[savoche]

The way I see it, the main reasons to want a KP would be:
- better high ISO performance - and for wildlife shooting I'd rate that pretty highly.
- flip-screen (not important for wildlife, mostly, but great for eg macro)
- smaller size (although that may be a bad thing if you're using heavy lenses - then again, the battery grip can remedy that)

There are things I like more with the K-3, though:
- dual SD slots (I relax much more when I know I have a backup of my images)
- better battery life (fewer batteries to keep track of when you're off the grid for a few days)
- built-in GPS (I never thought I would say it, but for wildlife I find geo-tagging pretty neat)
- the top LED display (I actually use it and find the small LED on the K-1 a tad annoying)
- better grip (or so I'm told - I have never held a KP)

For my photography I rarely shoot bursts so FPS and buffer depth is not really important. I'm quite contented with the 4.5 fps of the K-1 even for wildlife. I'm not much into bird photography, though.

It would be really hard to choose between the two if I should pick one as my only camera.

[Billk]

Both the K-3 II and KP have the same AF as far as I'm aware. They updated both with better tracking performance compared to the K-3.

Thanks Adam, that's good to know.

I feel my K1 has better AFC and am willing to trade that off against the lower burst rate and small buffer.

But until I got the K1, I thought the K3ii was perfection in a camera and will retrieve it from the camera shop soon if I can afford to.

[Adam]

Well, K-1 and K-1II do have the same AF as well and there is a significant difference in their AF performance. I would expect the same difference between K-3II and KP due to usage of acceleration unit.

The K-1 II AF has gotten software enhancements, so it's an improvement over the K-1's. The accelerator, however, is just used for processing images after capture.

Refer to our in-depth reviews (or the AF first impressions of the K-1 II) for more insight.

[mikesbike]

I don't shoot much in burst mode, so for me the KP's lower buffer is not an issue. I love my KP's low light/higher ISO performance, as well as its overall image quality. Your result with your K-S2 looks very good. The KP will provide even a little better resolution, and at higher ISO will preserve better detail. I have both cameras. If the deeper buffer or the 2 card slots are not important issues for you, I'd certainly recommend the KP for its higher ISO/shutter speed advantage, and also with its optional battery grip, since you are using such a large lens. And with this grip you'll have plenty of battery power at your disposal. The KP's battery grip would put it in proximity to the weight of the K-3 without a battery grip.

---------- Post added 07-18-18 at 11:18 AM ----------

I'm not so sure about "better resolution" (I thought resolution had to do with MP, i.e.: 16MP vs. 24 MP, etc.) but I own a K3 and like it for the wildlife shooting I do (90% of my shots are wildlife of some type).

The only drawback is its performance at higher ISO settings... noisier while keeping good details though. My old K5 sure beats it in that department but has a lesser performing AF.


I have tested the K3 with the 150-450 … great combo but, then again, if you are going to shoot in less than ideal light conditions, the KP might be a better choice. (according to reviews).


I think that Aslyfox posted some good comparisons up there in post no. 4 above.

That is the reason- the better low noise performance, I passed on getting the K-3 and instead took an excellent deal on a new K-5 IIs at the time. It had improved AF over the K-5 and improved image detail by eliminating the AA filter, yet still exceptional low noise. I still have and use it. But the KP is the champ. I liked mine so much I bought another- I now have two silver KPs and the battery grip!

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 07-18-2018 at 11:26 AM.

[bkpix]

I have owned a KP since last fall, and have shot at some length with a rented K-3II.

Having not much use for a big buffer, I've stayed with the KP on account of its image quality at high ISO -- most of the wild critters I find myself photographing are in bad light -- as well as the flippy screen and the compact size. I don't like the small battery, but it's not a deal breaker for me.

My only real complaint about the KP is its price. Once it drops to $600 or so I'll be buying another one and getting rid of both my K-5 and K-5IIs.

[Mikesul]

I have owned a KP since last fall, and have shot at some length with a rented K-3II.

Having not much use for a big buffer, I've stayed with the KP on account of its image quality at high ISO -- most of the wild critters I find myself photographing are in bad light -- as well as the flippy screen and the compact size. I don't like the small battery, but it's not a deal breaker for me.

My only real complaint about the KP is its price. Once it drops to $600 or so I'll be buying another one and getting rid of both my K-5 and K-5IIs.

Unfortunately that may be a long wait.

[Paul Charlier]

In reply to DeadJohn, I guess I used the wrong terminology there. What I should have said was image quality. I made this comment based on the review on this site See below quote from that article...

'While we still consider the Pentax K-3 II to be the APS-C flagship model due to features such as higher burst speeds and dual SD slots, as this review will show, the Pentax KP actually surpasses the K-3 II in image quality and customization options and it doesn't lag far behind the K-3 II in ruggedness. The KP exposes the K-3 II's age, as the KP is more modern in many ways, through built-in Wi-Fi and a facelifted user interface to faster general performance.'

In reply to Asylfox, those links were helpful thanks. I reread them and combined with comments from everyone else I think I will go with the KP at this point as I don't need the higher burst rate the way I like to work. The higher ISO is quite attractive for low light situations. I will get the battery grip to give me the the greater battery life and by the sound of it it will be about the same weight as the K3ii without the grip. Pentax/Ricoh Australia is out of KP stock at the moment so may have to wait or look elsewhere.

If they bring out a new flagship to replace the K3ii soon I guess I can get it as well and if not no loss.

Thanks to everyone for their input. Happy shooting.

[Ishpuini]

Probably repeating what others wrote here...

The K-3II has a few characteristics that are important to me when shooting wildlife:
- Animals move unexpectedly or show rapidly repeating behaviour. In both cases a fast burst rate helps capture the exact moment.
- You want to keep your eye on the subject as much of the time as possible to be able to shoot the exact moment the animal is in the composition you want. This leaves little time to review (and cull?) images.
--> both these will result in more images to the card than in other use cases. In that case I really want to have as much memory as possible, i.e. two card slots to double your capacity (I don't use the second card for back-up).
--> having only 300 or so images on one battery charge as with the KP is problematic in the above situation as well. This would mean depleating one battery every hour or so... With the K-3II and a battery grip (two batteries) I make it through the day. The battery capacity is crucial.

I've been on wildlife photography trips where other participants had to stop shooting half way through an outing because they were at the end of either memory or battery, having left spare memory/battery out of reach or not wanting to swap it out because of excessive dust/humidity. This never happened to me! Partly because of the K-3II's features, but not just that... Before my K-3(II) I always started a day with an empty card if I anticipated I might run out of space. Same with battery, I start with fresh batteries every day. Esp for memory, the K-3II's two slots have made a big difference in memory usage efficiency. None of my cameras ever had as little battery capacity as the KP, which even with a second battery in the grip would be a problem.

hth, Wim

[aslyfox]

. . . With the K-3II and a battery grip (two batteries) I make it through the day. The battery capacity is crucial. . . .

I've been on wildlife photography trips where other participants had to stop shooting half way through an outing because they were at the end of either memory or battery, having left spare memory/battery out of reach or not wanting to swap it out because of excessive dust/humidity. ...

Before my K-3(II) I always started a day with an empty card . . .

the battery grip, with or without the AA tray, might help to swap out battery without a lot of exposure to dust/humidity ??

_____________________________


I was told by my brick and mortar photography store to always start with a newly formatted memory card

they can recover images from a damaged card but they cannot select what images

so if you don't reformat and need that service, you pay for all of images even though you didn't need all of them recovered

[jpzk]

That is the reason- the better low noise performance, I passed on getting the K-3 and instead took an excellent deal on a new K-5 IIs at the time. It had improved AF over the K-5 and improved image detail by eliminating the AA filter, yet still exceptional low noise. I still have and use it. But the KP is the champ. I liked mine so much I bought another- I now have two silver KPs and the battery grip!

I'm VERY tempted to acquire a KP instead of waiting for "the next APS-C flagship".
While I like my K3, because I do a lot of shooting in less than ideal light conditions, I have "fallen back" using my trusty old K5 for this sort of photography (birds in deep woods).

According to the reviews, that would be a great choice.

[cport]

The K-1 II AF has gotten software enhancements, so it's an improvement over the K-1's. The accelerator, however, is just used for processing images after capture.

Refer to our in-depth reviews (or the AF first impressions of the K-1 II) for more insight.

I know that the accelerator is used just for processing images. However at the same time this saves working capacity of standard imaging engine. This should allow using more efficient AF algorithms (this is the difference between K-1 and K-1 II). In my opinion, an analogous test, which you did for K-1 and K-1II, would show a similar difference between KP and K-3II.

[sutherland]

If you have a K3 AND K5, I would continue to use those two cameras and hold out for the next 'APS-C Flagship' or buy more glass.

[Adam]

I know that the accelerator is used just for processing images. However at the same time this saves working capacity of standard imaging engine. This should allow using more efficient AF algorithms (this is the difference between K-1 and K-1 II). In my opinion, an analogous test, which you did for K-1 and K-1II, would show a similar difference between KP and K-3II.

I could have sworn we did this for the KP review, but perhaps that was just the original K-3.

[mikesbike]

Although used to the K-5 IIs style of body, and the K20D before it, I was glad to see the retro slim-bodied lighter KP arrive and now have both styles with their individual features, each having something of their own to offer. When I want a "bigger feel and grip" along with its excellent fast-operating control set, I refer back to the K-5IIs. Otherwise, I most often go with the KP, especially for low light use, and especially when using more compact lenses such as Limiteds or smaller zooms, including the 20-40mm Limited. In this case, for me the KP handles best. So it gets the most use. IQ is excellent to say the least. And it is very competent for handling of larger gear, especially with its battery grip.

One thing good about also having the K-5 IIs with its battery grip along when traveling, is if I've let all my batteries run low, I can throw a set of AA lithiums into the battery grip and shoot away while the others are in their chargers. Its IQ is still plenty good!

[gm4life]

Pretty easy... If high shutter speeds are important the nod goes to the K3 II. If high ISO is important the nod goes to the KP. If a top screen is important go for the K3 II. If a pop-up flash is important go KP.

Seriously though I own both... Both have taken awesome wildlife shots with my DA * 300 and DFA * 70-200. If you want a camera that can transform from compact near MLIC to a large grip/battery grip camera the KP is the ticket... However if you want a top screen and the faster shutter speed go K3 II. You really can’t go wrong with either both deliver the goods, just depends on your priorities.