[mikesbike]

Again, congratulations to @mikesbike on what I think is a fantastic choice - and my apologies for the slight OT detour

No apology needed. In fact my post really does touch upon my own reasoning for not going for the K-3 III, instead for the K-1 II, and I did take into consideration the factor of possible near-equal higher ISO performance of the new camera, as well as the VF being "almost" as good. I figured this might be true, so what other advantage does the K-1 II bring? I mean, the K-3 III will already be a quarter-pound heavier than my KP! And the K-1 II's VF is not "almost". Then the K-1 II has the articulating rear screen advantage, and the potential for even greater resolution- if one already has the lenses for that possibility. As I said in your other post, the DA 21mm is a great all-around prime lens. But on FF, my FA 35mm f/2 or certainly the FA 31mm f/1.8 can easily outperform it, with a 1-2 stop advantage, and provide a similar image shot at the same distance, but having a 36mp advantage vs a 24 or 26mp of the K-3 II, KP, or new K-3 III. And these smaller lenses make the added weight of the K-1 II far more manageable. My KP makes a great "sidekick" to complement the K-1 II, and also as an alternate when maximum portability is needed, because it is a full 11 ounces less as well as far less bulky! So this emphasizes the best advantages of both worlds, and with a full complement of useful features for each.

But thank you for being so thoughtful- you are indeed a very considerate person!

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 11-23-2020 at 03:02 PM.

[BigMackCam]

No apology needed. In fact my post really does touch upon my own reasoning for not going for the K-3 III, instead for the K-1 II, and I did take into consideration the factor of possible near-equal higher ISO performance of the new camera, as well as the VF being "almost" as good. I figured this might be true, so what other advantage does the K-1 II bring? I mean, the K-3 III will already be a quarter-pound heavier than my KP! And the K-1 II's VF is not "almost". Then the K-1 II has the articulating rear screen advantage, and the potential for even greater resolution- if one already has the lenses for that possibility. As I said in your other post, the DA 21mm is a great all-around prime lens. But on FF, my FA 35mm f/2 or certainly the FA 31mm f/1.8 can easily outperform it, with a 1-2 stop advantage, and provide a similar image shot at the same distance, but having a 36mp advantage vs a 24 or 26mp of the K-3 II, KP, or new K-3 III. And these smaller lenses make the added weight of the K-1 II far more manageable. My KP makes a great "sidekick" to complement the K-1 II, and also as an alternate when maximum portability is needed, because it is a full 11 ounces less as well as far less bulky! So this emphasizes the best advantages of both worlds, and with a full complement of useful features for each.

You've clearly thought it through very well, Mike, taking into account equipment you already own and the advantages you'll gain. For me, this is the most important thing of all - not which format or camera you ultimately chose, but that proper thought and appraisal of facts contributed to your decision. Of course, buying based purely on desire is OK too (I've done it myself), so long as we accept that it won't always work in our favour

[mikesbike]

Much thanks. I also recognize that for many who do not already have a lot in the way of pertinent FF lenses to point towards FF advantages, and then would have to spend a fortune then in heavier, more expensive lenses to serve various needs they already have in their APS-C systems, the forthcoming K-3 III should provide a viable alternative to getting into a FF system, by getting closer to those advantages in performance.

[DWS1]

About the only thing I find surprising about this..... is how long some have managed to go without getting a K1 ...... such restraint is so amazing...... other than the fiscal challendged... every long term pentaxian should have had a K5 and K1 at some stage I reckon....

I am so comfortable with and understand the the aps-c format so much that I'm not sure I want a full frame now.

[luftfluss]

About the only thing I find surprising about this..... is how long some have managed to go without getting a K1 ...... such restraint is so amazing...... other than the fiscal challendged... every long term pentaxian should have had a K5 and K1 at some stage I reckon....

Except perhaps for the handling - so many folks praise it - nothing else about the K-1 has a particularly strong pull...unless I decided to ditch my current gear and completely re-build my system, in which case multiple brands would be in play.

In other words, if one day I decided that I would seriously consider purchasing a K-1, it would be because I decided to change substantively how I go about my photography, and at that point I would look also at Canon, Nikon, Fuji, etc.

[luftfluss]

I am so comfortable with and understand the the aps-c format so much that I'm not sure I want a full frame now.

Yup. I "see" in APS-C. And as I shoot a lot of long telephoto, the K-1 doesn't seem to be much of an improvement to me.

[normhead]

Yup. I "see" in APS-C. And as I shoot a lot of long telephoto, the K-1 doesn't seem to be much of an improvement to me.

For telephoto FF is a huge disadvantage much of the time.

[BigDave]

One of the reasons I decided on Pentax over the other brands about 10 years ago was that on the K-7 I could use EVERY LENS Pentax ever made, screw mount to advanced K lenses. No other manufacturer that I am aware of can say that. And as I collected lenses, I tried to find FF based lenses so that when Pentax came out with their FF camera, I was set, and a few years later, the K-1 WAS released. Even though I have mostly FF lenses now, I can still use ALL of them on my K-7 or K-01, just compensating a bit for the crop factor. It is nice to have a 500mm lens that acts like a 750mm lens when doing bird photography. So many lenses, so little money! I really need to hit a lottery BIG!

[luftfluss]

One of the reasons I decided on Pentax over the other brands about 10 years ago was that on the K-7 I could use EVERY LENS Pentax ever made, screw mount to advanced K lenses. No other manufacturer that I am aware of can say that.

With mirrorless, pretty much every manufacturer can say that now. And there's gobs of cross-brand compatibility.

If you love lenses, this is the Golden Age.

[Mooncatt]

...nothing else about the K-1 has a particularly strong pull...

I hear the K1's pull out screen can take a strong pulling.

[luftfluss]

I hear the K1's pull out screen can take a strong pulling.

[Breakfastographer]

That's about the most diplomatic term I've heard for it

The truth is that with almost every new product, people complain about the price, especially high end gear where the price has to be higher to defray development costs amid smaller demand. I think many struggle with concepts such as launch prices, inflation, or the longer term effect of keeping one's peace and letting the early adopters happily pay the high launch price.

Well, as in other discussions, no built-in flash also, which can be quite handy for on-demand fill, and can act as a control trigger for an outboard flash setup. The KP still has a lot going for it, including its lighter weight and versatile adaptability.

Thank you for clarifying.

[mikesbike]

@luftfluss- Yikes!

---------- Post added 11-24-20 at 02:38 PM ----------

For telephoto FF is. huge disadvantage much of the time.

Yep. I do have a couple of top-notch FF tele primes, but for most tele needs I'll stick with APS-C. Even those primes will deliver better "reach".

---------- Post added 11-24-20 at 03:03 PM ----------

I have not cracked the owners manual yet, but so far I've found only a couple of oddities on the K-1 II. On the 4 control access buttons on the back, I was looking for the usual flash control button- ain't there! Instead is the illumination control of display for night/day, etc. which on the KP is found via the second top knob dial, which makes more sense to me. So I looked to see what the K-1 II's 2nd top knob has available, and was amazed to find both ISO and +/- comp settings on this dial, while right on top also are ISO and +/- buttons at fingertip convenience- seemingly an unnecessary duplication. Without that duplication, there'd be plenty of room for the display illumination adjustment via that top knob as it is on the KP! Then one would not have to go into menus to find flash adjustment, it could be right where it is on other Pentax models- handy!

[zapp]

By now enough info has come through to basically know what to expect when the K-3 III appears- an outstanding APS-C performer. Its expanded VF magnification almost as large as the K-1 II, fast-firing and AF performance probably the best Pentax ever, low light/high ISO perhaps fairly near what the K-1 II is capable of, in a body just under 30 oz.

When all is said and done about what is lacking and what is beneficial, what is coming will be one fine-performing APS-C model. But as I have said, I am overjoyed with what my KP brings me, including what the K-3 III lacks. So what should my next step logically be? What makes the most sense for me? Then I looked again at my old, but top-notch favorite FF AF lenses just sitting there next to my fine Pentax AF film bodies, not all that useful to me on DSLRs for some years now, and I arrived at a conclusion that became clear at this point, yet surprising even to myself!

The K-1 II is only a couple of years old, it has been and still is very successful and competitive, so I would not expect a successor to be in development for at least another 2 years, and then I don't know If it it will be minus a useful feature the current model now has. And the price point is now down near what is expected for the K-3 III! So logic finally kicked in, and I ordered the K-1II with the 28-105 WR kit lens special! I've now reawakened my fine FF lenses, have been enjoying the experience for some 2 weeks, and I am delighted!

I would go K1 first, but actually go for both.

[mikesbike]

Both really is best, as BigMackCam has so often expressed, as have I. Both formats have advantages, depending on application and the circumstances being dealt with. Since I am more than amply equipped in APS-C gear, and since I already have some impressive FF lenses, this was the basis of my choice.

However, if I had to choose only one or the other, for me APS-C is adaptable to more situations and is more versatile for all-around usage than is a FF outfit, and now the quality aspect between the two has been narrowed considerably.