[cls]

he way I would see it is if you are going to keep your next camera as long as you kept the K20D, you can probably justify buying the best one available

What struck me in your story is that you found so many reasons not to upgrade from your K20d, given the good advice by all those friendly people here.

Yes, these two observations, together - it was not the advice, just my hesitation, and I don't give up on a camera easily, and suffer from indecision! (Went from the K1000 to the K20D while eyeing the 1stD and 10D came along in quick succession but I was too cash-strapped at the time.)

Lack of pop-up flash doesn't bother me. Those are for those times where you absolutely need more light and have no other options. They create harsh shadows, so don't make for very pleasing photos

This is the conclusion I have been coming to as well - I hate the effect flash has, and concluded I must be unskilled in it's use (I am), so I avoid it. Having said that I have done some flash macro and some still stuff using a hotshoe flash, with somewhat better results. At any rate, it doesn't feel like the game changer it did before if I can purchase a small flash as you suggest (and the high ISO quality is better).

[K2 to K50]

I bought my KP in June 2019, after playing around with a cheapie 2nd hand K50.
I am generally not "a big spender" and figured I would not be buying another new camera for at least 5-7 yrs. I liked the KP.

Since then I have freed up a little on the sprendthrift aspect of my personality. Thoughts of: I'm in my late 70s, can't take it with you, etc.

So I went bananas in April 2021 and bought the 150-450mm zoom. (I was growing frustrated with the reach of the 55-300 PLM reach). Using such a big, heavy lens took a bit of a learning curve. But it is such a quality lens, and I am now finding myself shooting with it hand-held as often as with a monopod or tripod.

I bought the K3 iii in June 2021, after some serious "really, do you have to" type self-questioning. But I was contemplating an extended 2-week 1500 kilometre birding trip with friend. Two cameras seemed desirable.

Love it!!!
The KP was (is) a very nice camera. But the K3 iii is something else. It is really something else. Life is short (especially at my age!!!) so enjoy it as much as your budget and body (and partner!!!) will allow!

[Joetitch]

My favourite topic spending your money😀
I don't have the K3iii but I think it represents good value for money considering all the advances. There is a Japanese listing for a used one on eBay which is more than $400AU than I can buy one new so they must be paying more than we do. Get the best and forget the rest👍
I don't have one because my KP and K1 don't raise a sweat with what I shoot.

[totsmuyco]

If budget is not the problem, go for the K-3III. It's much better in all aspects from the K-3/K-3II. Furthermore, if you go for the K-3III, you have the latest technology so when there will be some changes in lens designs you're camera can use newer lenses. An example would be the KAF4 lenses. The K-5 series have very good sensors and are still very capable cameras. I have a K-5II. I'm sad I can't use use KAF4 lenses.

If budget will affect the purchase, I'd say go for the K-3II.

[biz-engineer]

K3-III, you'll shocked by how good it is compared to a K20D.

[NZ_Ross]

I had a K-5, upgraded to a K-3 which I used for 7 years, and recently brought a K-3 III.

The K-3 is a good rugged camera, but the K-3 III is a level well above it especially for action shots, birds etc. I think the sensor is significantly better too, but can't quantify that, just looks much better images with my lenses. I have since sold the K-3 as I realised I would not use it again, and wouldn't go back.

If you can afford a K-3 III then I can recommend it - it is a 7-10 year purchase in reality, and will last the distance.

[JohnX]

K3 III. Stop hesitate any longer; just do it. You won't look back! 😁

---

Last edited by JohnX; 01-08-2022 at 07:18 AM.

[UncleVanya]

I went from k100D Super to k-50, then k-3, then KP. The KP is far better at high iso than the K-3 AND operationally it is faster. I’m not talking about buffer speed or frames per second just the overall responsiveness. If the KP is that much of a leap ahead I imagine the K-3iii is even more capable given the entirely new OS.

But back to the K-3, it was a small incremental step from the K-50 which had itself been a giant step from the K100D super. The K-3 will be a major leap forward from the k20D, The K-3iii will be mind blowing. However as has been mentioned lenses too have a role. Balance your needs and consider grabbing the k-3 of whatever version allows you to afford any new lenses you also need.

[cls]

I believe I am convinced ... now, to finance the thing.

[cls]

So ... just before I bite the bullet (I've had the K3iii in the cart about three times already ...) I know some of you here have experience with different systems (Nikon, Canon), and mirrorless systems, which I am understanding are superior for AF and ISO noise than SLR. I have been mulling costing out selling and replacing my Pentax system with comparable Nikon or Canon (not ready to let go of SLR), but it seems a daunting task to evaluate. My gut says the K3iii is really close to the D500 or Canon equivalent, and it will be a huge pain to try to source new gear and sell old gear, and I will lose out in the end and possibly not be measurably more satisfied. I just read a very old thread comparing lens cost/quality in the three systems which was interesting and supported my gut feeling. Any insights into switching systems or is the K3iii putting Pentax in close enough range for speed and AF that it would not be worth the switch?


For lenses, I have:
- Sigma 100-300
- Sigma 17-70
- Pentax manual 50mm f2.0 that needs an upgrade
- Pentax 18-250 kit lens
- Pentax 200 f4 (rarely used)
- Vivitar 90mm Macro (rarely used at the moment but I come back to it now and again - it needs a repair as it has become loose).


If I started from scratch with a new system, I would want a fast 50, and something in both the 17-70 and 100-300 range, at least. With my current system I am looking to upgrade the fast 50 immediately, and looking toward macro capability and extended telephoto in future. I photograph a variety of things - lots of family and kid stuff, but also wildlife and dog sports. Many who responded counseled me to look at my lenses to improve my experience. I wonder, what would be some recommendations people would make?

[UncleVanya]

know some of you here have experience with different systems (Nikon, Canon), and mirrorless systems, which I am understanding are superior for AF and ISO noise than SLR. I have been mulling costing out selling and replacing my Pentax system with comparable Nikon or Canon (not ready to let go of SLR), but it seems a daunting task to evaluate. My gut says the K3iii is really close to the D500 or Canon equivalent, and it will be a huge pain to try to source new gear and sell old gear, and I will lose out in the end and possibly not be measurably more satisfied. I just read a very old thread comparing lens cost/quality in the three systems which was interesting and supported my gut feeling. Any insights into switching systems or is the K3iii putting Pentax in close enough range for speed and AF that it would not be worth the switch?


For lenses, I have:
- Sigma 100-300
- Sigma 17-70
- Pentax manual 50mm f2.0 that needs an upgrade
- Pentax 18-250 kit lens
- Pentax 200 f4 (rarely used)
- Vivitar 90mm Macro with an adapter ring, so manual (rarely used at the moment but I come back to it now and again).


If I started from scratch with a new system, I would want a fast 50, and something in both the 17-70 and 100-300 range, at least. With my current system I am looking to upgrade the fast 50 immediately, and looking toward macro capability and extended telephoto in future. I photograph a variety of things - lots of family and kid stuff, but also wildlife and dog sports. Many who responded counseled me to look at my lenses to improve my experience. I wonder, what would be some recommendations people would make?

First mirrorless doesn’t give better iso performance at all. Certain sensors available only in mirrorless might. But that’s reall putting a very thin hairsplitting difference in more prominence than is really useful.

As for focus - the truth is complex. Mirrorless tends to be where innovation is at the moment. DSLR’s lead for a long time. PDAF on chip helped and yet also can create banding issues in shadows that required a bit of new techniques on the part of raw converters at first. I own an A7rIII and a KP and I’ve had shots where one beat the other and it isn’t always predictable- modern gear is fantastic but it doesn’t have to be anywhere near cutting edge to give great images.

To be honest the lenses you have aren’t a huge investment. Nikon is the most similar to Pentax in DSLR world. Slightly more refined perhaps. Slightly better at a few odds and ends but with Nikon pricing and Nikon is moving away from their SLR mount so new tech will lag. Prices can be quite a bit better due to folks switching to mirrorless however.

Honestly you can gear chase but ultimately you need to decide what you like most. Look at this forum as one major assets to sticking with Pentax. No other gear seems to have this kind of community. That said, the other gear has more tutorials and better support in the mainstream if that matters to you.

---------- Post added 01-18-22 at 04:14 PM ----------

Canon DSLR’s tend to have lower dynamic range except for a few later models. That doesn’t make them inferior just be well informed.

[cls]

As for focus - the truth is complex. Mirrorless tends to be where innovation is at the moment. DSLR’s lead for a long time. PDAF on chip helped and yet also can create banding issues in shadows that required a bit of new techniques on the part of raw converters at first. I own an A7rIII and a KP and I’ve had shots where one beat the other and it isn’t always predictable- modern gear is fantastic but it doesn’t have to be anywhere near cutting edge to give great images.

Good points, and valuable insight. As I said, I am not ready to turn away from SLR at this time. Just in my research, I have read about the developments in mirrorless and how this compares to SLR.
1087NUIP

To be honest the lenses you have aren’t a huge investment

Yes, this is somewhat true. The old lenses came with my original purchase a million years ago, and I don't use them much or at all now. I upgraded in the last 2-4 years from the kit lens I purchased with the K20D, and am enjoying using them immensely. While it is true that the sigma lenses don't represent a huge investment in dollars, they would still need to be sold at used prices, and then replaced if I were to change systems. I have sentimental and practical attachment to Pentax, but was not eliminating the possibility if it just made more sense for what I use my camera for.


I do indeed appreciate the expertise and support offered here, i certainly find it very valuable and a part of the factor to stay with Pentax. It does seem that the K3iii brings Pentax up to a level where the difference may be made up by skill.

[Mooncatt]

Even though other brands have cameras better in some areas than Pentax, my enjoyment comes from things not directly attributed to image quality. The community, the ergonomics, the commitment to DSLR, etc have been the deciding factors for me. I'm nowhere near the skill level where splitting spec hairs can make a difference in my pics, so I stick with what I enjoy shooting with on a more emotional level. So don't discount that sort of thing if your skills are anything less than pro level.

And if you do still feel like you want to switch, rent a body and a couple lenses for a week or two. If you're willing to put down a few grand on a complete changeover, spending a few hundred on a rental for a test run is nothing, and should help solidify your decision. Either you'll become confident you're making the right choice to commit to the switch, or you'll be wiping sweat from your brow as you realize you just saved yourself from making a massive financial blunder. If you rent and find yourself still questioning in the middle ground, then I would recommend still holding off until something happens that makes you confident in the choice.

[UncleVanya]

Good points, and valuable insight. As I said, I am not ready to turn away from SLR at this time. Just in my research, I have read about the developments in mirrorless and how this compares to SLR.
1087NUIP



Yes, this is somewhat true. The old lenses came with my original purchase a million years ago, and I don't use them much or at all now. I upgraded in the last 2-4 years from the kit lens I purchased with the K20D, and am enjoying using them immensely. While it is true that the sigma lenses don't represent a huge investment in dollars, they would still need to be sold at used prices, and then replaced if I were to change systems. I have sentimental and practical attachment to Pentax, but was not eliminating the possibility if it just made more sense for what I use my camera for.


I do indeed appreciate the expertise and support offered here, i certainly find it very valuable and a part of the factor to stay with Pentax. It does seem that the K3iii brings Pentax up to a level where the difference may be made up by skill.

In a very real sense you need to decide what you want out of a system and what you want to photograph. If you want really long telephoto lenses like a 600mm - you will pay dearly for this on the Pentax system. There are much cheaper options that are optically very good in Sigma and Tamron that do not work on Pentax. These may be still a considerable expense and in a system that is not going to be expanded if you buy into the DSLR's of Canon and Nikon. The 150-450 is a good near alternative that can take a teleconverter and offers similar range at an ISO penalty but not horrific. If you want exotic wide angle lenses with huge wide apertures - again Pentax may offer some choices but not as many or as varied as current mirrorless cameras and to some degree the DSLR's of CaNikon. If you want to use legacy lenses stretching well back into the middle of the last century with very little functional loss then Pentax is king of the DSLR's for sure. Nikon do a degree is close but only from the F mount forward and only on the high end bodies do you get screw drive autofocus. Cannon changed mounts in the 80's so only the EF series works on their bodies. The older FD and FL mount lenses can't be used on their DSLR's. If you want limited lenses then only Fuji really competes in terms of smaller jewel like lenses - but even then you are forced into Mirrorless which you have said isn't your cup of tea. Most photography is more about skills than performance - but some edge cases exist where the limits of Pentax bodies can be tested. The K-3iii has a smaller buffer than the burst rate would tend to suggest. The focus accuracy and burst rate are right in line with the Nikon D500. They aren't identical however (all of my info is from hearsay and reviews on these by the way. I own a KP, K-3, K100D/K100DS and a Sony A7rIII and have owned other systems (m43 and Samsung). I have a large investment in expertise and lenses in Pentax but I'm largely brand agnostic other than a bias against Canon. (Mind you they are good cameras but they annoy me)

In the end - pick what you want to do - not what specs you think you need. The KP is more than adequate for what I do - despite being a step backwards from the K-3 (original) in buffer and burst rate and number of cards and grip ergonomics and remote control (IR missing) and so forth. The features that I have discovered mattered (Image Quality, High ISO performance, focus accuracy, tilting screen, third control wheel) have all been found to be a lot more interesting than what I gave up. In this case I never really took my own advice I lucked into trying the KP when there was a sale. If I had been honest with myself I would have noted that I don't tend to shoot wildlife or sports and burst rate is overrated. I also would have said to myself - you aren't a pro, and the only real use of the dual slots was to use an Eyefi card for wifi - which the KP has natively. (and the eyefi no longer works) Then I would have said - I don't shoot high iso much - which was only partly true... and I find this is one of those must use to learn to love features. The grip I complained about until I used it - then I found it was not a big deal. Anyone with a good camera holding technique from the film era can master the KP.

So while the K-3iii is the ultimate Pentax ASPC - the comparison to other models by other companies should only be relevant if you see real practical advantages to use of those features. Additionally the same should be said of the delta between the K3iii and other Pentax gear. Weigh what matters to you and decide. Rental is a real and helpful option. If you think the D500 plus a lens or two will make you better - rent one. Try it. Do likewise with the K-3iii if possible. If not then ask around. Learn what isn't greener before you leap.

[TER-OR]

Hello again,

Something like 2 years ago I ventured into the forums here to get advice on upgrading my workhorse K20D. I was eyeing the K3, specifically focusing on improvements on auto-focus, speed for dog, kid, wildlife action, and low light performance. I got a lot of useful food for thought specifically advice to give the KP another look. I did, but it's image quality and fps etc advantages just couldn't overcome some other things I valued more esoterically (handling especially with large lenses, lack of LCD, some other things). So I kept my eye on the marketplace and so very limited used market here in Canada for a K3, and just kept missing opportunity after opportunity.


I am still looking for an upgrade, and now the K3iii has got some more usage history. Whereas the onboard flash was a deterrent for me at first for the K3ii, given my frustration at obtaining a new camera, it now seems like a small issue if I can get a small external on-camera flash, especially if the k3iii overcomes any drawbacks of the k3.


I would greatly appreciate any insights on handling, image quality, higher iso capability (like, max 3200-6400, I cannot see myself using ISO higher than that ever), speed, compared to the K3 and KP in particular. I have considered the K1 as well, but the speed is a deal breaker for me.

Thank you in advance!

I have the K3II and K3III. There is a difference, each model is a bit better, and the focus tracking is markedly better.
If you dig in my Flickr, you'll see K10, K5, K3II and K3III images. The K5 sensor is the most film-like, it's very pleasing to the eye but the K3 series outperforms it in every other way.

I have the little AF201 flash too, and have used it on rainy days outdoors with the 18-135. I can trust its weather resistance. If you're not needing the weather sealing, no big deal - any flash will work.