Originally posted by Tbone51 K3 vs K1 ii:
Image Quality is similar; actually, to my eye, I can't really tell the difference between K3 (24mp), K1ii (36mp) and K1ii (crop mode, 15mp). Even pixel-peeping, they all look good.
Advantage of K3: smaller, lighter, works so well with small lenses like 20-40, 15mm.
Advantage of K1ii: geotagging, wi-fi for JPEGs, significantly better at high ISO (relatively noise-less to 3200), much better dynamic range, works so well with 28-105 "kit" lens, larger viewfinder, significantly better autofocus C mode.
Both are very nice cameras. I like having GPS built in, rather than trying to attach the external 0-gps1 device; it fell off and broke. GPS is a nice feature. Crop mode works great.
If someone is happy with aps-c then they should stay with it. Using a k1 in crop mode, personally, is not something I bought the camera for. I bought it for full frame use only. I gave up generally on pixel peeping. But I do want to know what a poster size print will look like. Although some claim increased resolution has little to do with final appearance..,,blow up the same scene from an aps-c , k1 , and 645d...to say 24x36 and you will notice the difference. For 11x14 likely no difference noticed. But dynamic range, gps built in, brighter viewfinder, ability to use full frame older and newer lenses, was what made me take the jump.