[yozza]

I am tossing up between getting a K3 or a K1 for my brother who's interests are similar to mine, portraits, including full body, and is studying photography. I have a k1 myself though am more experienced.

As he is new is a k3 better to pick up with higher grade lenses or a k1 and start off basic? Price is first in mind, however quality is real important for him as he is looking to start picking up work sooner than later. All his shots will be web based now.

From what i have read the k3 is very good, and could likely pick up a high quality zoom + a 55mm 1.4 lense 0r 77mm limited, though can i make up for low light and resolution quality with the lenses on the k3? Be great to get any advice and if it were k3 what zoom lense (keeping in mind portraits, and environmental fashion full body) what would you go for, for the sharpest images be it sigma or pentax?

Thanks

---

Last edited by yozza; 11-05-2016 at 03:54 AM.

[nitehntr]

the K3 is very good but the K1 is better. especially at higher ISO's i have both and use them somewhat interchangeably but reach for the K1. i have shot my grandsons sports indoors (flag football and basketball) with both and the K1 is by far the better body for available light. i can use much higher ISO's. the frame rate is slower but the quality more than makes up for it and makes me time my shots better like in the film days when it was one shot at a time.

[BigMackCam]

For long telephoto work, the K-3 is a better choice, period. You would have to crop significantly on the K-1 to get the same field of view, and the resulting images would be at a lower resolution. The K-3 also wins in terms of size, weight and cost (even though the K-1 is compact and attractively-priced compared to most full-frame cameras). If you really don't need a full-frame camera, why pay for one and carry the size / weight penalty? I have the K-3 as well as a non-Pentax full-frame camera. Often I choose to take my K-3, simply because it's more practical to carry round all day.

With that said, in almost every other sense, the K-1 is clearly a "better" camera - bigger sensor, higher resolution, greater dynamic range, better high ISO performance, shallower depth of field at equivalent focal lengths with the same aperture, better AF, improved shake reduction, articulated screen, pixel shift resolution, GPS and astrotracer and more. I have some (though not all) of those benefits on my full frame camera too, yet still I often go with my K-3 just because it's easier to carry around.

In some ways, I think the ideal setup is to have a K-1 and a K-3 (or K-3II), so you can carry both when required, or pick one or the other depending on the situation. But where there's a choice of buying one or the other, I think it depends to some extent on your priorities and requirements as to which one is "best"

[Pentax Syntax]

I own both the K-1 and the K-3 and use them both extensively. For telephoto, I agree with BigMackCam since the K-3 has higher resolution at the APC crop sensor size. Since you mention portraits specifically, I would probably go with the K-3 and better lenses. The K-1 at 36 MP is a harsh test for full frame lenses and many fail to perform as they did on film. The new Pentax lens lineup 15-30, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 are pricey and are probably more than your brother would like to spend. I use the 28-70 FA* and 80-200 FA* lenses on my K-1 and they perform well but they were both close to $1500 professional quality lenses. OTOH, the Pentax 50 FA 1.4 becomes a beautiful ~75mm equivalent portrait lens on the K-3 and the results are outstanding. It is only in the landscape arena where I see the K-1 pulling ahead. The K-1 has slightly snappier autofocus than the K-3 but for portraits that is not relevant since I almost always go to manual focus to catch eye highlights in the large aperture narrow FOV. You can't go wrong with either.....or both!

[Alex645]

Lots to consider with a budget.
a) Good lenses will typically see use on at least 3 generations of cameras. So for the long term, it would be wiser to get the K3 if that affords you better glass.
Keep in mind, if you expect him to eventually upgrade to FF, youʻll want to get FF optics with the K3.
b) For sure, the K1 is better for portraits with less inherent depth of field, better dynamic range, and ability to crop. Also I have found flagship cameras to have a longer practical usage life (not just actuations, but will take longer to becoming obsolescent).
c) On the K3, the Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM A Pentax is considered the sharpest lens with that sensor, but I think that focal length is too short for most portrait and even full body work. In general, the Pentax primes are superior and the Pentax smc DA Star 55mm F1.4 SDM would be my first choice.
d) Zooms for the K3, Iʻd go with the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO HSM C Pentax.
e) If you opt for the K-1, the kit options are either with the 24-70mm f/2.8 or the 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6. The 24-70mm is superior in IQ, speed, and dof, but the 28-105mm has the longer focal lengths for portraits, nearly 1/3 the price, and almost 1/2 the weight. On a K-1 for his usage, Iʻd favor the 28-105mm.

You are an awesome brother to consider and get this for yours. However, from personal experience, I have found that gifts are not valued like gear you buy for yourself. I donʻt know your brother, but this is from my own personal experience. I mention this only in that you may want to consider getting gear different than your own so that you two can swap and borrow from each other or if one of you moves on to other interests, the other doesnʻt have redundancy.

[robthebloke]

I'm in two minds about this. The K-3 + DA15 + DA35 macro + DA70 is more or less a perfect starter kit for photography (high quality, covers all the bases, it's a shame the limiteds aren't weather sealed, but as a can-do-anything-kit, it's pretty much unrivalled in my opinion). The only problem with going down that route, is that you'll lose money in the long term owing to depreciation, and the inability for those lenses to transition to full frame. So instead of the DA limiteds, you could instead put the cash into FF glass. Now here's the kicker, whilst you could do that, on the K-3 the results wont be as good as the DA limited above (Well ok, the FA77 is pretty special, and the DA*55 is pretty good, albeit more expensive than a limited).

If your brother is wanting to put a pile of cash into photography equipment now, in 12 months time will he be happy with forking out the same money again (or more) for a K-1 body and FF glass?

To me, a K-1 + D-FA 50mm (or FA43, or DA55) is probably the best option for a starter kit for FF (assuming he has a kind brother who would be willing to loan him a lens or two if/when jobs come up). From user-reviews I've seen of the 28-105, people seem to view the lens as better-than-they-were expecting. That might be an option, although personally I'd rather buy the D-FA 50mm f2.8 macro, and DA 35mm f2.4 for the same money.

I know people state that the K-3 is better for telephoto work, however personally I find that to be a purely theoretical advantage, and not really something I've seen when taking actual shots. I've consistently found the K-1 improvements in DR & AF has trumped the pixel density advantage of the K-3. Where I will give the K-3 a nod though, is for tripod based macro work, and for ultra wide landscapes (where the DA15 presents a very lightweight alternative to the DFA 15-30, one that is especially useful if you like hiking).

So if your brother has decided to get into photography for commercial reasons, I'd personally recommend the K-1 + DFA50 macro (or FA43). If however he is doing this to learn about photography, and have fun, then the K-3 + DA15 + DA35 macro + DA70. That's my opinion, others will surely disagree.

[biz-engineer]

K1 or K3 are both very good. K3 beats the K1 is terms of image_quality / price, when using good lenses. Long lenses isn't the case here, so Pentax is just a good choice, either using the K3 and limited lenses or K1 and DFA. Although optically excellent, I wouldn't encourage getting into SDM lenses, but the DA or FA limited and DFA yes definitely.

[Nicolas06]

For events, weddings and fashion/portraiture, I think an FF body is the better choice.

Going with tamron 28-75 and tamron 70-200 screw drive and any FF body from any brand is what would get you the most for the lowest price. The drawback of K1 for that is that it is bit expensive while there cheaper FF cameras like D610 or 6D that do the job for $1000-1300 depending the deal you find. The biggest drawback of any FF is size/weight and I'd be for having good strap if you are to use it for hours on a setting.

For that kind of practice, you'll also want a flashes. The lighting gear may be more important than all the rest combined.

[normhead]

I like own both. My only question is how close are you to your brother? Is there going to be the possibility of borrowing each other's lenses? In which case, I'd go same body. If he's studying photography, definitely the K-1. More dynamic range, better performance at high ISO, more resolution. My reasons for using my K-3 every day would be for the added reach for birding, the burst mode and the larger buffer, meaning a much longer burst. With my birds, where I'm always stretching the limits, I'll get much better IQ on 90% of my images than I would with a K-1 and I get a lot more keepers for the same period of time. To me, it's a specialty body, for a specialty I enjoy, but the K-1 is getting to be the all-purpose work horse.

Unless he's going to specialize in something like the image below the K-1 is more appropriate. I tried to use my K-1 for these, Way to often it doesn't get the job done and you miss shots that would be routine with the K-3. This particular image would be seriously degraded if shot with a K-1 using the same lens.



A friend of mine's son did photography at Carlton University near here, was told he had to have a full frame, and ended up with a Canon 6D, which he continues to use professionally. Sad, since he had houseful of Pentax equipment which now sits at home. The Pentax FF came two years too late for him. When I read people are using a K-1 for sports etc, unless they are shooting in dark gyms, I wonder if they understand how to set up for a high burst rate by suppressing the AF hold. You can make a K-3 function worse than a K-1, but you don't have to.

[Paul the Sunman]

My son has been getting fabulous results -- and winning prizes -- with the K5/K3, shooting mostly travel and nature (including macro). He has the advantage of a cupboard full of my lenses, but also bought himself a Sigma 50-500 (fabulous reach on the K3 but FF compatible too). For his type of photography, and with my lens selection, the K3 was the better option.

[btnapa]

I am tossing up between getting a K3 or a K1 for my brother who's interests are similar to mine, portraits, including full body, and is studying photography. I have a k1 myself though am more experienced.

As he is new is a k3 better to pick up with higher grade lenses or a k1 and start off basic? Price is first in mind, however quality is real important for him as he is looking to start picking up work sooner than later. All his shots will be web based now.

From what i have read the k3 is very good, and could likely pick up a high quality zoom + a 55mm 1.4 lense 0r 77mm limited, though can i make up for low light and resolution quality with the lenses on the k3? Be great to get any advice and if it were k3 what zoom lense (keeping in mind portraits, and environmental fashion full body) what would you go for, for the sharpest images be it sigma or pentax?

Thanks

Hi yozza,

I just replied to your other post. Seeing this post gives me more info about what you want to do. Having gone through the journey of K5IIs then K3 and now K1, for serious no compromise commercial work, I would buy the K1. If budget is an issue, get the K3 with the 24-70 Pentax. Go all FA lenses if you will eventually get the K1.

For the ultimate package which can handle just about any situation, a K1 with the 15-30, 24,70 and the 70-200 would be my choice.

If the Pentax 70-200 is too expensive (it was for me), get the Tamron 70-200. It is a dream lens. For the money it is an absolute no brainer. I am amazed at what the lens did on my K3 and now on my K1.

You mentioned full body shots. In that particular instance, K1 will do a better job than the K3. For close up people shots, the difference will be less noticeable.

Do not forget that you will need a solid tripod, some lighting equipment and a bag to carry the gear. I am afraid the plot thickens!! Tell your brother to buy some starter equipment and make some money with it and fund the rest of the purchases. That is what I did and still do.

If you want to see a list of the gear I use, send me a PM and I will send you what I am shooting with and why.

Good luck with your purchases. As you know Pentax offers the most bang for the buck in the photo world. So, you have picked the right brand for still photo work. If you were to do video, then that is a whole different story.

[yozza]

I own both the K-1 and the K-3 and use them both extensively. For telephoto, I agree with BigMackCam since the K-3 has higher resolution at the APC crop sensor size. Since you mention portraits specifically, I would probably go with the K-3 and better lenses. The K-1 at 36 MP is a harsh test for full frame lenses and many fail to perform as they did on film. The new Pentax lens lineup 15-30, 24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 are pricey and are probably more than your brother would like to spend. I use the 28-70 FA* and 80-200 FA* lenses on my K-1 and they perform well but they were both close to $1500 professional quality lenses. OTOH, the Pentax 50 FA 1.4 becomes a beautiful ~75mm equivalent portrait lens on the K-3 and the results are outstanding. It is only in the landscape arena where I see the K-1 pulling ahead. The K-1 has slightly snappier autofocus than the K-3 but for portraits that is not relevant since I almost always go to manual focus to catch eye highlights in the large aperture narrow FOV. You can't go wrong with either.....or both!

thankyou that very helpful pentax syntax

---------- Post added 11-05-16 at 04:19 PM ----------

Lots to consider with a budget.
a) Good lenses will typically see use on at least 3 generations of cameras. So for the long term, it would be wiser to get the K3 if that affords you better glass.
Keep in mind, if you expect him to eventually upgrade to FF, youʻll want to get FF optics with the K3.
b) For sure, the K1 is better for portraits with less inherent depth of field, better dynamic range, and ability to crop. Also I have found flagship cameras to have a longer practical usage life (not just actuations, but will take longer to becoming obsolescent).
c) On the K3, the Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM A Pentax is considered the sharpest lens with that sensor, but I think that focal length is too short for most portrait and even full body work. In general, the Pentax primes are superior and the Pentax smc DA Star 55mm F1.4 SDM would be my first choice.
d) Zooms for the K3, Iʻd go with the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC MACRO HSM C Pentax.
e) If you opt for the K-1, the kit options are either with the 24-70mm f/2.8 or the 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6. The 24-70mm is superior in IQ, speed, and dof, but the 28-105mm has the longer focal lengths for portraits, nearly 1/3 the price, and almost 1/2 the weight. On a K-1 for his usage, Iʻd favor the 28-105mm.

You are an awesome brother to consider and get this for yours. However, from personal experience, I have found that gifts are not valued like gear you buy for yourself. I donʻt know your brother, but this is from my own personal experience. I mention this only in that you may want to consider getting gear different than your own so that you two can swap and borrow from each other or if one of you moves on to other interests, the other doesnʻt have redundancy.

Thanks alex great info!!

---------- Post added 11-05-16 at 04:26 PM ----------

Thanks all for the help guys, much appreciated

[robert52]

Bodies come & go but lens you keep if good forever . So K3 or even K5 & invest in good lens not cheap lens

[redcat]

I am tossing up between getting a K3 or a K1 for my brother who's interests are similar to mine, portraits, including full body, and is studying photography. I have a k1 myself though am more experienced.

If he's studying photography I'd recommend FF body, he can start with a good AF lens with a reasonable price (ex : FA 50mm) and discover the world of manual focus lens (some lens are awesome with a price tag, ex : Samyang 85mm 1.4, 135mm f2...). And if you guys are close, you can build a lens line up together (how cool is that )

[Rondec]

It really is a tough call. I would probably get the better glass (just make sure it is full frame compatible) and the K3. For middle ranges there won't be a huge difference unless he is really pushing iso or wants to print really big and glass generally is more important than the camera body.

Either camera will work fine as a learning tool and can be used in professional situations. I guess the question in my mind would be how soon he would want to "move up" to full frame if he starts with APS-C.