[mikesbike]

have used the built-in flash on my K-5 to provide fill lots of times

I hear you on that! The KP is a lighter, more compact model with a "flagship" build quality- magnesium alloy with weather sealing. The GPS and astro tracer is there with an add-on unit for the hot shoe as desired. The forthcoming APS- C flagship, the K-3 III, also will not have the built-in flash, and will be rather costly, but there is a WR mini flash, having a tilt head for ceiling bounce. that is pocketable.

[Its Y I shoot Pentax]

Ive considered upgrading my K5iis to a KP but I just haven't felt a strong enough urge to actually do it.

[Oldbayrunner]

Here's my take, ergonomically the K3/K3ll are going to be close to what you are used to with the K5lls but if your looking for more compact then the KP offers that. The K3ll for a camera two years older in most respects, even in dynamic range, is identical in specs to the KP with twice the shutter life. You do lose the onboard flash but gain onboard gps/astrochaser. I used the k5lls for several years and picked up a K3ll, then this year I bought a K1 mkll finally selling my beloved K5lls because the crop mode on the K1 mkll was around the same mp.

So my suggestion if you want the best of all worlds then if affordable the K1/K1mkll makes more sense. Why, because you can still maintain using all of your apsc glass with it and be in about the same 16mp you were used to working with the K5lls. Yet some of your apsc glass may still be used in 36mp full frame mode with little vignetting. All Pentax manual lenses are full frame so they can be easily used. There are a host of older auto K mount full frame film lenses that can be found that work wonderfully on the K1. Yet as it becomes affordable to you the newer full frame lenses, though somewhat expensive, are an upgrade option. Though I fought the thought of switching by moving back to full frame images, since picking up my K1mkll my K3ll doesn't get used as much but there are times when the field of view of apsc comes in handy so I keep it with me. Though if I don't feel like carrying two cameras I can put my apsc glass on my K1 and shoot even though at a slightly lessor mp then the K3ll. That is starting to happen more often now.

[Mooncatt]

If you take the camera out in very bad weather and prioritize construction quality and weatherproofing, then you might want to get the K-3 or K-3ii over the KP or K-70, even for low light.

I primarily shoot low light/light painting and the K3 II has been more than adequate for my needs. I do run those images through Topaz for noise reduction, but they are still usable with other NR options. It may not be quite as good as the KP, but it's not likely to disappoint. Plus I just think the ergonomics of the K3 line are just better.

[Apet-Sure]

Ive considered upgrading my K5iis to a KP but I just haven't felt a strong enough urge to actually do it.

The K-5IIs is a very fine camera, and I still love mine. Then, late in 2019, I found out about a chance to take a once-in-a-lifetime trip to Newfoundland in 2020. Photo opportunities around every corner. I wanted to upgrade some of the camera gear I would be taking. I cashed in a small retirement savings account, and bought an 'iceberg' lens (DA* 60-250mm) and a KP from two different PF members, both at great prices. By early March I had my passport photo and was ready to get my passport. Yeah, that was then. Then everything changed. It's now unlikely I'll ever get to Newfoundland and take pictures of icebergs. But I'm not sorry about my gear purchases.


The KP gets you 50% more pixels than the K-5 (more cropping options and higher resolution). I seldom used my K-5 above ISO 1600; the KP will give you the same image quality at ISO 6400 or even a bit higher. The JPEG color accuracy is noticeably better on the KP than the K-5 IMO. If you can find a gently used KP at a good price I don't think you'd be disappointed with it. Even a new one at current prices is worth it I think.

[shyrsio]

Yhe only reason you should upgrade from the K-5II is the pixel count, because for the 16 MP range it really is the best.

[mikesbike]

Though if I don't feel like carrying two cameras I can put my apsc glass on my K1 and shoot even though at a slightly lessor mp then the K3ll. That is starting to happen more often now.

But with the K-1 II in crop mode, you still can get the other advantages, especially the superior higher-ISO performance the K-1 II is capable of. However, I would still want to have a high-level APS-C body and lenses available because of the K-1 II's size and weight factor not being welcome features under certain circumstances.

[Belnan]

So OP did you come up with an idea of what direction you want to go?

[totsmuyco]

Go for the KP if you need a new one now. If you can wait and have the funds the K-3III is an option.

[haroon88]

I would select K3 (the new one).

[ChristianRock]

It all depends on the budget.... if you had to sell the K-5iis for financial reasons, I'm assuming your budget isn't unlimited.