Originally posted by EFats My last Pentax was film...that's how long ago!
I've had enough of those ground level shots that I appreciate what a flippy screen might do for me, but then again, my comment about just firing off a bunch of random shots and hoping for the best...
I like the smaller, tiny mirroless cameras. I have one, it's practically pocketable and has given me some FANTASTIC shots. But there are 2 huge issues:
1) Battery life does not match up to my old, old DSLR and is really not sufficient. I do not like carrying spare battery and sometimes it doesn't last a day. I really am on the go a lot sometimes and travelling light so I do not want to fiddle with a 2nd piece of equipment. My older DSLR can sometimes go an entire trip, several days, without recharging
A K70 is rated 480 shots per charge, K3 is rated 720 shots for a charge. And when the battery are old, autonomy decrease.
Originally posted by EFats 2) So many missed/garbaged shots due to the slower autofocus, stuff that I would catch with my older DSLR. I know Pentax doesn't have a reputation for being the best here but I think it would do better than a 10 year old DSLR which was pretty ok for me.
In term of AF, K70 match basically a expert/pro APSC Nikon DSLR that is 10-12 year old. K3 has much better autofocus than K70. It is comparable to expert/pro APSC body of Nikon that is 7 year old. Overall still worse for sports/action but quite capable.
Many there would defend the brand and they would be right that a K3 is good enough for most things as long as there no fast action involved and even with fast action you'd manage as long as you know your stuff. K70 simply lack the hardware and software for it. And after all K3 is already quite old body.
K70 is an entry/mid level offering and Pentax has on purpose used an old AF module and old metering module. It is still reliable and fast, even in low light but it wouldn't allow to focus preciselly on a subject reliably, the white balance and metering isn't as accurate. This is simply that K3 is a pro level body made to last and is quite efficiant while the K70 target more amateurs, beginers. Sure the K70 is more recent, so it is a bit better at high isos and it has an articulated screen, but in term of pure photographics feature and capability, it isn't really a match to a K3.
In term of price for money and in term of having a camera that perform well overall and that'll last you for years, the K3 is the way to go.
Originally posted by EFats I do want an onboard flash. I had hoped the newer mirrorless with high ISO would actually negate the need for one (which is typically low light situation, not for the other purposes which it can be used for) but this hasn't been the case. I don't want to carry a separate flash as is the case with my mirrorless because I just end up not carrying it.
Even the most recent KP or the FF K1 with the best high iso performance need a bit more effort for great low light AF performance:
- typically a fast lens. At least f/2.8, ideally f/2 especially on APSC.
- A great techique with the right subject perfectly in focus (f/2-f/2.8 make it quite important).
- Shooting in RAW, even with the camera with the best JPEG engine of the most recent cameras and a significant experience in post processing and noise removal. Even if DxO would give great results out of the box, outstanding with the prime option enabled.
A good lighting equipment make wonders otherwise even with an old camera, but the on board flash can only salvage a scene. It will not allow you to craft the scene. With great lighting equipment you can achieve outstanding results with the kit lens and 10 years old APSC DSLR that the best FF body would not dream without flash. But as we both know this is quite anoying to go around with a set of dedicated flashes + the soft box etc. So failing that the fast lens + great experience + raw processong does a decent job.
Here a few example from low light shots with K3, no flash, processed with DXO:
K70 would do a bit better, but it would still need the fast lenses and RAW processing to achieve that. Without the lenses and raw processing, there a gap of 3-5EV and even if K70 has 1EV advantage this can't compensate that much. And also the keeper rate would be much lower due to AF tha isn't that precise to target the subject you want in focus. With f/2 or f/2.8 you can't allow the focus to not be were it should and the K70 off center AF points are to big to manage that accurately.
By the way current mirrorless body can have very good AF. A GX80/GX85 or a Sony A6300 do as good or better than the typicall DSLR.