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.