[richard0170]

This post is my personal reflection on my two Pentax DSLRs - the K3 and KP. How they fit in to how I take my photos and how I find them in use. It is not meant to be a review of either camera, but others may find it useful if in a position of trying to decide between the two.
I bought my first Pentax DSLR, a Kx, in 2011, as it was relatively cheap and allowed me to use my old A mount lenses. I did not get on with it at all despite being happy with its IQ. I got rid of it and purchased a Fuji X100. In 2015, still wanting to use my Pentax lenses I decided to try what was on offer then and settled on the K3, and wow! what a difference between that and the Kx, in terms of handling and functionality, let alone IQ. In short I love the K3. I have grown my system around it. Many lenses have been added and a battery grip too.
When Pentax introduced the KP a few years ago my interest was naturally aroused, but at the point of introduction it was way overpriced compared to both the K70 and the K3ii. Never the less I strolled down to my local camera store and they kindly let me have feel. I was not impressed, reaching the same conclusions as that CSTV episode.
A year or two passed and my lens collection began to include the Ltd primes, and when I got a 70mm f2.4 it just felt all wrong on the K3. What I need (I told myself) was a smaller, lighter camera for my Ltds. I deliberated for many months over a KS-2, K70 or used KP. Another trip to the camera shop and play with the KP changed my mind somewhat over the handling issues I had, but the price even used was a bit more than I was willing to pay. Luckily a used KP came up at a bargain price and I snapped it up, and recently I have added the battery grip, as one came up cheaply.
So now we can get to my personal comparison.
To my mind the K3, with battery grip attached, is in every way superior than the KP, with battery grip, in terms of feel, ergonomics and handling. It fits my hand perfectly. All the controls are in exactly the right place for my fingers, especially the shutter button being on the front of the camera rather than on top, causing my finger having to cramp up and around on the KP. The screen is bigger and nicer to view. However, remove the battery grips and things are reversed. My pinky finger dangles helplessly from the bottom of the K3, but due to the smaller size of the KP my whole hand envelopes the body and the shutter release is now in the right place on the KP. I have issues though with other control placements on the KP, but this is not a fault of the camera, but due to my relatively large hands. I have to cramp my fingers up to get to the controls I want. Again this is not the camera's fault. I would rather those controls be there than have to dive into the menu, and the smaller body size necessarily means that the buttons are close together. Smaller handed folk may find no issue at all. Back to the screen, it is very nice to have some articulation, though I would have preferred a fully articulating one as it is useful for hand held architectural shots. The articulation though means than the screen must be smaller on the KP.
Image quality up to ISO 800 seems pretty much the same, but the KP pulls ahead significantly thereafter. I am OK with the K3 up to 1600, but the KP at 1600 is a bit better and still good at 3200. I do not need to go beyond this setting. The AF on the KP seems marginally better, but this is not important to me as I do very little action shooting. Out of camera B&W images on the KP look to me vastly better from the KP than the K3. Most of my shooting is RAW and processed in camera and this last point is important to me.
The K3 has 2 card slots, but as a keen amateur this is nice but not essential, and better battery life. But I grew up with film and still use it so its no big deal to carry a spare battery if I am using my KP.
In conclusion then which do I find better? Well neither. The KP is my camera of choice now for handheld use with my Ltd primes, F 28mm f2.8 , DA 50mm f1.8 and A 50mm f2.8 Macro. For all my other lenses especially manual focus, telephotos and zooms I prefer the K3 as it provides me with better handling. For most tripod use I prefer the K3, but when I have to get close to the ground the articulating screen gives the KP the nod. I hated the KP when it was first released because of its price and handling compromises, but the former has been addressed over time and my opinions of the latter have somewhat changed since I revisited the camera a few months ago. It was a shame when Pentax introduced the KP they did not also offer an upgraded version of the K3ii at the same time. The K3 and KP are really different types of camera suited to different purposes, with some obvious cross over. I look forward with interest to the K3ii replacement next year (if it happens), but I love my K3 so much I think it unlikely I will upgrade it.

[Zygonyx]

Interesting Richard.

Same experience here, i use the K-3 most of the time with it's grip and my big tele-lenses, whereas i (will as it is recent buy) use the KP in town for anything from urbex to social events.

The K-1 having replaced my 645D as dedicated tool for lanscape and portraits.

[BigMackCam]

An interesting and honest personal view on the handling of both cameras, Richard. Thanks for posting.

I own the K-3 and K-3II. The size and handling - both with and without the battery grip attached - are close to perfect for me. I do have fairly large hands, though. In fact, the size and control spacing (though not necessarily the layout) on my K10D / GX-10 suits me even better, which confirms my preference for larger bodies.

I've tried the KP a couple of times at shows, and thought it was nice... rather like a DSLR version of mirrorless bodies I've tried, including the Sony A7 MkII that I own. I've never been entirely convinced by the control layout and lack of LCD on the top panel, but these are undoubtedly things one gets used to, along with the different feel in the hand compared to larger DSLRs. I'm sure that after a few weeks of shooting with it, the KP would be just as familiar as my K-3, and the improved high ISO performance is a significant benefit...

[totsmuyco]

I've held the KP once and it felt like a film camera without a motor drive. I guess if I'll get one I'll adapt to it. But I'm sure I'll need the large grip and a battery grip. Good looking mean machine that KP is. Nice tool for a Jedi Pentaxian.

[reh321]

I've held the KP once and it felt like a film camera without a motor drive. I guess if I'll get one I'll adapt to it. But I'm sure I'll need the large grip and a battery grip. Good looking mean machine that KP is. Nice tool for a Jedi Pentaxian.

I have a KP - I have never used it without the smallest grip, and never with a battery grip. You are right - it feels like a film camera without a motor drive, and I love that. Perhaps my hands are smaller - I wear medium gloves - perhaps it is the two-handed style I developed back in 1969 when I got my first manual focus rangefinder camera, but the KP is the closest I have ever had to a digital camera that ‘fits’ well.

[taktoon]

Great post to read. I have to say that KP with limiteds looks great. Maybe I will grab one soon.

[Cerebum]

Fascinating and I completely agree. My KP is my limited lens camera and my K3 is for M42s and larger zooms. The IQ on the KP is better as is the way it handles high iso. I adore the Kp with a limited lens and recently did Cadiz with the kp and the 35mm limited with fantastic results

[richard0170]

I've held the KP once and it felt like a film camera without a motor drive. I guess if I'll get one I'll adapt to it. But I'm sure I'll need the large grip and a battery grip. Good looking mean machine that KP is. Nice tool for a Jedi Pentaxian.

To me the battery grip is really only beneficial for portrait format, or if you need the extra battery life. The BG adds extra weight so in theory should balance the camera better with heavier lenses, and it does indeed do so when used in portrait format, but when used in landscape it feels just like a film camera with a winder rather than motor drive attached. You end up using more force to grip the camera with your fingers which tends to induce shake, rather than having your fingers loosely clenched and allowing gravity to hold the camera in place.
As far as the different size grips go, the KP's I have played with in the shop have had the small grip on. The camera I bought had the large grip attached. I can't honestly say which is better as the grip seems to offer no real function in how one has to hold the camera, due to the position of the shutter release. I have not bothered with trying the different grips on my KP, being content with the one already attached. This reminds me of the difference in style between an ME Super and a Super A. Essentially the same body, just the latter had a sculpted grip round back and a front screw on one. Yet I still prefer the feel of the ME Super.

[reh321]

To me the battery grip is really only beneficial for portrait format, or if you need the extra battery life. The BG adds extra weight so in theory should balance the camera better with heavier lenses, and it does indeed do so when used in portrait format, but when used in landscape it feels just like a film camera with a winder rather than motor drive attached. You end up using more force to grip the camera with your fingers which tends to induce shake, rather than having your fingers loosely clenched and allowing gravity to hold the camera in place.
As far as the different size grips go, the KP's I have played with in the shop have had the small grip on. The camera I bought had the large grip attached. I can't honestly say which is better as the grip seems to offer no real function in how one has to hold the camera, due to the position of the shutter release. I have not bothered with trying the different grips on my KP, being content with the one already attached. This reminds me of the difference in style between an ME Super and a Super A. Essentially the same body, just the latter had a sculpted grip round back and a front screw on one. Yet I still prefer the feel of the ME Super.

The me "balance" is not a thing - if I could hold my "Super Program" on the left of my signature picture with a 300mm lens and no IBIS {and I could} then certainly I can hold the 'KP" on the right of my signature photo with a 300mm lens and IBIS.

[richard0170]

The me "balance" is not a thing - if I could hold my "Super Program" on the left of my signature picture with a 300mm lens and no IBIS {and I could} then certainly I can hold the 'KP" on the right of my signature photo with a 300mm lens and IBIS.

In this case though you are attaching a small light body to a big heavy lens, and I would agree it becomes irrelevant then. I do not use lenses this big and heavy very often, but many standard zooms, older standard lenses, portrait teles and wide angle lenses with a fast aperture, although not big and heavy, but significantly heavier than more modestly equipped maximum aperture lenses, balance does indeed make a difference to how a camera feels. This may make no difference in terms of image stability but it does when just simply holding the camera or having it dangling from a strap.
Just to be clear though, if one has to use finger pressure, rather than allowing the weight of the camera to rest in relaxed fingers, to hold a camera steady you are increasing the chance of camera shake. Your fingers should be relaxed for ultimate hand held stability.

[Vmax911]

I've contemplated getting the grip for my KP, but overall I felt that I would trying to be make it into something it's not. It is sublime with the DA limiteds. I typically shoot with smaller cameras, so the size doesn't bother me. I am excited to see what the K-new brings about.

[csa]

Great thread, since I'm thinking of getting another Pentax body. I have very small hands, yet I feel that my K3 fits perfectly with longer lenses. I've never felt it was too large to be readily used. I don't use battery grips, as that adds weight, which is what I don't need. The one feature on the KP that is missing, and I use constantly; is the top display.

I'm in no hurry; but threads like this are really very helpful to those of us that cannot walk into a camera store & hold a specific camera.

[richard0170]

I've contemplated getting the grip for my KP, but overall I felt that I would trying to be make it into something it's not. It is sublime with the DA limiteds. I typically shoot with smaller cameras, so the size doesn't bother me. I am excited to see what the K-new brings about.

I bought the BG for the KP as it was S/H and going cheap. I totally agree with you that it tries to turn the camera into something it is not. It does an OK job, just not a great one. New price or even the normal used prices I see seem hard to justify the purchase, unless you really need the extra battery life.

[mikesbike]

Very good thread- good conversations. Interesting to see the various shooting styles and needs. I too came from years of shooting film, about 30 years of exclusively shooting 35mm film, in fact, with numerous camera models as progress was made from manual cameras only on to advanced AF bodies. When I began with my first SLR, all manual everything was the only type available. It was a Vivitar body with a 50mm lens. After 6 years, I acquired my first Pentax, a brand new ME Super, and I was amazed upon discovering its ability to automatically set aperture, and "correctly' set exposure instantly. I had already learned how a camera's light meter can be fooled by tricky lighting situations, which are many, so I simply continued with that in mind.

Some have been wanting a DSLR version of the ME Super or Super A or Super Program for years, and to me the KP is a wonderful answer to satisfy this desire and a lot more, since it can be changed like a chameleon to become very different. As to handling, I hold with my left hand from below supporting the bulk of whatever weight is involved anyway, while the the right hand is mainly involved for added stability and operating controls. So for me, handling is mostly a matter of gripping the camera and lens when not in a shooting position, which is also important if going about to perform hand-held photography for a period of time. For this, the grip I use on the KP can matter.

I find going from "Super Program" to "later-version LX" styles as the KP can do by grip-changing, is sometimes of value for me. I prefer the smallest grip for most smaller prime lenses, including Limited primes. For larger lenses, mid-length zoom lenses and on up to and including the DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 lens or like size, up to and including the largest supplied grip is fine. Going to larger or heavier lenses than this, I prefer using the battery grip for more gripping surface. Then there is balance- again this is especially pertaining to general handling rather than shooting, but even when shooting hand-held and holding from below, having the battery grip on does balance better for such larger lenses. As to battery life, there are times during shooting of events where I use the battery grip to avoid being interrupted by battery-changes.

As to button locations, lack of top LCD, and dual-use of some on-body buttons in order to maintain compactness and lower weight, I was already used to this and even further reduction with the K-S2, which I bought for its combination of very small size with very big capability, even while having much larger flagship bodies. In the case of the KP, there were some important gains as a trade for these reductions, in the form of the new 3rd wheel control system. I've found no problem for me in getting used to these differences.

As to your observations, Richard, regarding what you value by having both camera designs with your K-3, very interesting, because it is likewise with me and my K-5 IIs. I love m KP, and I still love my K-5 IIs!!

[reh321]

In this case though you are attaching a small light body to a big heavy lens, and I would agree it becomes irrelevant then. I do not use lenses this big and heavy very often, but many standard zooms, older standard lenses, portrait teles and wide angle lenses with a fast aperture, although not big and heavy, but significantly heavier than more modestly equipped maximum aperture lenses, balance does indeed make a difference to how a camera feels. This may make no difference in terms of image stability but it does when just simply holding the camera or having it dangling from a strap.
Just to be clear though, if one has to use finger pressure, rather than allowing the weight of the camera to rest in relaxed fingers, to hold a camera steady you are increasing the chance of camera shake. Your fingers should be relaxed for ultimate hand held stability.

No, my camera shakes no more than it would with a larger body; there is no noticeable force exerted by my fingers in general - you are not noticing the work your right fingers have to do.