[Doundounba]

I thought AF is better with K-70 according to the demonstration video ...

Really, you're going to use two random videos from the Internet to compare AF performance? (FWIW, the K-70 video is only focusing at near-infinity, AFAICT.)

To me, from the tenor of the thread discussion, it sounds like you want the K-70, and maybe that's the most important factor. I'm serious - don't underestimate the influence of desire. Both are good cameras. If one of them makes you want to go out and shoot more than the other, then maybe that's the one you should be using.

What I hadn't thought of is that the K-70 might have an advantage in Liveview AF - remains to be tested. I think it also has video AF advantages - I don't pay much attention to video features. But for through the viewfinder AF, the K-70 has a fairly old AF engine.

[W.j.christy]

Owning a K-3 and looking at the K-70 I still would prefer my K-3 over the K-70. Just a point of note I own a k-3 not a k-3II but the below is applicable to both.

The ergonomics of the K-3 series are very good, not to say that the ergonomics of the K-70 won't be good but based on experience with previous non-flagship models, they won't be as good. If you have large hands like me, you will truly appreciate the feeling of the K-3 in your hands. To draw a comparison, the K-3 is liking owning a snap-on ratchet as opposed to a craftsman. Both are good, but there is something about the fit and finish of a snap-on.

The dual SD card slots has been mentioned a few times, I consider this a huge advantage. The ability to have an instant backup, or to split where the .jpg vs Raw images go is very nice indeed. Something that I now can't live without. The k-70 doesn't have that option.

I recently discovered what its like to have a battery grip on my camera as well. The added weight and comfort that comes from a grip, especially when taking portraits or the like (i have used it outdoors for scenery to great effect), means it is something that now can't live without as well. The K-70 doesn't accept a battery grip.

Something that is not mentioned (or i haven't seen in the previous comments) is the button layout. The K-70 has a great feature set, however, you will be searching through the menus to be able to access many of those features where as with the k-3 many of the features you need to adjust will have some button that you can press to access them on the outside of the camera instead of searching through all the menu's.

If I am not mistaken, the expected battery life of the k-3 is better as well. I am sure this remains to be seen, but judging by the the past mid level APS-C Pentaxes I would assume this is the case.

Finally, and to reiterate many previous posts, the optical auto focus engine in the k-3 is the most advanced of the APS-C lineup. The K-3's auto focus is completely new with 27 auto focus points of which 25 are cross type an the center 3 being sensitive down to -3EV (if I remember correctly). Where as the K-70 is using the auto focus engine out of the K-5II/s which is 11 auto focus points, of which 9 are cross type and only the center point is sensitive down to -3 EV (again correct me if i am wrong) . The live view auto focus of the K-70 will most likely be superior to the K-3 due to the hybrid AF but if you don't use live view often then its a moot point.

just my $1.50 worth.

[TER-OR]

I know there already are some discussions going on in the internet about K-70s vs other stuff, but I'm a newbie to Pentax and hoped get some advises from experienced Pentax users. My question is pretty straightforward as the title suggests. Would you prefer to have K-3 II with 3200 shutter counts for $650? or get a new body of K-70 releasing next month in same price? Value-wise, which on do you think is better? Besides the K-70's advantages over K-3 II, the AF functionality, Wi-fi, and articulated LCD, the price point they offered on the bundle that comes with a pretty good kit lens (18-135mm WR) makes me more than happy to purchase this camera. The seller on ebay, however, says he mainly used the camera in the studio and offered shipping and return fee in case I'm not satisfied. I like the build quality, electronic monitor on the top of the camera, battery life and the GPS of the K-3 II as well, but mostly the build quality. Flash....? well...taking pictures in the darker situations is not my purpose of buying a camera at this point. I'm more into nature, landscapes and casual pictures in bright daylight and maybe some Astro shots. At this moment I'm more in to the new K-70, to be honest. And there is a poll indicating K-70 is slightly more preferred over K-3s as well. But this thread, I did not just created to see who want which camera more, but I also wanted to learn from different perspectives of experienced people. I hope to see some great responses. Thanks!

There are a couple other things to consider - the K3II has no built-in flash. It has built-in GPS instead. If GPS isn't of value to you, but the flash is, then these are critical features. The small AF210 flash is really nice, and compact, but is still one more thing to carry around (plus it recharges fairly slowly). Same with articulating screen, if that is important to you.

The flagship models are built like tanks. They will take a beating and keep functioning well. My K5 looks a bit battered (it fell a couple times and was thrown once), but still works great. My K3II hasn't been around long enough to get beaten up. The K70 is of the mid-range series. If you are careful you won't have a problem. If you're in active situations where you can't always hold the camera closely (or are naturally a bit negligent) then the K3II might be a better choice.

[talkskiwon]

The K3 can use a grip, is rated for more shutter life most likely, and will have a more pro/solid feel to it. Plus, you can get it now and it should hold better value. Dual card slots is awesome.

Just keeping it posted. I missed the chance to get the $680 used K-3 ii yesterday. I was thinking maybe the camera is not meant to be mine and decided to go for the new K-70 bundle. To get some reward off my purchase, I applied for an adequate credit card and started to get ready for the purchasing action. Then out of no specific reason, I went to ebay and searched for camera deals. Probably just to see what's around ebay one last time. The moment I thought I was done searching, I clicked to view the K-3 ii listings in ending-soon order. And I gotta tell you. I never see anything in ending-soon order on ebay. I'm not a big fan of bidding. I have literally never clicked to see which listings are ending-soon before. And right there then! I found this amazing K-3 ii deal. I saw a Japanese vendor selling a bundle that comes with a new K-3 ii body and a new HD DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR in just $1133, shipping included. There were many same bundle listings from other Japanese vendors, but the price range was pretty wide. Also, there was just one bundle (out of 3) left on that listing, so I had to think. After some thoughts, I purchased that last bundle with my old card. I simply could not blow this chance to get that bundle waiting for my credit card to arrive. So... In short, the K-70 bundle that comes with DA 18-135mm is $900...and K-70 body-only is $650....If I subtract the $500 price tag of 18-85mm lens that comes with my K-3 ii bundle from the total spending, it gives me $633........... BANG BANG! A new K-3 ii for $633. The lens itself is $500 on Amazon and since it's a 2014 release, used version of is not so much cheaper either. From the reviews, 18-85mm lens performance is very solid, so I will probably keep it, but just in case I don't like the lens and decide to sell it as new, I can well earn $450 off the lens, which then gives me $683 for the new K-3 ii. I'm Soo000O happy with this purchase. If my credit card has arrived sooner, this purchase could have been instant $383 according to my credit card rewards, but that will happen soon with other future purchases so it don't matter no more. Anyways, this is how my first camera purchase ended and wanted to share my experience. If there is any advice on what to do with the new 18-85mm lens, please let me know. I think its wise to stick with the lens, but people have different opinions....so I want to open my mind and listen to all. Thanks for reading and the advises.

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 06:34 AM ----------

There are a couple other things to consider - the K3II has no built-in flash. It has built-in GPS instead. If GPS isn't of value to you, but the flash is, then these are critical features. The small AF210 flash is really nice, and compact, but is still one more thing to carry around (plus it recharges fairly slowly). Same with articulating screen, if that is important to you.

The flagship models are built like tanks. They will take a beating and keep functioning well. My K5 looks a bit battered (it fell a couple times and was thrown once), but still works great. My K3II hasn't been around long enough to get beaten up. The K70 is of the mid-range series. If you are careful you won't have a problem. If you're in active situations where you can't always hold the camera closely (or are naturally a bit negligent) then the K3II might be a better choice.

Thanks

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 06:35 AM ----------

Owning a K-3 and looking at the K-70 I still would prefer my K-3 over the K-70. Just a point of note I own a k-3 not a k-3II but the below is applicable to both.

The ergonomics of the K-3 series are very good, not to say that the ergonomics of the K-70 won't be good but based on experience with previous non-flagship models, they won't be as good. If you have large hands like me, you will truly appreciate the feeling of the K-3 in your hands. To draw a comparison, the K-3 is liking owning a snap-on ratchet as opposed to a craftsman. Both are good, but there is something about the fit and finish of a snap-on.

The dual SD card slots has been mentioned a few times, I consider this a huge advantage. The ability to have an instant backup, or to split where the .jpg vs Raw images go is very nice indeed. Something that I now can't live without. The k-70 doesn't have that option.

I recently discovered what its like to have a battery grip on my camera as well. The added weight and comfort that comes from a grip, especially when taking portraits or the like (i have used it outdoors for scenery to great effect), means it is something that now can't live without as well. The K-70 doesn't accept a battery grip.

Something that is not mentioned (or i haven't seen in the previous comments) is the button layout. The K-70 has a great feature set, however, you will be searching through the menus to be able to access many of those features where as with the k-3 many of the features you need to adjust will have some button that you can press to access them on the outside of the camera instead of searching through all the menu's.

If I am not mistaken, the expected battery life of the k-3 is better as well. I am sure this remains to be seen, but judging by the the past mid level APS-C Pentaxes I would assume this is the case.

Finally, and to reiterate many previous posts, the optical auto focus engine in the k-3 is the most advanced of the APS-C lineup. The K-3's auto focus is completely new with 27 auto focus points of which 25 are cross type an the center 3 being sensitive down to -3EV (if I remember correctly). Where as the K-70 is using the auto focus engine out of the K-5II/s which is 11 auto focus points, of which 9 are cross type and only the center point is sensitive down to -3 EV (again correct me if i am wrong) . The live view auto focus of the K-70 will most likely be superior to the K-3 due to the hybrid AF but if you don't use live view often then its a moot point.

just my $1.50 worth.

You are right. K-3s are the way to go!

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 06:36 AM ----------

I would go with the K3-II myself but only just barely. The K-70 appears to have the important features that have been left out of the K-50/30 in the past. 14 bit raw, better AF, etc. The addition of Pixel shift is a major step up on par with the flagship apsc body. The K3-ii does offer a few features that the K-70 lacks, dual slots for SD cards is one of those, battery grip is another, top LCD is a third. WiFi and tilting screen are really nice features the K-70 has over the K-3ii.

---------- Post added 06-21-16 at 10:43 PM ----------

I think in Live View there may be advantages to the K-70 but not in normal optical viewfinder mode.

Yes sir K-3 ii

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 06:37 AM ----------

K-3II for me for sure.

For me, too!

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 06:38 AM ----------

K-3 II has better AF, GPS, 200k shutter, (probably) quieter shutter, top ergonomics & composition adjustment. The K-70 has OBF, wifi, tilty screen, less weight and a warranty (since it's new). One big advantage of the K-3 II is that you can have it right now - new or used. You won't have the K-70 for probably at least one month. Tough call, but you know what they say about a bird in the hand...

The call got so easy with good price

[W.j.christy]

Congratulations on your new camera! I know you will love it!

[VoiceOfReason]

Just keeping it posted. I missed the chance to get the $680 used K-3 ii yesterday. I was thinking maybe the camera is not meant to be mine and decided to go for the new K-70 bundle. To get some reward off my purchase, I applied for an adequate credit card and started to get ready for the purchasing action. Then out of no specific reason, I went to ebay and searched for camera deals. Probably just to see what's around ebay one last time. The moment I thought I was done searching, I clicked to view the K-3 ii listings in ending-soon order. And I gotta tell you. I never see anything in ending-soon order on ebay. I'm not a big fan of bidding. I have literally never clicked to see which listings are ending-soon before. And right there then! I found this amazing K-3 ii deal. I saw a Japanese vendor selling a bundle that comes with a new K-3 ii body and a new HD DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR in just $1133, shipping included. There were many same bundle listings from other Japanese vendors, but the price range was pretty wide. Also, there was just one bundle (out of 3) left on that listing, so I had to think. After some thoughts, I purchased that last bundle with my old card. I simply could not blow this chance to get that bundle waiting for my credit card to arrive. So... In short, the K-70 bundle that comes with DA 18-135mm is $900...and K-70 body-only is $650....If I subtract the $500 price tag of 18-85mm lens that comes with my K-3 ii bundle from the total spending, it gives me $633........... BANG BANG! A new K-3 ii for $633. The lens itself is $500 on Amazon and since it's a 2014 release, used version of is not so much cheaper either. From the reviews, 18-85mm lens performance is very solid, so I will probably keep it, but just in case I don't like the lens and decide to sell it as new, I can well earn $450 off the lens, which then gives me $683 for the new K-3 ii. I'm Soo000O happy with this purchase. If my credit card has arrived sooner, this purchase could have been instant $383 according to my credit card rewards, but that will happen soon with other future purchases so it don't matter no more. Anyways, this is how my first camera purchase ended and wanted to share my experience. If there is any advice on what to do with the new 18-85mm lens, please let me know. I think its wise to stick with the lens, but people have different opinions....so I want to open my mind and listen to all. Thanks for reading and the advises.

Okay, go ahead and use the 16-85 since by all accounts it is a great lens, and the difference between it and the 18-135 is you gaim more on the wide end but lose on the long end, and either lens is a fine lens. Not quite up to DA* standards, but still fine. Use it as your walk around lens. For a longer one you can go with a HD DA 55-300, and then you're set from 16-300, and if you want wider the 10-17 (it isn't WR) would fill in that end, and both together on sale can be had for 600ish dollars at times. After that it is all up to what you want to do. You have a very capable camera coming your way.

[UncleVanya]

The 16-85 compares favorably to the 16-50 DA* lens in everything except aperture. That's a really nice buy. Good luck and enjoy!

[talkskiwon]

Congratulations on your new camera! I know you will love it!

Thank you!

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 10:48 AM ----------

Okay, go ahead and use the 16-85 since by all accounts it is a great lens, and the difference between it and the 18-135 is you gaim more on the wide end but lose on the long end, and either lens is a fine lens. Not quite up to DA* standards, but still fine. Use it as your walk around lens. For a longer one you can go with a HD DA 55-300, and then you're set from 16-300, and if you want wider the 10-17 (it isn't WR) would fill in that end, and both together on sale can be had for 600ish dollars at times. After that it is all up to what you want to do. You have a very capable camera coming your way.

What are some distinguished qualities of DA* lenses? and I'd love to have a ultra wide lens but isn't 10-17 a fisheye that turns everything too curved? saw some example photos and people know how to flatten it out though. How do they do that?

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 10:49 AM ----------

The 16-85 compares favorably to the 16-50 DA* lens in everything except aperture. That's a really nice buy. Good luck and enjoy!

Thanks! I think I will enjoy the camera a lot.

[UncleVanya]

Everything you ever wanted to know...
Ultra Wide Angle 4-Lens Showdown Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

Just published.

[VoiceOfReason]

What are some distinguished qualities of DA* lenses? and I'd love to have a ultra wide lens but isn't 10-17 a fisheye that turns everything too curved? saw some example photos and people know how to flatten it out though. How do they do that?

The DA* lenses are constant aperture more premium grade lenses which are also WR too. For UWA the Sigma 8-16 is really awesome, really sharp, and gives great colors, but I may sell mine because the Sigma 12-24 gives exactly the same FOV on the K1 as the 8-16 does on the K3, so it becomes redundant for me. Other ones to consider if you don't like fisheye are the Sigma 10-20 or Tamron 10-24. I had the Tamron and it was sharp and had great colors.

[talkskiwon]

Everything you ever wanted to know...
Ultra Wide Angle 4-Lens Showdown Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

Just published.

What a timing again haha. Thank you for posting the article

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 01:26 PM ----------

The DA* lenses are constant aperture more premium grade lenses which are also WR too. For UWA the Sigma 8-16 is really awesome, really sharp, and gives great colors, but I may sell mine because the Sigma 12-24 gives exactly the same FOV on the K1 as the 8-16 does on the K3, so it becomes redundant for me. Other ones to consider if you don't like fisheye are the Sigma 10-20 or Tamron 10-24. I had the Tamron and it was sharp and had great colors.

Sounds like my choice will be the Tamron lens for sure. Thanks!

---------- Post added 06-23-16 at 01:28 PM ----------

Congratulations on your new camera! I know you will love it!

Thank you so much!!

[TER-OR]

I rented an 8-16 for a couple weeks, it's a special lens. I'm tempted to buy one but with the 10-17 I don't know that I'd use both.