Originally posted by Rondec I guess I am more asking the question "Why would someone who owns a K-1 be interested in a K3 III?" The K1 was being offered for 1700 dollars with grip included, recently, so I suppose that means that the K3 III has to be somewhere in the 1100 to 1400 dollar range. It isn't as though there is a huge difference in price between top end APS-C and low end full frame, at this point, and while the K-1 is a top end camera for Pentax, it is still priced like an entry level full frame camera.
For serious macro and even wildlife, crop cameras offer a significant discount over full frame cameras with minimal downside, but if someone shoots a lot of different things -- portraits, landscapes and occasionally macro -- then they might still end up with a full frame camera and figure out how to make it work.
For the same field of view, using lenses specific to the format, an APS-C camera and lens is going to be smaller and lighter. And anywhere from a lot, to just a little bit, cheaper. But it still makes a difference.
I have full frame and APS-C cameras. Admittedly, different brands, but still... If I put aside my A7 MkII, as it's not a realistic comparison, my other full-frame camera is a Hasselblad HV (i.e. Sony A99 in a sharper, tougher suit). It's a little wider than the K-1, but otherwise very similar in size and weight. Add on a decent 24-70 f/2.8 lens and it's a chunky, reasonably heavy package. Perfectly usable, of course, and use it I do... but my K-3 (or K-3II) plus 17-50 f/2.8 makes for a smaller and lighter package that's much nicer to carry around for an afternoon, and certainly for a whole day - even more so if I'm carrying other APS-C format lenses with me. Of course, I don't get the same shallow depth of field and subject separation with the APS-C setup, but often that's a compromise I'm willing to accept. I say "often"... I
mean "usually", as however much I love my HV and Sony Zeiss 24-70 f/2.8, I choose my K-3 far more frequently, and have taken a far greater number of photographs with it as a result. It's just less tiring and tiresome to carry for longer periods. None of this takes away from my HV... it just means that I'm more likely to take the K-3 because the format and size combination (and compromise) happens to work very well - for
me
For the same reason as above, I can totally understand why some people choose micro 4/3rds. It's not for me, but I completely get the desire for smaller, lighter kit. It's just that my needs are satisfied by Pentax APS-C gear, so I have no personal need to go to a smaller format
Last edited by BigMackCam; 03-25-2018 at 01:39 PM.