I'm remaining realistic here. But still I expect some considerable improvement compared to my K-3II. With that I mean 2 stops, would that be reasonable?
This is my use case: I'm now shooting low light static scenes in bursts of one or two dozen images, depending how high in ISO I need to go for sharp handheld shots. The reasoning is that for stacking and averaging out shots in photoshop to get rid of high ISO noise, I need
XX images to get from ISO
XX00 IQ to ISO100 IQ. E.g. at ISO12.8K that means processing 20 images results in noise levels between ISO400 and ISO800, which I'm generally happy with.
If I can get away with 1/2 or 1/4 the number of images for the same end result because of the K-3 mark III's better IQ, that would already be a great deal. Less images to take into the burst means less chance of slight movement changing perspective (and making proper alignment impossible), less time needed to delete them in case of mistake, less space on my memory cards/drives, less processing time...
But I think I'm being realistic since I'm not expecting no longer having to do any stacking for "perfect" IQ.
Wim