[officiousbystander]

Well,the X-T3 is a joy to use,as for the KP I have no joy using it.Even though the output is certainly JOYous!I'm in the group that just doesnt like the ergonomics.

I almost bought a cheap run out XE3 but before I decided I thought I'd spend more time with my KP and really immerse myself in it first. I invested in setting up properly. And it's just fantastic. Once you get to the stage where you have finger memory of all the controls then the ergonomics just isn't a barrier. If ergonomics includes whether its comfortable to hold or not that's another question and for some can't be overcome. So I've saved some money and made a small step towards overcoming GAS.

[KiloHotelphoto]

My own comparisons have shown little difference between what I get at 8 FPS on my K3 and 20 fps. I hear people say its an advantage but until I see it, I'm not buying it. People say all kinds of stuff. What I'd be looking for would be an 8 frame sequence taken with a K-3 and a 20 fps segment shot with another camera, of the same subject where it can be shown what you might get with your extra FPS. I can tell you for sure 20 fps is going to cost you time evaluating the images. So 20 FPS is starting at a disadvantage. It has to produce better keepers to be worth it, and even then, it will be a personal decision (but at least you'll have concrete evidence on which to base your choice.) Especially since tracking your fast moving subject isn't any easier with 20 FPS than it is with 8.

The last time I was able to see someone else's results, what he got from his 1300 images at 20 FPS and what I got from my 600 images at 8 FPS were pretty similar (some of his were better, some of mine were better.) But it took him an extra day to process everything. Not all of us have that kind of extra-time.

That statement doesn't tell you anything until you establish the parameters for which it's true. (I know for a lot of my wildlife images with relative slow moving subjects it isn't.)

And once Pentax goes to 12 FPS, in a couple months, the test will have to be done over, even if 20 FPS comes out on top in some instances. No one has ever established what the optimum FPS is for any given speed and distance. It's one of the least known elements of action photography.

What people who can pay the big bucks for minimal improvements in performance think is pretty much irrelevant to me. I'm allergic to the "big bucks" part.

A lot of us are trying to do the best we can on limited resources. I don't see 20 FPS as one of the selling points that's likely to be relevant to me any time soon. The K-new at 12 FPS seems to me to be great in-between point even for folks like my who have been stuck at 8 fps for years. I have 20 FPS on my ZS100. I've never used it.

No you don’t need 20fps all the time so you can set it for less. If you’re shooting birds at a bird feeder or bison at Yellowstone you don’t need it, but if you’re shooting a bald eagle or osprey fishing 20fps it’s nice to have.

And you don’t have to shoot thousands of shots, it only takes a quick burst of 3-4 seconds to get the shot of the bird coming down to the water and grabbing a fish so 60-80 shots isn’t many to go through.

I’ve had cameras that have shot as slow as 5fps K1 and 5dsr all the way up to 20fps R5. If I’m shooting action I want all the fps and focus point coverage I can get.

[surfar]

I almost bought a cheap run out XE3 but before I decided I thought I'd spend more time with my KP and really immerse myself in it first. I invested in setting up properly. And it's just fantastic. Once you get to the stage where you have finger memory of all the controls then the ergonomics just isn't a barrier. If ergonomics includes whether its comfortable to hold or not that's another question and for some can't be overcome. So I've saved some money and made a small step towards overcoming GAS.

Thats great for you.The XE3 is amuch better camera imo.

[Cerebum]

I almost bought a cheap run out XE3 but before I decided I thought I'd spend more time with my KP and really immerse myself in it first. I invested in setting up properly. And it's just fantastic. Once you get to the stage where you have finger memory of all the controls then the ergonomics just isn't a barrier. If ergonomics includes whether its comfortable to hold or not that's another question and for some can't be overcome. So I've saved some money and made a small step towards overcoming GAS.

The KP is fantastic once you get it tailored to your liking, its not everyone's favourite, surfar hates his and I am sure he is not alone but most of us absolutely love it. It is a quirky camera l think it is both capable and beautiful

[ZombieArmy]

The KP is fantastic once you get it tailored to your liking, its not everyone's favourite, surfar hates his and I am sure he is not alone but most of us absolutely love it. It is a quirky camera l think it is both capable and beautiful

The KP is the best. Makes me want to get into wood widdlin' and make myself a custom grip for it.

[Cerebum]

The KP is the best. Makes me want to get into wood widdlin' and make myself a custom grip for it.

I think wood widdlin is probably the new record for distance off topic lol ("widdlin" has a completely different meaning in the UK, and you wouldn't want that on your KP )

[surfar]

surfar hates his

I dont like the way it feels,the images are excellent and the price I paid for a 3000acutation copy was pretty GOOD!

The K3x3 will have a sensor Ive been using for quite a while,if it feels good I'll sell my KP.

[Cerebum]

I dont like the way it feels,the images are excellent and the price I paid for a 3000acutation copy was pretty GOOD!

The K3x3 will have a sensor Ive been using for quite a while,if it feels good I'll sell my KP.

I often switch back to my K3, its like driving a classic car but my KP now fits me like a glove. The ergonomic differences between the two aren't enormous, at first glance they are hardly noteworthy but its surprising how much difference it makes.

[someasiancameraguy]

The KP is the best. Makes me want to get into wood widdlin' and make myself a custom grip for it.

I too like to widdle my wood. But seriously I'd honestly love an FF version of the KP with film like presets similar to Fuji. Essentially the LX/MX digitized for the modern era.

[surfar]

I often switch back to my K3, its like driving a classic car

I use my K3 too,much better gloves than those Ps!

---------- Post added 12-08-20 at 08:47 PM ----------

FF version of the KP with film like presets similar to Fuji.

With ergos of a K-1!

That would be nice!....Theres a couple of threads about FilmSims on Pentax.I havent used any yet but will once this busy period is over.

[Benz3ne]

I too like to widdle my wood. But seriously I'd honestly love an FF version of the KP with film like presets similar to Fuji. Essentially the LX/MX digitized for the modern era.

I've thought similar. Or a K-1 'mini' with a 24mp FF sensor.
If that had some 'old-school' film camera aesthetics I reckon it'd be a bit of a hit.

[someasiancameraguy]

With ergos of a K-1!
That would be nice!....Theres a couple of threads about FilmSims on Pentax.I havent used any yet but will once this busy period is over.

I've thought similar. Or a K-1 'mini' with a 24mp FF sensor.
If that had some 'old-school' film camera aesthetics I reckon it'd be a bit of a hit.

IMO the Nikon Df is a concept of this but terribly executed. It was too heavy, too bulky, too ugly, and too expensive.

[Jonathan Mac]

At the moment there's no system that fits exactly what I want, mirrorless or otherwise. I'd like to move to FF, preferably mirrorless, but each system has elements which are huge turn-offs, so until they're fixed in a way which appears to be permanent I'll stick with what I have.

[bdery]

This is the area that surprised me most. Going from a K1 to A7iii I was shocked at how much quicker burst is, and how useful it can be to the right person. It's really helped with getting shots of my Daisy jumping, that's for sure!

The K-3 has 8.3 fps, which is actually close to the A7C's 10 fps. I think I never had a fast enough card for that camera however.

whereas BDery wished for faster frame-rate, I stumbled upon it.

I probably wasn't clear, I said it was something I wished for 3-4 times, no more than that. So it's not something I desired, just a bonus.

And yes, DSLRs have live view, but bar a very few that have come along in the last couple of years, they're not really designed to use that live view as their principle way of taking pictures. From software to ergonomics it's noticeable that that's the case. It's almost always an add-on, which is certainly not the case for a mirrorless camera.

Using Live view on the K-1 feels in no way different than on the Sony A7C. It's much more dependant on the lens, of course, and older lenses are not designed for this. A new lens won't struggle quite as much. I do see that Sony's AF tracking is outstanding (hardly a surprise when compared to Pentax). But the act of using live view, in itself, is the same. That and the K-1's tilting screen which I think I like better. Anyway, when I use live view I'm generally on a tripod, and not looking about ultimate speed.

[normhead]

I’ve had cameras that have shot as slow as 5fps K1 and 5dsr all the way up to 20fps R5. If I’m shooting action I want all the fps and focus point coverage I can get.

I suspect everyone wants it, just because it sounds cool... but showing that you actually get anything for it is different. 8 FPS, on the K-3 is quite good. That's an image every .125 seconds. 20 frames per second is .05 frames per second. How much happens in .075 seconds? Your subject has too be very fast for that to make difference. If you specialize in very fast there's definitely change it might make a difference, very fast requires specialized shooting locations. IF you aren't willing to travel to locations where you can take that kind of image, they are largely irrelevant. SO you can eliminate a huge number of shooters needing 20 FPS, just because they rarely put themselves in a position to need it.

The K-new is 12 FPS, I was hoping for 10.

How out posting a high speed burst where we can see all the images? That would let us determine if wee'd ever actually need 20 FPS. For my dogs even a K-1 a a frame ever .25 seconds works fine.

I had 10 choices.....


I chose 1


Would more FPS have been beneficial? Personally I don't think so. But I'd love to see some visual evidence otherwise, to help with parameters. At what subject speed does 20 FPS became optimal, and can you actually track the subject going that fast?