the price. However, I am not sure there are so many advantages in the KP over the K-3 that I would want to upgrade from the 3 to the P. ... Also, the single card slot in the KP made me very nervous. I love the dual slots in the K-3, often using two 128gb cards in tandem, for backup. I see the K-1 ii has two slots. ... Two card slots is a big advantage. I tell the K-1 to store raw on one (128GB) and jpeg on the other (64GB). I'm a big believer in redunancy as backup. However, I'd point out that the KP is now selling, new, for less than $800. Given the price reduction, I figure they're either planning to phase out that model or replace it with a "mark II" version.

07-28-2019, 07:38 AM - 2 Likes	#12
robtcorl Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: St Louis, MO Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,606	Originally posted by MarkJerling I've only shot the one mountaintop wedding with the K-1II and it did a bloody good job. I suspect the shooter had a great deal to do with that. So nice, they look like paintings!

07-28-2019, 04:27 PM - 2 Likes	#14
MarkJerling Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: May 2012 Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 20,406	Originally posted by robtcorl I suspect the shooter had a great deal to do with that. So nice, they look like paintings! Thank you Bob!

07-29-2019, 04:47 AM	#15
Unregistered User Guest	Having received and installed the battery grip on the KP, I can state with assurance that it, unlike the K-50, cannot accept AA batteries, but it can take the LI109 like the KP and K-50, but can also take the LI90, the stronger battery used in the K1 and K3. However, with the BG7 battery grip installed on the camera (along with the largest grip adapter attached) and a largish cylinder sticking out of the front with heavy glass in it, it is not as light and nimble as the stripped KP. I went out to visit my new tractor, yesterday, 40 mi. W. of where I live (the backhoe attachment is back-ordered), and took the back roads to get home. I stopped off along the way and took a bunch of pictures with the KP with the grip and the DA* 55mm attached. What an experience! That is a great camera! I haven't done the arithmetic to figure out which is actually greater in resolution, the K-1 or the KP (not number of pixels, but number of pixels per square unit of surface area), but they're certainly in the same class, and my initial perception is that the KP comes out better, despite the physically smaller sensor. Right now, if I could have only one camera, it would be the KP. (By the way, I'm one of the K-1 die-hards who elected to forego the "upgrade".)