[ChristianRock]

Well... the difference between 1.4lb and 1.8lb might be significant if you're walking with a camera all day long...

On the other hands, if you shoot indoor sports, I'd say the AF of the K-3 III is definitely what you want.

[aslyfox]

. . . The camera is mostly outdoor and travel companion, . . .

not sure what that means landscape vs. wildlife ???

. . . I thought difference between KP and K-3 III was bigger, . . .

https://camerasize.com/compare/#873,706

.. . I also take photo's of indoor sports . . .

you may want to look at the " Continuous Shooting ", the " ISO Range " " Shutter Speed " and " Maximum FPS " data


now the disclaimer, I claim no particular expertise, I'm just someone who posts a lot

[AfterPentax Mark II]

So I am leaning towards K-3 III... I will sleep on it.

Leaning on it, mmm alright, but sleep on it? I agree with the others here that if you just put the question K-3 III or KP an answer might be either difficult or the easiest one to answer. But the advise to buy a KP and add a good lens for the price difference is a sound advise. I enjoy the grip that came with it and it is never off my KP. The 20-40mm Ltd paired excellent with this camera, but the 16-85 is very capable as well. I bought it to upgrade from my K-3 mark II and never regretted it. The poor K-3 mark II now suffers the life of a backup for the KP.

[kypfer]

I own and use both … the ergonomics are somewhat "different"!
The K-3iii is very much in the continuing vein of Pentax DSLRs … if you already own one you'll feel immediately at home with this body, the shutter button and control wheels are exactly where you'd expect them to be!
The designers apparently spent some time fine-tuning the grip and control placement … they got it right!
I bought the K-3iii as an "a/f upgrade". In that role it serves well for wildlife work, mostly birds.
In my mind, the KP was a design exercise, trying to replicate an older camera, with the shutter button on the top of the body instead of slightly in front and the front control wheel added almost as an afterthought.
Having used my KP extensively with the largest of the three grips, 'cos that "looked" most like my other DSLRs, the arrival of my K-3iii left me with a KP with no real job to do , so I started to fiddle around, and found fitting the smallest grip, everything started to make sense!
Although the physical measurements of both cameras appear similar on paper, the KP with the small grip "feels" very much more compact in the hand. There's no big right-hand bulge, just so much more "retro". In my hand, the shutter button placement seems so much more natural with the smallest grip fitted (wish I'd realised that earlier!!)
With a "standard" zoom (eg. 18-50mm DC WR RE) fitted and some telephoto capability in my bag (FA 100-300mm or modern equivalent) the KP is an ideal "outdoor and travel companion". The built-in flash makes it just that little bit more flexible … if I was using the K-3iii for that purpose I'd want to have a separate flashgun, just in case The KP is also some 100+gm (4oz) lighter, a thought if you're carrying it for any distance.
The KP's autofocus is very good, especially with the latest firmware installed. Not stellar, like the K-3iii, but a very significant step up from the earlier firmware and even more so from the earlier cameras. Inevitably, both cameras will benefit from a wider aperture lens if being used for indoor sports! On paper the K-3iii has an extra stop of low light sensitivity, EV-4 against EV-3 for the KP, but only with an f/2.8 lens!
I've absolutely nothing to say against either camera, they are both superb, but inevitably the K-3iii is even "more superb" … even if you do need a separate flash


Just my tuppence worth … having used both cameras I thought there might be something of use in my ramblings

[stevebrot]

either the KP or K 3 III would be quite an upgrade

Agreed, though 880 Euro for a KP seems high (assuming used) unless one truly wants that model. If NOS, 880 Euro pricing may be more in line. (Pricing in the EU and Britain can be so different than in the U.S., so I had best shut my mouth, eh?)


Steve

[bertwert]

Saying that I think outdoors both cameras would be fine, but I also take photo's of indoor sports and K-50 auto-focus was driving me crazy.

I just recently upgraded to the KP from the K-50, and goodness is it a big change in almost every fashion!

At around the same time, I also had a lens upgrade, which I think improved my photography much more than a K-3iii could. So perhaps some budget saved could be allocated to a new lens? What do you use now?

I have many positive things to say about the KP and could go on and on, but I'm sure you've seen most of what there is to about the KP. For what it's worth, I primarily shoot wildlife and landscapes (at an amateur level of course) and find the KP a good fit, including spots in which the K-50 was lacking.

That being said, I would probably have gotten the K-3iii if it was in my budget, and I'm sure it's in my future (5+ years from now) but I don't see myself ever giving up the KP. It's a delightful body for many things, and makes a good base for a travel kit with some primes.

[Serkevan]

Agreed, though 880 Euro for a KP seems high (assuming used) unless one truly wants that model. If NOS, 880 Euro pricing may be more in line. (Pricing in the EU and Britain can be so different than in the U.S., so I had best shut my mouth, eh?)

Steve

A new KP in the EU was ~1100€ until discontinuation. 880€ sound alrighty for NOS.

[jumbleview]

I had similar question, when it became clear that K3iii will not have adjustable screen. So I bought used KP (new was discontinued already). I am happy with it so far, but honestly speaking I did not use screen adjustment much. But I do envy bigger K3iii optical viewfinder (never experienced it myself, but people praise that viewfinder very much). So decisive factor is what do you want more: articulated screen or bigger viewfinder. And money of course is a factor too, but that is important only at time of purchase and maybe next several months.

[JPT]

Another great thing about the K-3 III that doesn't get mentioned much is the totally new OS and upgraded electronics it has. My experience so far has been that the K-3 III just feels like a much more responsive camera in all ways, but especially when you go into image review or the menus.

Since you can do everything with either the screen or the buttons, you can find your own balance of using the screen. I think I'm about half and half. Some examples of things that are a lot easier are:
- Using the grid of settings on the info screen. You just touch them and set the parameter with two touches, rather than doing right-right-down-OK-down-down-down-OK. You get the picture.
- Any kind of image review. Being able to swipe, pinch-zoom and so on is great - like a smart phone
- Changing settings deep in the menus is less of a hassle. I mean things like changing the programmable button assignment, JPEG parameters and so on
- Wifi is available on both cameras, but the speed and function of the K-3 II is a generation ahead. I really like that the camera itself can resize the image to a small size before sending unnecessarily large files to the phone

I used to have times where I thought, "I should really change ?? setting for this shot, but it means going into the menu. I can't be bothered." The new system makes me more inclined to do that and generally makes me experiment more with different settings.

I was used to this menu system from having the GR III, but the GR's tiny battery makes you worry about running it down. With the K-3 III, the battery is ample and the processor seems faster than the GR III, so it's a better experience.

Having got used to this, I don't think I could go back to the traditional Pentax menu system.

Actually my only gripe with the K-3 III so far is that I wish the screen was a couple of centimeters larger, because I have to be a little more accurate with my finger than I'd like to hit the right menu selection.

[AnotherVoice]

I own both. I mostly shoot birds and aircraft inflight. I like the KP for reasons mentioned, but told myself that I would upgrade when Pentax "fixed" 3 things about the KP. 1) Frame rate during burst shooting is slow, and the buffer is comparatively very small. 2) Quicker focus and less hunting with my 300mm/F4 and 560mm. 3) Dual SD card slots are nice, but having an UHS-II capability was critical, again to clear the buffer.

The K-3iii hit all my upgrade requirements plus some more low light capability and lots of customization.

So, now the KP is my primary night/Astro camera (for the articulating screen) and the K-3iii is primary the rest of the time.

But hey, I'm just AnotherVoice...

[DonV]

KP, will do! JMHO

[Biff]

These discussions are interesting. For me the KP is a lot of camera and I don't nearly use it to its potential, and I'm pretty sure that would be true for the K3 II, K3, and probably the K5II I had. I like the size, layout and vibe of the KP. I'm sure I'd love a K3 III but can't see needing it. To me, after a point it's splitting hairs. I'll use the KP for most things, although if I get more into birds in flight photography I may get a D500 just for that given current prices and access to lenses. But birds in flight is a niche not all are interested in. (This is not to suggest the K3 III is not good at birds in flight.)

[jersey]

If you are gonna take cameras on long trips, hiking etc then KP is lighter and has a AA battery adapter. Meaning you will get less tired and it will be more comfortable plus in case you run out of juice all you need is some place where you can AA battery, no need to remember spare batteries. And K-3 Mk III is not the best camera ever when it comes to battery live, for longer trips you will need to have spares with you.

If weight and battery life are not issues then get K-3. You cannot go wrong with best and newest.

[slartibartfast01]

If you are gonna take cameras on long trips, hiking etc then KP is lighter and has a AA battery adapter. Meaning you will get less tired and it will be more comfortable plus in case you run out of juice all you need is some place where you can AA battery, no need to remember spare batteries. And K-3 Mk III is not the best camera ever when it comes to battery live, for longer trips you will need to have spares with you.

If weight and battery life are not issues then get K-3. You cannot go wrong with best and newest.

I didn't know you could use AA batteries in a KP. How do you do that?

[kypfer]

If you are gonna take cameras on long trips, hiking etc then KP is lighter and has a AA battery adapter. Meaning you will get less tired and it will be more comfortable plus in case you run out of juice all you need is some place where you can AA battery, no need to remember spare batteries. And K-3 Mk III is not the best camera ever when it comes to battery live, for longer trips you will need to have spares with you.

If weight and battery life are not issues then get K-3. You cannot go wrong with best and newest.

Where can I get an AA adapter for my KP, please?
My original 3rd party "spare" D-Li109 has recently died and I need to get a replacement, but I've got plenty of NiMH AA cells I could use instead.