Originally posted by 08amczb For low light the KP is better and the 3 wheel control is awesome. But for battery life it's disappointing. I would keep the K-3 if the low light performance is enough otherwise the KP sounds better. The K-3 is more reliable too.
There is no evidence that the K-3 is more reliable than a KP. They are both very well-built. A KP with the battery grip can provide actually more battery life than a K-3, and will be at about the same weight as a K-3 II alone, but will have the vertical shooting advantage. The only real advantages a K-3 offers are more dedicated on-body controls, a top LCD screen, a deeper buffer for burst shooting, and dual card slots. I already have all of those advantages in my K-5 IIs except the last one.
---------- Post added 10-13-19 at 05:40 PM ----------
Originally posted by EDstrg87 I have the K3 but, in this moment i would prefer the KP.. better IQ, High iso resolution, tilt screen and 5 axis stabilization and lightweight
Exactly!
---------- Post added 10-13-19 at 05:47 PM ----------
I also have 2 KP bodies, in my case both silver. I will keep them regardless of any decision regarding the forthcoming new APS-C flagship. The KP is too unique not to have, and in a good way. All these features and outstanding imaging capability with a very useful set of controls in a pro-build quality but compact design. I bought two bodies to make sure if something should happen to one of them I would still have a KP. I have also found it often to be very convenient to shoot with two of them, each with a different type of lens and a different grip.