Used K-3. Is it worth it?

Dewman · 02-17-2016, 12:57 PM

There is a used K-3 for sale locally with less than 200 SA's. It comes with a SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm WR lens and a SMC Pentax-DA 55-300 ED (non-WR) lens. I think it can be had for $700.00. It comes with all acessories....battery, battery charger, original box for camera, manual, cords, lens caps, hoods (except for the 55-300, and a 16gb wifi memory card.

I've looked at the reviews and am I correct in that the battery for the K-3 is NOT the same as the one for the K-50?

Four years ago, I began my journey in the digital world with a K2000, then moved up to a K-50.... which I love. I also have a K-30 that I like maybe a little more than the K-50. But, the increase in MP.... and the added increase in resolution this brings, is a loud voice I'm having a hard time ignoring.

With the coming of the much-anticipated K-1.... and the also anticipated drop in the value of previous models of Pentax cameras, what's your thoughts on this price?

I'm SOOOO tempted to drop the hammer on it!

**jpzk** · 02-17-2016, 12:59 PM

Seems like one heck of a good deal!
I've just spent about that much just for the (new) K3 body-only.

**colonel00** · 02-17-2016, 01:05 PM

That's not a bad deal at all. If I hadn't already decided to go with the K-3 II, I'd be all over it. That and I already have the 18-135 and 55-300. That's $400-500 in lenses right there.

robthebloke · 02-17-2016, 01:09 PM

Yeah, the battery is different, however it does last much longer. I've never ran out of battery on a full day of shooting. Sounds like a good deal, assuming it's some ex-demo (and not returned because it has poo on the sensor, after someone dropped it in the toilet), then I'd say go for it

pathdoc · 02-17-2016, 01:12 PM - **1 Like**

I personally would not do it. That's just me. I could technically* afford just about any Pentax camera if I wanted it tomorrow, but I'm holding off until my K-5 dies and then jumping straight to the K-1. For me, the K-3 does not represent a significant enough difference in capability. Yes, it is a more capable camera, but the K-5 does everything I need it to do to a more than sufficient standard. Had my *ist-DL not died, I would probably never have replaced it.

If you WANT the extra megapixels (and other juicy extras that the K-3 provides), and the lenses do not duplicate what's in your collection already, and you're happy spending $700 that you won't be able to put towards the K-1 then sure, it's a hell of a package. Those two lenses plus the body at less than 200 shots for that price? You're practically picking up one of the lenses for free and the other for seriously dirt cheap. But it's almost too good to be true, so make sure you have right of return or some other form of protection if something goes sour mechanically or electronically.

* = If I came home with a new 645Z and some lenses without prior discussion, my wife would probably shoot me and I'm not sure I could blame her.

robthebloke · 02-17-2016, 01:21 PM

There is a big difference between the k-5 and k-3. If FF is your thing, then one would assume you're already eyeballing it. If FF is not your thing, then the jump from k-5 to k-3 is much much bigger than the jump from k-x to k-5.

**boriscleto** · 02-17-2016, 01:29 PM

Yes it is worth it. I don't foresee much of a drop in the price of the K-3 because of the K-1. The thing that will drop the price of the K-3 is the release of a new APS-C body. Lenses aren't going to drop much more either.

bertwert · 02-17-2016, 02:18 PM

Definitely worth it!

lineswest · 02-17-2016, 02:21 PM

I've been using the K3 for a little over a year now, unless you're dedicated to going FF, then it's well worth it (which seems to be theme emerging here)

**Jacquot** · 02-17-2016, 05:49 PM

K3 is a great camera, to me you cannot do better, except the new K1, but that takes in a good bit more to consider. I love my K3, and always use it for the most critical work, it is so easy to use and great results. I chose it for the last vacation, and even though I took my Fuji X100 it stayed in the bag. Great handling body, and very easy to carry with primes. I was coming from the K30, which is also very good, but this is definitely better. Are you ready to pay $1800 for the alternative? I am not yet, but I do like what I've seen of it.

Dewman · 02-17-2016, 06:04 PM - **1 Like**

I have decided to buy the K-3 camera kit. It cost me $800.00, but I think that was more than a fair price. I already have the DA-18-135mm lens and I have A DA L 55-300mm ED lens, but the one that comes with the K-3 is a DA 55-300 ED. What is your opinion of the difference between the two.... other than the fact that the DA has the quick shift feature? The DA L version gets a higher rating on the reviews.... supposed to be a little sharper.

Color me excited!

**colonel00** · 02-17-2016, 06:08 PM - **1 Like**

I'll take the 18-135 for $100

**boriscleto** · 02-17-2016, 06:26 PM

Originally posted by Dewman

The DA L version gets a higher rating on the reviews.... supposed to be a little sharper.

All three 55-300s are the same optically.

UserAccessDenied · 02-23-2016, 09:03 AM

EDIT: Woops... Didn't see you already bought it. haha!
Congrats on the new cam!

Dewman · 02-23-2016, 09:42 AM

Originally posted by UserAccessDenied

EDIT: Woops... Didn't see you already bought it. haha!
Congrats on the new cam!

Nope, didn't get it. Some rascal beat me to it! Oh well.... he who snoozes loses! My bad! My VERY bad!

But, being "stuck" with my K-50 and K-30 isn't the end of the world!

02-17-2016, 12:57 PM	#1
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492	Used K-3. Is it worth it? There is a used K-3 for sale locally with less than 200 SA's. It comes with a SMC Pentax-DA 18-135mm WR lens and a SMC Pentax-DA 55-300 ED (non-WR) lens. I think it can be had for $700.00. It comes with all acessories....battery, battery charger, original box for camera, manual, cords, lens caps, hoods (except for the 55-300, and a 16gb wifi memory card. I've looked at the reviews and am I correct in that the battery for the K-3 is NOT the same as the one for the K-50? Four years ago, I began my journey in the digital world with a K2000, then moved up to a K-50.... which I love. I also have a K-30 that I like maybe a little more than the K-50. But, the increase in MP.... and the added increase in resolution this brings, is a loud voice I'm having a hard time ignoring. With the coming of the much-anticipated K-1.... and the also anticipated drop in the value of previous models of Pentax cameras, what's your thoughts on this price? I'm SOOOO tempted to drop the hammer on it!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Have 50/1.8, is it worth it to buy a 35/2.4?	keanex	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	02-28-2016 12:52 AM
International travel, is it worth upgrading from K-30 to K-3/3ii?	Newtophotos	Pentax DSLR Discussion	15	12-27-2015 11:30 AM
Sony's new 42 MP sensor. Is it worth it?	normhead	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	7	10-18-2015 10:29 AM
Is it worth it to switch to K-5 II for the sake of ultrasonic dust removal?	rrstuff	Pentax DSLR Discussion	13	12-26-2013 05:53 AM
Is it worth it to get the k-5, or will the k-x do??	Moz Artistic Visionz	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	10-03-2011 06:34 PM

02-17-2016, 12:59 PM	#2
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	Seems like one heck of a good deal! I've just spent about that much just for the (new) K3 body-only.

02-17-2016, 01:05 PM	#3
colonel00 Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Shawnee, KS Posts: 483	That's not a bad deal at all. If I hadn't already decided to go with the K-3 II, I'd be all over it. That and I already have the 18-135 and 55-300. That's $400-500 in lenses right there.

02-17-2016, 01:09 PM	#4
robthebloke Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 844	Yeah, the battery is different, however it does last much longer. I've never ran out of battery on a full day of shooting. Sounds like a good deal, assuming it's some ex-demo (and not returned because it has poo on the sensor, after someone dropped it in the toilet), then I'd say go for it

02-17-2016, 01:12 PM - 1 Like	#5
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	I personally would not do it. That's just me. I could technically* afford just about any Pentax camera if I wanted it tomorrow, but I'm holding off until my K-5 dies and then jumping straight to the K-1. For me, the K-3 does not represent a significant enough difference in capability. Yes, it is a more capable camera, but the K-5 does everything I need it to do to a more than sufficient standard. Had my ist-DL not died, I would probably never have replaced it. If you WANT the extra megapixels (and other juicy extras that the K-3 provides), and the lenses do not duplicate what's in your collection already, and you're happy spending $700 that you won't be able to put towards the K-1 then sure, it's a hell of a package. Those two lenses plus the body at less than 200 shots for that price? You're practically picking up one of the lenses for free and the other for seriously dirt cheap. But it's almost too good to be true, so make sure you have right of return or some other form of protection if something goes sour mechanically or electronically. = If I came home with a new 645Z and some lenses without prior discussion, my wife would probably shoot me and I'm not sure I could blame her.

02-17-2016, 01:21 PM	#6
robthebloke Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Sydney Photos: Albums Posts: 844	There is a big difference between the k-5 and k-3. If FF is your thing, then one would assume you're already eyeballing it. If FF is not your thing, then the jump from k-5 to k-3 is much much bigger than the jump from k-x to k-5.

02-17-2016, 01:29 PM	#7
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Yes it is worth it. I don't foresee much of a drop in the price of the K-3 because of the K-1. The thing that will drop the price of the K-3 is the release of a new APS-C body. Lenses aren't going to drop much more either.

02-17-2016, 02:18 PM	#8
bertwert Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Golden, BC Posts: 15,173	Definitely worth it!

02-17-2016, 02:21 PM	#9
lineswest New Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: The Palouse Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 16	I've been using the K3 for a little over a year now, unless you're dedicated to going FF, then it's well worth it (which seems to be theme emerging here)

02-17-2016, 05:49 PM	#10
Jacquot Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sun City Center, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,544	K3 is a great camera, to me you cannot do better, except the new K1, but that takes in a good bit more to consider. I love my K3, and always use it for the most critical work, it is so easy to use and great results. I chose it for the last vacation, and even though I took my Fuji X100 it stayed in the bag. Great handling body, and very easy to carry with primes. I was coming from the K30, which is also very good, but this is definitely better. Are you ready to pay $1800 for the alternative? I am not yet, but I do like what I've seen of it.

02-17-2016, 06:04 PM - 1 Like	#11
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492 Original Poster	I have decided to buy the K-3 camera kit. It cost me $800.00, but I think that was more than a fair price. I already have the DA-18-135mm lens and I have A DA L 55-300mm ED lens, but the one that comes with the K-3 is a DA 55-300 ED. What is your opinion of the difference between the two.... other than the fact that the DA has the quick shift feature? The DA L version gets a higher rating on the reviews.... supposed to be a little sharper. Color me excited!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-17-2016, 06:08 PM - 1 Like	#12
colonel00 Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Shawnee, KS Posts: 483	I'll take the 18-135 for $100

02-17-2016, 06:26 PM	#13
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by Dewman The DA L version gets a higher rating on the reviews.... supposed to be a little sharper. All three 55-300s are the same optically.

02-23-2016, 09:03 AM	#14
UserAccessDenied Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,677	EDIT: Woops... Didn't see you already bought it. haha! Congrats on the new cam!

02-23-2016, 09:42 AM	#15
Dewman Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Idaho Posts: 5,492 Original Poster	Originally posted by UserAccessDenied EDIT: Woops... Didn't see you already bought it. haha! Congrats on the new cam! Nope, didn't get it. Some rascal beat me to it! Oh well.... he who snoozes loses! My bad! My VERY bad! But, being "stuck" with my K-50 and K-30 isn't the end of the world!