is Pentax K3ii worth upgrading?

normhead · 09-20-2015, 08:33 AM - **1 Like**

Compared to a K-50 a K-3 makes more sense than new lenses unless you want a different FoV. And looking at your two lenses, I'd seriously consider the 18-135 or 16-85. I still use my K-5 even though I use a K-3 most of the time. I'm not convinced that for the average person who's absolute largest print is going to be 30x20, you need anymore than a K-5 for IQ. Yes you can get better IQ with an FF if you buy a the right FF, but, in many cases, you can exceed FF IQ with a K-50. There will be the odd image that an FF does better, but probably not more than 10%-5% of the time. And there are many images on the K-50 that will be equal. A K-3 will give you almost identical IQ to the lower end Full Frame cameras, even in low light. The FF gives you the ability to trade DoF for Noise, at the widest settings. But 90% of the settings available on FF are exactly the same if you match DoF on FF as on APS-c.

SO, unless you're talking more resolution, FF really isn't worth anything very often. You can buy higher res in FF, but, that's really only a factor if you're printing over 30x20 or have a 4k monitor, where you might see a difference with a high res picture, although that isn't confirmed by any actual research that I've seen.

For the most part, the need of FF is hype, not fact. You aren't going to go from not liking your images, to liking your images because you switch to an FF or even a K-3. Your friends who think they are getting better images with their FFs than you can with your K-50 are probably delusional. Most people who think they can get better IQ by buying better gear are. The best guys on the forum get better pictures with their phones than others do with their FFs. The technical specs of the camera are a very small part of that equation.

Work with what you have until you get mages you like. Then think of upgrading. And get a good multi-purpose zoom. You are very limited in your shooting options by the glass you are shooting with.

Last edited by normhead; 09-20-2015 at 08:45 AM.

**UncleVanya** · 09-20-2015, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by matthewxavier

Hi everyone, I m Xavier.
I had Pentax K-50, fisheye lens, 50mm both are DA lens.
I wanna upgrade my camera to higher level.
Should I wait for Full Frame or go for K3ii?

Originally posted by normhead

Compared to a K-50 a K-3 makes more sense than new lenses unless you want a different FoV. And looking at your two lenses, I'd seriously consider the 18-135 or 16-85. I still use my K-5 even though I use a K-3 most of the time. I'm not convinced that for the average person who's absolute largest print is going to be 30x20, you need anymore than a K-5 for IQ. Yes you can get better IQ with an FF if you buy a the right FF, but, in many cases, you can exceed FF IQ with a K-50. There will be the odd image that an FF does better, but probably not more than 10%-5% of the time. And there are many images on the K-50 that will be equal. A K-3 will give you almost identical IQ to the lower end Full Frame cameras, even in low light. The FF gives you the ability to trade DoF for Noise, at the widest settings. But 90% of the settings available on FF are exactly the same if you match DoF on FF as on APS-c.

SO, unless you're talking more resolution, FF really isn't worth anything very often. You can buy higher res in FF, but, that's really only a factor if you're printing over 30x20 or have a 4k monitor, where you might see a difference with a high res picture, although that isn't confirmed by any actual research that I've seen.

For the most part, the need of FF is hype, not fact. You aren't going to go from not liking your images, to liking your images because you switch to an FF or even a K-3. Your friends who think they are getting better images with their FFs than you can with your K-50 are probably delusional. Most people who think they can get better IQ by buying better gear are. The best guys on the forum get better pictures with their phones than others do with their FFs. The technical specs of the camera are a very small part of that equation.

Work with what you have until you get mages you like. Then think of upgrading. And get a good multi-purpose zoom. You are very limited in your shooting options by the glass you are shooting with.

I think the OP no longer owns the K50 and so buying now the decision is replace it with ? I would suspect buying a K3 on discount makes the most sense over K3ii and FF. The points above are excellent however.

Greenneck · 09-20-2015, 10:46 AM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

I think the OP no longer owns the K50 and so buying now the decision is replace it with ? I would suspect buying a K3 on discount makes the most sense over K3ii and FF. The points above are excellent however.

That does seem to be what happened. If I still had the k50 I would keep the k50. If had no camera id but the K3ii because I want the flucard use and the gps. I would be very worried that it was too much camera for me to handle though. The k50 really probably has hundreds of more features to get fantastic pictures than most of us who own them know how to use or use to their full capabilities. Editing raw in programs such as light room greatly helps out image quality and thats by far the cheapest option to start with.

Full frame will be very expensive as well as have a much more limited supply of glass for awhile and I don't see why anyone really needs a camera like that unless you make more than enough money off your photography to pay for it.

I considered upgrading camera bodys for awhile but I realized I was just thinking more is always better, then I decided to work on technique and glass

**UncleVanya** · 09-20-2015, 11:57 AM

Originally posted by Greenneck

That does seem to be what happened. If I still had the k50 I would keep the k50. If had no camera id but the K3ii because I want the flucard use and the gps. I would be very worried that it was too much camera for me to handle though. The k50 really probably has hundreds of more features to get fantastic pictures than most of us who own them know how to use or use to their full capabilities. Editing raw in programs such as light room greatly helps out image quality and thats by far the cheapest option to start with.

Full frame will be very expensive as well as have a much more limited supply of glass for awhile and I don't see why anyone really needs a camera like that unless you make more than enough money off your photography to pay for it.

I considered upgrading camera bodys for awhile but I realized I was just thinking more is always better, then I decided to work on technique and glass

I enjoyed my k50 and would still be shooting it but the fact is my dad decided he needed to get a k3 camera when he made a little money on a deal on some shotguns. Part of the deal involved trading away his k50.

He uses me for tech support so when he decided he had to have the k3... so I had no choice but to upgrade.

normhead · 09-20-2015, 01:18 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

I enjoyed my k50 and would still be shooting it but the fact is my dad decided he needed to get a k3 camera when he made a little money on a deal on some shotguns. Part of the deal involved trading away his k50.

He uses me for tech support so when he decided he had to have the k3... so I had no choice but to upgrade.

I still have a computer I bought to be same as my moms, so I could help her when she phoned. Been there done that. She's been dead 3 years, the computer is still going strong.

When I see the current prices of K-3s, I could sell my old camera bodies and get one. They are a deal.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Is it worth upgrading K5 to K5iis?	Maksat Tutan	Pentax DSLR Discussion	28	11-07-2014 12:20 PM
Is it worth upgrading my firmware	cybertaff	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	11-04-2014 06:10 PM
Is it worth upgrading from kit lens to Tamron 17-50?	Mike M.	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	11-29-2011 08:57 PM
Is it really worth upgrading *Ist DS to K-r in term of Image Quality	fgpinarli	Pentax K-r	16	03-01-2011 06:09 AM
is the k100d worth upgrading to	davekimber	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	07-14-2007 08:19 AM

09-20-2015, 08:33 AM - 1 Like	#16
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Compared to a K-50 a K-3 makes more sense than new lenses unless you want a different FoV. And looking at your two lenses, I'd seriously consider the 18-135 or 16-85. I still use my K-5 even though I use a K-3 most of the time. I'm not convinced that for the average person who's absolute largest print is going to be 30x20, you need anymore than a K-5 for IQ. Yes you can get better IQ with an FF if you buy a the right FF, but, in many cases, you can exceed FF IQ with a K-50. There will be the odd image that an FF does better, but probably not more than 10%-5% of the time. And there are many images on the K-50 that will be equal. A K-3 will give you almost identical IQ to the lower end Full Frame cameras, even in low light. The FF gives you the ability to trade DoF for Noise, at the widest settings. But 90% of the settings available on FF are exactly the same if you match DoF on FF as on APS-c. SO, unless you're talking more resolution, FF really isn't worth anything very often. You can buy higher res in FF, but, that's really only a factor if you're printing over 30x20 or have a 4k monitor, where you might see a difference with a high res picture, although that isn't confirmed by any actual research that I've seen. For the most part, the need of FF is hype, not fact. You aren't going to go from not liking your images, to liking your images because you switch to an FF or even a K-3. Your friends who think they are getting better images with their FFs than you can with your K-50 are probably delusional. Most people who think they can get better IQ by buying better gear are. The best guys on the forum get better pictures with their phones than others do with their FFs. The technical specs of the camera are a very small part of that equation. Work with what you have until you get mages you like. Then think of upgrading. And get a good multi-purpose zoom. You are very limited in your shooting options by the glass you are shooting with. Last edited by normhead; 09-20-2015 at 08:45 AM.

09-20-2015, 10:16 AM	#17
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,400	Originally posted by matthewxavier Hi everyone, I m Xavier. I had Pentax K-50, fisheye lens, 50mm both are DA lens. I wanna upgrade my camera to higher level. Should I wait for Full Frame or go for K3ii? Originally posted by normhead Compared to a K-50 a K-3 makes more sense than new lenses unless you want a different FoV. And looking at your two lenses, I'd seriously consider the 18-135 or 16-85. I still use my K-5 even though I use a K-3 most of the time. I'm not convinced that for the average person who's absolute largest print is going to be 30x20, you need anymore than a K-5 for IQ. Yes you can get better IQ with an FF if you buy a the right FF, but, in many cases, you can exceed FF IQ with a K-50. There will be the odd image that an FF does better, but probably not more than 10%-5% of the time. And there are many images on the K-50 that will be equal. A K-3 will give you almost identical IQ to the lower end Full Frame cameras, even in low light. The FF gives you the ability to trade DoF for Noise, at the widest settings. But 90% of the settings available on FF are exactly the same if you match DoF on FF as on APS-c. SO, unless you're talking more resolution, FF really isn't worth anything very often. You can buy higher res in FF, but, that's really only a factor if you're printing over 30x20 or have a 4k monitor, where you might see a difference with a high res picture, although that isn't confirmed by any actual research that I've seen. For the most part, the need of FF is hype, not fact. You aren't going to go from not liking your images, to liking your images because you switch to an FF or even a K-3. Your friends who think they are getting better images with their FFs than you can with your K-50 are probably delusional. Most people who think they can get better IQ by buying better gear are. The best guys on the forum get better pictures with their phones than others do with their FFs. The technical specs of the camera are a very small part of that equation. Work with what you have until you get mages you like. Then think of upgrading. And get a good multi-purpose zoom. You are very limited in your shooting options by the glass you are shooting with. I think the OP no longer owns the K50 and so buying now the decision is replace it with ? I would suspect buying a K3 on discount makes the most sense over K3ii and FF. The points above are excellent however.

09-20-2015, 10:46 AM	#18
Greenneck Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Posts: 200	Originally posted by UncleVanya I think the OP no longer owns the K50 and so buying now the decision is replace it with ? I would suspect buying a K3 on discount makes the most sense over K3ii and FF. The points above are excellent however. That does seem to be what happened. If I still had the k50 I would keep the k50. If had no camera id but the K3ii because I want the flucard use and the gps. I would be very worried that it was too much camera for me to handle though. The k50 really probably has hundreds of more features to get fantastic pictures than most of us who own them know how to use or use to their full capabilities. Editing raw in programs such as light room greatly helps out image quality and thats by far the cheapest option to start with. Full frame will be very expensive as well as have a much more limited supply of glass for awhile and I don't see why anyone really needs a camera like that unless you make more than enough money off your photography to pay for it. I considered upgrading camera bodys for awhile but I realized I was just thinking more is always better, then I decided to work on technique and glass

09-20-2015, 11:57 AM	#19
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,400	Originally posted by Greenneck That does seem to be what happened. If I still had the k50 I would keep the k50. If had no camera id but the K3ii because I want the flucard use and the gps. I would be very worried that it was too much camera for me to handle though. The k50 really probably has hundreds of more features to get fantastic pictures than most of us who own them know how to use or use to their full capabilities. Editing raw in programs such as light room greatly helps out image quality and thats by far the cheapest option to start with. Full frame will be very expensive as well as have a much more limited supply of glass for awhile and I don't see why anyone really needs a camera like that unless you make more than enough money off your photography to pay for it. I considered upgrading camera bodys for awhile but I realized I was just thinking more is always better, then I decided to work on technique and glass I enjoyed my k50 and would still be shooting it but the fact is my dad decided he needed to get a k3 camera when he made a little money on a deal on some shotguns. Part of the deal involved trading away his k50. He uses me for tech support so when he decided he had to have the k3... so I had no choice but to upgrade.

09-20-2015, 01:18 PM	#20
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by UncleVanya I enjoyed my k50 and would still be shooting it but the fact is my dad decided he needed to get a k3 camera when he made a little money on a deal on some shotguns. Part of the deal involved trading away his k50. He uses me for tech support so when he decided he had to have the k3... so I had no choice but to upgrade. I still have a computer I bought to be same as my moms, so I could help her when she phoned. Been there done that. She's been dead 3 years, the computer is still going strong. When I see the current prices of K-3s, I could sell my old camera bodies and get one. They are a deal.