[Stavri]

If the K3 Mark II was to take place I wouldn't expect more than Wifi/NFC integration, Flippy screen, more video shooting upgrades and some marginal increase in processing speed. From what I've seen Ricoh/Pentax doesn't have a new AF system, or another sensor in the works apart from the FF. Looking at their update history with the K5 Pentax hasn't updated sensor on their bodies (removing the AA filter doesn't count) so the K3 Mark II would most probably have the same sensor. I know we're speculating but adding a flippy screen and WiFi and better video shooting modes wouldn't be enough to make me sell my K3.

[jon404]

I'm with the post above that guesses we will see a K-3 II, with wifi, maybe an articulating screen.
As for image size. I'm retired, but back these days making ads and brochures for a few clients. The only benefit I get from a larger image is more room to crop... at the expense of longer processing time in Lightroom. So I'm very happy with my K-5 IIs, and, usually, the Pentax 16-45mm f/4 lens.
But the wifi, which should allow the camera to be controlled from an iPad, with the iPad as a preview screen... I could use that...

[stevebrot]

If the K3 Mark II was to take place I wouldn't expect more than Wifi/NFC integration, Flippy screen, more video shooting upgrades and some marginal increase in processing speed.

I would not expect more than Wi-Fi/NFC integration*. Given the current price point on the K-3, I don't believe that waiting would make much sense unless a person wanted to pay the price of being an early adopter.


Steve

* Tilt screen would require a new body

[Stavri]

I would not expect more than Wi-Fi/NFC integration*. Given the current price point on the K-3, I don't believe that waiting would make much sense unless a person wanted to pay the price of being an early adopter.


Steve

* Tilt screen would require a new body

you're right...

[orcaspirit]

I would try for a K5II/s over a K5 for slightly better AF, although the K3 can be had for quite inexpensive prices now and has better AF again.

Do not worry about 16MP vs 24MP, in fact the 16MP sensor may be slightly better at low light.

Many thanks for your response. I want to do low light for dusk are later on the water as I have a boat and my club has outstations that are away from civilization so I can take advantage of it that others might not. Yes there is a thought of price and I don't need the latest & greatest and stuff I call "over featured" in cameras, electronics etc. I've always been taught that composition, light and opportunity are your friend. Not screwing around with tabs & options that you miss a shot because of it. But that's me.

Thanks again.

[peterjcb]

...when you start seeing the K-3 regularly selling in the $500 range then you'll know that it's successor will soon be on the way...
Personally I love my K-3 and looking forward to getting the FF eventually but not right away...

[Dieseler]

I want to do low light for dusk are later on the water as I have a boat and my club has outstations that are away from civilization so I can take advantage of it that others might not.

To be honest, also consider the K50. It has the same 16MP sensor as the K5 series, is weather resistant and can take AA batteries (with the holder accessory) which could be handy when away from civilisation. There are some very good prices on this model.

[Steve.Ledger]

To be honest, also consider the K50. It has the same 16MP sensor as the K5 series, is weather resistant and can take AA batteries (with the holder accessory) which could be handy when away from civilisation. There are some very good prices on this model.

Yep, I love the AA trees out bush, but you have to be in the outback at the right time of year, too early and they're only AAAs...

[Dieseler]

Yep, I love the AA trees out bush, but you have to be in the outback at the right time of year, too early and they're only AAAs...

Or too late and they are all flat (by Marcia! How did you fare BTW?)

[stevebrot]

which could be handy when away from civilisation

Yep, I love the AA trees out bush, but you have to be in the outback at the right time of year, too early and they're only AAAs...

Seriously though, the notion of AA backup when unable to charge the LI battery is an often-cited advantage to owning the K-30 and K-50 and I tend to agree. That being said, unless you packed your own AA batteries, availability may be a problem. My daughter found this out while traveling in India. The charger for her K10D had a meltdown with the result that she shifted to her Nikon P&S as backup. The batteries on the Nikon where soon kaput, but reliable replacement batteries were basically unavailable. Even name brands in original packaging were DOA.


Steve

[Bagga_Txips]

Yep, I found this problem in rural China. It's cool to be able to use AAs, but when I was on a 90 minute coach trip deep into a farming area all the local residents wouldn't dream of wasting cash on badly stored cheap ripoff dulacell or everleady batteries when they could use homemade oil lamps or candles instead. So any AAs you could find in the little hole in the wall stores were regarded by them as exotic curiosities for tourists.The batteries could well be ten years old, would cost a fortune, and might give you ten extra shots if you were lucky.

[Nicolas06]

Hi kids - I'm new here and I have a K200D. I quite like the camera & lenses and I bought it used. Good enough to get my first cover shot on our regional glossy mag - Pacific Yachting in Feb. 15. My question is I was thinking to upgrade to a K-3 or K-5 but the trouble is already have a camera that is 10.2 MP what is satisfactory for my needs for now but the K-3 has 24.4 MP where the K-5 is only 16 MP.

Maybe a newbie question: How come? I'd thought 24.4 MP would be better than the K-5 at 16 MP. i like to do low light if I can and a bought a 1.8 lens recently for scenic which is better for either end of the day. And the opportunity that crop up.

I'm not new to photography but digital maybe. I'm just trying to learn.

Many thanks,
OS

It depend what you are after:

K5 family
Rougly everything from K30/K50, K5/K5-II/K5-IIs are in the same boat.
Even through they are more modern even K-S1/K-S2 are more like K5 familly than K3 even through the sensor is now 20MP.

This was a big step vs K7 and improved quite a bit the low light performance because they use a modern CMOS sensor and have some nice processing chain out of it, even if they cheat a bit by bluring things at high isos (even the Raws).
There also overall improvement like overall better AF, refined design and so own.

There was still a few problems with theses bodies and K3 is has fixed a good share of them.

K3

This is still the greatest Pentax body and honestly for some features by far.

Some gimmicks
There the gimmicks or the small improvement that may not be that needed like more than 8 frame per second in burst mode, support for 2 SD card or a design build for 200K actuations instead of the 100K of K5-K5-II or 50K of K30/K50. This is also the possibility to similate a low pass filter by shaking the sensor. I always had this one off since I brought the camera and never had issues even counting dozen thousand pictures with it.

Some Subtle improvements
Then there some refinement that are really usefull but still subtle. The improvement white balance that is more often just right and the metering that is much improved and mean that 99% of the time I'am just fine with -0.3Ev but that may be also me that became a bit better too. But I can confirm the difference is here. Exposure is better than before and white balance is better than before. The K5 bug for flash seems to be gone too.

A new sensor
Then a bit more interresting is the added resolution in the sensor. This not only the 24MP. Compared to any previous camera except the K5-IIs this is the removal of a the low pass filter AND the added resolution. The low pass filter alone tests between K5-II and K5-IIs show up to 20% increase in resolution. The 16=>24MP thing can add as much is the lense is good enough so that a 40% theorical increase in resolution. The same as it would be if we got from 16 to 32MP but kept the low pass filter.

This means that well you can print really larger, actually the double size. But honestly a K5 had already so much that you really need something like 20x30" to see a difference.

What is more subtle but still interresting is the more cropping capability. With great lenses you just can crop more. You can get really great 100-120mm shoots from your FA77 and still print large. Like you can crop a lot your 50-135mm shoots as long as you don't use it wide open.

Here for example a 100% crop of this 50-135 taken at 80mm. The actual reframing make it show the same are as a 400mm:




And here is crop from FA50, the cropping make it framed like a 240mm:



The K5 was somewhat capable of that up to a point but many time as was a bit disapointed. First because the low pass filter was preventing to have 100% pixel level sharpness. While the number where same to be 16MP... The actual resolution was more like 6MP. Now the 24MP of the K3 are more like 12MP. By comparison a 12MP shoot of a compact camera is only worth 2-4MP of real quality if you ask.

So you have more margin, you can particulary appreciate that if you are a birder because your DA300 just really become something like a 400 and you can get reasonnable result top to 500mm of cropping, even 600 or more in perfect lighting conditions.

Even for all prime addict or people wanting a light package you added value to all your lenses. You need less primes to cover the same range, and your longest focal give you more reach than before and if you setup it now you might need a slighly shorter max focal length than before. That awesome.

Much better AF - A real game changer.

This one is the real game changer. This is by far the best thing. All the other Pentax camera have just big off center AF points. This means that if you shoot a portrait either you relyed on manual focus and your eyes to help or you had great chance that your focus on the eye was more on the elbrow, or the nose. And that with large apperture, yout portrait was not as sharp as intended not because the sensor was not good enough, but because the focus was not right. You could use the center AF point that true. But if you reframed after, the focus would have changed enough that for a headshoot it would be off and if you didn't this mean you needed a shorter focal length and to reframe drastically.

The K3 has much smaller AF point. You can use a large apperture like f/2 or f/1.4, you can select an off center point (like the subject eye), you trigger the AF, you shoot. It is in perfect focus. Really, a game changer for large appertures.

There other things already present in K5-IIs and I think K-S2 too. The focus work well in dim light. I remember all the time when I was trying to take shoot in a bar where the focus was off even when the deph of field wasn't that small. Because the AF was not working that well in theses conditions. It was long and not very precise.

Now it works well in dim light too.

There the added speed overall. The AF is more decisive and for screw drive lenses (like all ltd except the 20-40) the motor got better and faster too.

Now you can just trust the camera to focus on what you ask it to focus on. That really better than before and of a great comfort if you are in a hurry or if like me your eyes sight is not good enough for manual focussing.

Conclusion
With the current prices for the K3, if you want a serious body to last you for a long time, this is the to go for. Even K-S2 is not at all at the same level. The only thing that it got from itself is being lighter and having an articulated LCD. Now really for now it is still the K3 that is the most capable in Pentax land, and by far.

[Barry Pearson]

K3
This is still the greatest Pentax body and honestly for some features by far.
Some gimmicks
There the gimmicks or the small improvement that may not be that needed like more than 8 frame per second in burst mode, support for 2 SD card or a design build for 200K actuations instead of the 100K of K5-K5-II or 50K of K30/K50. This is also the possibility to similate a low pass filter by shaking the sensor. I always had this one off since I brought the camera and never had issues even counting dozen thousand pictures with it.

I want faster burst mode than 8 frames per second; the K-3 is inadequate for me sometimes. I've used 2 SD cards with the FluCard, and for some types of photography such as wedding photography recording every image twice can be important.

So while these may well not be useful to many people, they are certainly not gimmicks.

[Nicolas06]

I want faster burst mode than 8 frames per second; the K-3 is inadequate for me sometimes. I've used 2 SD cards with the FluCard, and for some types of photography such as wedding photography recording every image twice can be important.

So while these may well not be useful to many people, they are certainly not gimmicks.

Sure there always the 1% of the users that need a specific feature and find it key. That's why the highend camera have so many feature. Not everybody really need the astro tracer function neither.

Anyway it is not like there a huge difference between 7 and 8 fps. If 8 fps doesn't cut it and is limiting you, 9 or 10 fps will not change much and 7 would not be noticably slower neither. The difference is irrelevant between a K5 and a K3 on this point. If you really need more than 8fps, that a 1Dx you want and 14fps. Or to not use a DSLR and it slow mirror anymore.

I wonder through what specific use you really need it for. Most action shooter would prefer a D7100 with some good pro glass that will allow to have the subject kept in focus and be limited with 6fps than having the high burst rate of the K3 but more miss focussed shoots.

[Barry Pearson]

Sure there always the 1% of the users that need a specific feature and find it key. That's why the highend camera have so many feature. Not everybody really need the astro tracer function neither.
Anyway it is not like there a huge difference between 7 and 8 fps. If 8 fps doesn't cut it and is limiting you, 9 or 10 fps will not change much and 7 would not be noticably slower neither. The difference is irrelevant between a K5 and a K3 on this point. If you really need more than 8fps, that a 1Dx you want and 14fps. Or to not use a DSLR and it slow mirror anymore.
I wonder through what specific use you really need it for. Most action shooter would prefer a D7100 with some good pro glass that will allow to have the subject kept in focus and be limited with 6fps than having the high burst rate of the K3 but more miss focussed shoots.

Here are some of the sorts of photography I do.

The difference between a K-5 and a K-3 was important to me. (I have both, plus a K-5IIs in between which is an important improvement over the K-5).

I compete with amateur photographers who use IDx cameras. I want to get as close as possible to that performance without wasting much of my investment in K-mount equipment. I have already pre-ordered both of the new D FA lenses, partly to get faster better AF. I will be buying more D FA lenses as they are released, if they offer a significant improvement over what I am using. I am trying to get high burst rate and also reduce the number of missed shots.