Was it worth it ?

HopelessTogger · 05-15-2016, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I have to ask, who is totally happy with any piece of equipment. Even a K-1. I keep hearing "It's heavy."
And if you own a K-3 and are not totally happy, who's to say the camera that will make you happy isn't a Panasonic FZ1000, or a Q .

As much as we'd like to have a simple sound bite, I'm afraid this isn't it.

I am totally happy with the K-1. Because of the ergonomics and the FA Limited's it doesn't feel heavy in use.

nocturnal · 05-15-2016, 10:25 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by todd

Just replying to the original post with more of what has already been said, but in my opinion it was most definitely worth it. As a mediocre unprofessional hobbyist, I have the luxury of taking pictures simply for the fun of it and the K1 is simply the funnest camera I have ever shot with by far. I planned to keep my K3 as a backup and for any time I think faster frame rate or reach is needed. Still keeping the K3, but don't know if I will actually ever bring myself to pack it, because the K1 is significantly better and more desirable for me in all other aspects of the game.

So far I've had very little time/opportunity to do my favorite genre of shooting (landscape) but even so I'm definitely getting shots I wouldn't have obtained as well with the K3. I'll demo with this example; one of my first shots after pulling the K1 out of box a week ago Friday, and it was the first shot taken with FA31... I didn't choose this one because it's special from a technical standpoint, but because it reminds me so well of my first experience impression of the camera... I put the FA31 on, lifted up the camera and shot, without even really thinking about it, and I got this, in relatively low light (F1.8, 1/20s, ISO200). I did play with it a little in post, but to me the IQ improvement is recognizable. The focus is much closer than I would have obtained that easily with the K3 in this circumstance... The whole experience is just... satisfying. Ahhh!!!

That is a really good portrait which says it all about the photographer and camera.

edo · 05-15-2016, 10:41 AM

Worth it? Sure it is!

I went away from Pentax called by the sirens of mirroless.

Still kept my full frame Pentax glasses by pure collection.

Now that I shoot a full frame DSLR with my lenses I am in heaven!

I think a change in system once in a while can be refreshing in order to shake your photographic skills up!

Pentax K 85mm 1.8
Pentax A 50mm 1.2
Pentax F 17-28mm fish eye on full frame
And many many more lenses like takumars, legacy zooms, UWA etc.. On a full frame Pentax??

Yes worth it!

normhead · 05-15-2016, 10:46 AM

This is getting annoying.

Maybe I'll rejoin the conversation when the gushing dies down.

**monochrome** · 05-15-2016, 10:52 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Are squirrel shots allowed?

Opps - thought better of it and edited. But I can do without the smugness.

stevebrot · 05-15-2016, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Are squirrel shots allowed?

I saw a few very stunning dog and cat photos.

Steve

stevebrot · 05-15-2016, 11:46 AM

Originally posted by normhead

As much as we'd like to have a simple sound bite, I'm afraid this isn't it.

If a person can't answer the question, then the rational for purchase is something other than craft. Pain drives the choice of tools or as you put it in your signature, "the set of compromises".

Originally posted by kh1234567890

My original question still appears to be unanswered. No killer shot examples that I couldn't take with crop bodies/lenses.

My question also goes unanswered. What is deficient in your current gear that you would like to remedy? If nothing, why this thread?

You have worded your question in such a way that you are not accountable. I can provide you with links to several example K-1 images today (some with Sigma 35/1.4?) that would be difficult or impossible for me to reproduce with my K-3 with available lenses and which I am totally impressed with, but I suspect that nothing I might point you to will be impressive enough because either the example is not within your usual usual choice of subject or effect (have no need) or because it is not "killer" (does not appeal aesthetically).

FWIW, I spent several minutes on your Flickr stream and also took a look at the gear list on your profile. In my opinion, given a half day with the K-1, D FA 24-70, and your existing kit and you will be muttering "where has this been all my life". I believe you will find the format suits your style. OTOH, you are doing very nice work* on APS-C at 16Mpx so there does not appear to be any need for change. If you have a future need to satisfy FF curiosity (what might be accomplished), I recommend an inexpensive K-mount film SLR and a roll of Ektar 100.

Steve

* I don't know if any qualify as "killer" by your definition, but I like what I saw.

Last edited by stevebrot; 05-15-2016 at 11:59 AM.

**jatrax** · 05-15-2016, 12:25 PM

Originally posted by normhead

This is getting annoying.

Maybe I'll rejoin the conversation when the gushing dies down.

Might be a long wait........

Don't fight it, you know you want one.

kh1234567890 · 05-15-2016, 01:06 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

FWIW, I spent several minutes on your Flickr stream and also took a look at the gear list on your profile. In my opinion, given a half day with the K-1, D FA 24-70, and your existing kit and you will be muttering "where has this been all my life". I believe you will find the format suits your style. OTOH, you are doing very nice work* on APS-C at 16Mpx so there does not appear to be any need for change. If you have a future need to satisfy FF curiosity (what might be accomplished), I recommend an inexpensive K-mount film SLR and a roll of Ektar 100

Thanks.

In the dim and distant past I used to shoot film. My son still does, having worked his way up from 35mm to a 6x9 Fujica GW690 monster and I have played with his toys. It is not for me - life is too short.

What I was after was whether there is something unique about K-1 shots (rendering, whatever), something that would be hard to achieve with another camera. Something like the 'Leica M look' is for good Leica shots. Not just a bigger Sony sensor and assorted twiddly bits, which might make picture taking easier but do not necessarily result in 'wow, this must have been taken with a Pentax K-1'.

stevebrot · 05-15-2016, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

What I was after was whether there is something unique about K-1 shots (rendering, whatever), something that would be hard to achieve with another camera.

Probably not. There are fine points regarding S/N ratio, dynamic range, viewfinder, AF performance, and quiet shutter but with the possible exception of Pixel Shift resolution and total resolution, there are no defining characteristics that I am aware of that would set the K-1 apart from your K-5II in terms of base image characteristics. To go further, while I have not seen examples, I suspect that crop mode photos from the K-1 would be functionally indistinguishable from the same lens on your K-5II*. Pixel Shift, improved multi-exposure/composite features, AA filter off/emulation, RGB meter sensor, astro tracer, and focus peaking would be the distinguishing features that might affect image quality and/or creative options. Almost all on the list are available on the K-3II at a much lower price point if APS-C serves you best.

Steve

* The lack of AA filter on the K-1 would even the playing field in regards to detail capture despite having less pixels in crop mode than the K-5II

repaap · 05-15-2016, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

Thanks.

What I was after was whether there is something unique about K-1 shots (rendering, whatever), something that would be hard to achieve with another camera. Something like the 'Leica M look' is for good Leica shots. Not just a bigger Sony sensor and assorted twiddly bits, which might make picture taking easier but do not necessarily result in 'wow, this must have been taken with a Pentax K-1'.

Well, actually, that might be quite difficult to have, but something like 'whoa, I took this with my K-1 and my FA 43 is incredible with it, compared to K-3!' would be more like it. goes also for couple other lenses too.
here is simple flower shot. Nothing extra ordinary, or so much wow, but it looks completely different than let's say shot with K-3. I could have used different lens to make it more great, but in other way too. as anyone knows, you have to choose lens to make it the way that you want it to look. you can also do the same with camera now.

surfar · 05-15-2016, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

this must have been taken with a Pentax K-1'.

Its only money, more will come your way

My advice is go and handle one, like I did, I had NO inclination of buying at all.The K1 is special and its value, and it should have been done 5 years ago.the only time i'll pick up my 3 other Pentax dslrs now, will be to put in the box when they are sold.

Its 2 cameras in 1(with the 1.5 teleconverter built in by putting on the da lenses).
A lowlight demon, landscape/street shooter/portrait in FF mode and a sporty telephoto in crop mode.Rated for 300k shots.
It could only have been better if there was a 4K video feature and a touch screen.
Ricoh are on a winner!

**Rondec** · 05-15-2016, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by kh1234567890

Thanks.

In the dim and distant past I used to shoot film. My son still does, having worked his way up from 35mm to a 6x9 Fujica GW690 monster and I have played with his toys. It is not for me - life is too short.

What I was after was whether there is something unique about K-1 shots (rendering, whatever), something that would be hard to achieve with another camera. Something like the 'Leica M look' is for good Leica shots. Not just a bigger Sony sensor and assorted twiddly bits, which might make picture taking easier but do not necessarily result in 'wow, this must have been taken with a Pentax K-1'.

The answer is 'no,' unless you like narrow depth of field and plan to shoot with the FA limiteds wide open. People claim to see what they see, but I would consider the K-1 to be like a K5, but with more resolution and more dynamic range.

If you are satisfied with what gear you use now, I am not sure why you are asking the question.

dakight · 05-15-2016, 03:40 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

If a person can't answer the question, then the rational for purchase is something other than craft. Pain drives the choice of tools or as you put it in your signature, "the set of compromises".

My question also goes unanswered. What is deficient in your current gear that you would like to remedy? If nothing, why this thread?

You have worded your question in such a way that you are not accountable. I can provide you with links to several example K-1 images today (some with Sigma 35/1.4?) that would be difficult or impossible for me to reproduce with my K-3 with available lenses and which I am totally impressed with, but I suspect that nothing I might point you to will be impressive enough because either the example is not within your usual usual choice of subject or effect (have no need) or because it is not "killer" (does not appeal aesthetically).

FWIW, I spent several minutes on your Flickr stream and also took a look at the gear list on your profile. In my opinion, given a half day with the K-1, D FA 24-70, and your existing kit and you will be muttering "where has this been all my life". I believe you will find the format suits your style. OTOH, you are doing very nice work* on APS-C at 16Mpx so there does not appear to be any need for change. If you have a future need to satisfy FF curiosity (what might be accomplished), I recommend an inexpensive K-mount film SLR and a roll of Ektar 100.

Steve

* I don't know if any qualify as "killer" by your definition, but I like what I saw.

The truth of the matter is that when someone poses such a query they usually have already answered it in their own mind. Regardless of the testimony and evidence the fix is already in and his final answer will be something to the effect "Yep, just as I thought."

In the meantime the rest of us will pursue our efforts, take our pictures, hone our craft, and enjoy our hobby regardless of his opinions one way or the other.

Sandy Hancock · 05-15-2016, 04:30 PM

OK. I'm essentially an amateur, dog and flower kind of photographer, who occasionally gets to go out and shoot cool stuff. I have had the K-1 for not quite two weeks, and I have been very busy with my day job so real opportunities have been limited.

I have had a K-3 since its release, and I reckon I have a pretty good handle on its capabilities. The K-1 is genuinely in another league - AF is much better, resolution is appreciably better, ergonomics are improved, viewfinder is bigger with better functionality (I love the spirit level and plumb line in the OVF), etc. What it boils down to is that my keeper rate is higher and the pictures are better. Really.

These are basically snapshots, but I think they illustrate the point.

Have a look at this in flickr, then download the full size jpeg and look into Sammy's right eye. Could I have done the same with my FA77 on the K-3 @ f/2.8 and ISO400 (as close to fully equivalent as I can get)? I don't think so.

Could I have done this with my DA15 on the K-3? Of course not, because f/2.8 would be the equivalent and that's impossible. And the edges would be mush. The DA14 @ f/2.8 would be closer, but I don't have that lens.

I don't have a K-3 II, so can't comment on the pixel shift shots from that camera, but download the full size jpeg from flickr again and tell me if that could be done with any camera below medium format.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
It was worth it.	Lenscap	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	9	05-14-2016 11:16 AM
Have 50/1.8, is it worth it to buy a 35/2.4?	keanex	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	02-28-2016 12:52 AM
Used K-3. Is it worth it?	Dewman	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	02-24-2016 09:03 AM
Sony's new 42 MP sensor. Is it worth it?	normhead	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	7	10-18-2015 10:29 AM
Should I buy this lens is it worth it	emetcalf	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	2	03-20-2011 06:58 PM

05-15-2016, 10:25 AM	#61
HopelessTogger Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Location: Roi-et, Thailand Posts: 773	Originally posted by normhead I have to ask, who is totally happy with any piece of equipment. Even a K-1. I keep hearing "It's heavy." And if you own a K-3 and are not totally happy, who's to say the camera that will make you happy isn't a Panasonic FZ1000, or a Q . As much as we'd like to have a simple sound bite, I'm afraid this isn't it. I am totally happy with the K-1. Because of the ergonomics and the FA Limited's it doesn't feel heavy in use.

05-15-2016, 10:25 AM - 1 Like	#62
nocturnal Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 507	Originally posted by todd Just replying to the original post with more of what has already been said, but in my opinion it was most definitely worth it. As a mediocre unprofessional hobbyist, I have the luxury of taking pictures simply for the fun of it and the K1 is simply the funnest camera I have ever shot with by far. I planned to keep my K3 as a backup and for any time I think faster frame rate or reach is needed. Still keeping the K3, but don't know if I will actually ever bring myself to pack it, because the K1 is significantly better and more desirable for me in all other aspects of the game. So far I've had very little time/opportunity to do my favorite genre of shooting (landscape) but even so I'm definitely getting shots I wouldn't have obtained as well with the K3. I'll demo with this example; one of my first shots after pulling the K1 out of box a week ago Friday, and it was the first shot taken with FA31... I didn't choose this one because it's special from a technical standpoint, but because it reminds me so well of my first experience impression of the camera... I put the FA31 on, lifted up the camera and shot, without even really thinking about it, and I got this, in relatively low light (F1.8, 1/20s, ISO200). I did play with it a little in post, but to me the IQ improvement is recognizable. The focus is much closer than I would have obtained that easily with the K3 in this circumstance... The whole experience is just... satisfying. Ahhh!!! That is a really good portrait which says it all about the photographer and camera.

05-15-2016, 10:41 AM	#63
edo Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 75	Worth it? Sure it is! I went away from Pentax called by the sirens of mirroless. Still kept my full frame Pentax glasses by pure collection. Now that I shoot a full frame DSLR with my lenses I am in heaven! I think a change in system once in a while can be refreshing in order to shake your photographic skills up! Pentax K 85mm 1.8 Pentax A 50mm 1.2 Pentax F 17-28mm fish eye on full frame And many many more lenses like takumars, legacy zooms, UWA etc.. On a full frame Pentax?? Yes worth it!

05-15-2016, 10:46 AM	#64
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	This is getting annoying. Maybe I'll rejoin the conversation when the gushing dies down.

05-15-2016, 10:52 AM	#65
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by normhead Are squirrel shots allowed? Opps - thought better of it and edited. But I can do without the smugness.

05-15-2016, 10:54 AM	#66
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by normhead Are squirrel shots allowed? I saw a few very stunning dog and cat photos. Steve

05-15-2016, 11:46 AM	#67
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by normhead As much as we'd like to have a simple sound bite, I'm afraid this isn't it. If a person can't answer the question, then the rational for purchase is something other than craft. Pain drives the choice of tools or as you put it in your signature, "the set of compromises". Originally posted by kh1234567890 My original question still appears to be unanswered. No killer shot examples that I couldn't take with crop bodies/lenses. My question also goes unanswered. What is deficient in your current gear that you would like to remedy? If nothing, why this thread? You have worded your question in such a way that you are not accountable. I can provide you with links to several example K-1 images today (some with Sigma 35/1.4?) that would be difficult or impossible for me to reproduce with my K-3 with available lenses and which I am totally impressed with, but I suspect that nothing I might point you to will be impressive enough because either the example is not within your usual usual choice of subject or effect (have no need) or because it is not "killer" (does not appeal aesthetically). FWIW, I spent several minutes on your Flickr stream and also took a look at the gear list on your profile. In my opinion, given a half day with the K-1, D FA 24-70, and your existing kit and you will be muttering "where has this been all my life". I believe you will find the format suits your style. OTOH, you are doing very nice work* on APS-C at 16Mpx so there does not appear to be any need for change. If you have a future need to satisfy FF curiosity (what might be accomplished), I recommend an inexpensive K-mount film SLR and a roll of Ektar 100. Steve * I don't know if any qualify as "killer" by your definition, but I like what I saw. Last edited by stevebrot; 05-15-2016 at 11:59 AM.

05-15-2016, 12:25 PM	#68
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by normhead This is getting annoying. Maybe I'll rejoin the conversation when the gushing dies down. Might be a long wait........ Don't fight it, you know you want one.

05-15-2016, 01:06 PM	#69
kh1234567890 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Manchester, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,653 Original Poster	Originally posted by stevebrot FWIW, I spent several minutes on your Flickr stream and also took a look at the gear list on your profile. In my opinion, given a half day with the K-1, D FA 24-70, and your existing kit and you will be muttering "where has this been all my life". I believe you will find the format suits your style. OTOH, you are doing very nice work* on APS-C at 16Mpx so there does not appear to be any need for change. If you have a future need to satisfy FF curiosity (what might be accomplished), I recommend an inexpensive K-mount film SLR and a roll of Ektar 100 Thanks. In the dim and distant past I used to shoot film. My son still does, having worked his way up from 35mm to a 6x9 Fujica GW690 monster and I have played with his toys. It is not for me - life is too short. What I was after was whether there is something unique about K-1 shots (rendering, whatever), something that would be hard to achieve with another camera. Something like the 'Leica M look' is for good Leica shots. Not just a bigger Sony sensor and assorted twiddly bits, which might make picture taking easier but do not necessarily result in 'wow, this must have been taken with a Pentax K-1'.

05-15-2016, 01:54 PM	#70
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by kh1234567890 What I was after was whether there is something unique about K-1 shots (rendering, whatever), something that would be hard to achieve with another camera. Probably not. There are fine points regarding S/N ratio, dynamic range, viewfinder, AF performance, and quiet shutter but with the possible exception of Pixel Shift resolution and total resolution, there are no defining characteristics that I am aware of that would set the K-1 apart from your K-5II in terms of base image characteristics. To go further, while I have not seen examples, I suspect that crop mode photos from the K-1 would be functionally indistinguishable from the same lens on your K-5II. Pixel Shift, improved multi-exposure/composite features, AA filter off/emulation, RGB meter sensor, astro tracer, and focus peaking would be the distinguishing features that might affect image quality and/or creative options. Almost all on the list are available on the K-3II at a much lower price point if APS-C serves you best. Steve The lack of AA filter on the K-1 would even the playing field in regards to detail capture despite having less pixels in crop mode than the K-5II

05-15-2016, 01:54 PM	#71
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by kh1234567890 Thanks. What I was after was whether there is something unique about K-1 shots (rendering, whatever), something that would be hard to achieve with another camera. Something like the 'Leica M look' is for good Leica shots. Not just a bigger Sony sensor and assorted twiddly bits, which might make picture taking easier but do not necessarily result in 'wow, this must have been taken with a Pentax K-1'. Well, actually, that might be quite difficult to have, but something like 'whoa, I took this with my K-1 and my FA 43 is incredible with it, compared to K-3!' would be more like it. goes also for couple other lenses too. here is simple flower shot. Nothing extra ordinary, or so much wow, but it looks completely different than let's say shot with K-3. I could have used different lens to make it more great, but in other way too. as anyone knows, you have to choose lens to make it the way that you want it to look. you can also do the same with camera now.

05-15-2016, 01:56 PM	#72
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,141	Originally posted by kh1234567890 this must have been taken with a Pentax K-1'. Its only money, more will come your way My advice is go and handle one, like I did, I had NO inclination of buying at all.The K1 is special and its value, and it should have been done 5 years ago.the only time i'll pick up my 3 other Pentax dslrs now, will be to put in the box when they are sold. Its 2 cameras in 1(with the 1.5 teleconverter built in by putting on the da lenses). A lowlight demon, landscape/street shooter/portrait in FF mode and a sporty telephoto in crop mode.Rated for 300k shots. It could only have been better if there was a 4K video feature and a touch screen. Ricoh are on a winner!

05-15-2016, 01:56 PM	#73
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by kh1234567890 Thanks. In the dim and distant past I used to shoot film. My son still does, having worked his way up from 35mm to a 6x9 Fujica GW690 monster and I have played with his toys. It is not for me - life is too short. What I was after was whether there is something unique about K-1 shots (rendering, whatever), something that would be hard to achieve with another camera. Something like the 'Leica M look' is for good Leica shots. Not just a bigger Sony sensor and assorted twiddly bits, which might make picture taking easier but do not necessarily result in 'wow, this must have been taken with a Pentax K-1'. The answer is 'no,' unless you like narrow depth of field and plan to shoot with the FA limiteds wide open. People claim to see what they see, but I would consider the K-1 to be like a K5, but with more resolution and more dynamic range. If you are satisfied with what gear you use now, I am not sure why you are asking the question.

05-15-2016, 03:40 PM	#74
dakight Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,216	Originally posted by stevebrot If a person can't answer the question, then the rational for purchase is something other than craft. Pain drives the choice of tools or as you put it in your signature, "the set of compromises". My question also goes unanswered. What is deficient in your current gear that you would like to remedy? If nothing, why this thread? You have worded your question in such a way that you are not accountable. I can provide you with links to several example K-1 images today (some with Sigma 35/1.4?) that would be difficult or impossible for me to reproduce with my K-3 with available lenses and which I am totally impressed with, but I suspect that nothing I might point you to will be impressive enough because either the example is not within your usual usual choice of subject or effect (have no need) or because it is not "killer" (does not appeal aesthetically). FWIW, I spent several minutes on your Flickr stream and also took a look at the gear list on your profile. In my opinion, given a half day with the K-1, D FA 24-70, and your existing kit and you will be muttering "where has this been all my life". I believe you will find the format suits your style. OTOH, you are doing very nice work* on APS-C at 16Mpx so there does not appear to be any need for change. If you have a future need to satisfy FF curiosity (what might be accomplished), I recommend an inexpensive K-mount film SLR and a roll of Ektar 100. Steve * I don't know if any qualify as "killer" by your definition, but I like what I saw. The truth of the matter is that when someone poses such a query they usually have already answered it in their own mind. Regardless of the testimony and evidence the fix is already in and his final answer will be something to the effect "Yep, just as I thought." In the meantime the rest of us will pursue our efforts, take our pictures, hone our craft, and enjoy our hobby regardless of his opinions one way or the other.

05-15-2016, 04:30 PM	#75
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	OK. I'm essentially an amateur, dog and flower kind of photographer, who occasionally gets to go out and shoot cool stuff. I have had the K-1 for not quite two weeks, and I have been very busy with my day job so real opportunities have been limited. I have had a K-3 since its release, and I reckon I have a pretty good handle on its capabilities. The K-1 is genuinely in another league - AF is much better, resolution is appreciably better, ergonomics are improved, viewfinder is bigger with better functionality (I love the spirit level and plumb line in the OVF), etc. What it boils down to is that my keeper rate is higher and the pictures are better. Really. These are basically snapshots, but I think they illustrate the point. Have a look at this in flickr, then download the full size jpeg and look into Sammy's right eye. Could I have done the same with my FA77 on the K-3 @ f/2.8 and ISO400 (as close to fully equivalent as I can get)? I don't think so. Could I have done this with my DA15 on the K-3? Of course not, because f/2.8 would be the equivalent and that's impossible. And the edges would be mush. The DA14 @ f/2.8 would be closer, but I don't have that lens. I don't have a K-3 II, so can't comment on the pixel shift shots from that camera, but download the full size jpeg from flickr again and tell me if that could be done with any camera below medium format.