K3ii vs Fuji XT-1

jeffryscott · 08-14-2015, 07:33 PM - **1 Like**

Anybody used both? Thoughts?

I previously had K5II, loved it, but AF was a bit too slow for my needs at the time. Now have Fuji and mostly love the camera, but am thinking of the K3II or K3. No particular reason except that I really liked the handling of the K5II and Fuji's can be a little quirky

Thanks.

Canuck_west · 08-14-2015, 08:37 PM

Fuji has a great number of excellent primes. Pentax doesn't. ☺

noelpolar · 08-14-2015, 08:41 PM

Funny.

---------- Post added 15-08-15 at 01:13 PM ----------

My view of the K3, in this context, is that it is just so comfortable and competent that when you have it you take so much for granted. You then fixate on some other aspect of a "competing" camera....buy it..... and begin to realise.....

I have a K5II and K3.

jeffryscott · 08-14-2015, 09:09 PM

Originally posted by Canuck_west

Fuji has a great number of excellent primes. Pentax doesn't. ☺

What about the limiteds? Not as fast, but smaller? How do they compare optically?

Been looking at the 50-140 Fuji, and thinking back to my 50-135 Pentax. The Fuji is probably better, but the Pentax is smaller, lighter and very, very good.

The potential FF camera with the 31 and 77 intrigues me ... I wonder how much it will grow, size and cost-wise over the K3 series.

Not very rational thinking to switch as the Fuji is quite remarkable and the lenses are lovely, but I just got my kid a Pentax K20D as her first cam and it got me reminiscing about the K5II ....

Bagga_Txips · 08-14-2015, 09:22 PM

I have a K5 and a K3. The K3 is much more responsive in every way than the K5. A year or two ago, before I got my K3, I was asked to take a shot using a Canon plus standard/kit zoom lens, and I was impressed by how quiet it was, but didn't see much difference in the speed of focus. Since then I bought a Pentax 18-135 and a Sigma 17-50, and they both seem just as quiet as that Canon setup.

But the K3 seems to be quiet, nippy, and very responsive. I think we worry too much about technical quality, and not enough about fun, joy of ownership and usage. I liked my K5 a lot, but was jealous of my wife's cool shiny blue K30. But I love this K3, so the fact that it gives me better results than any camera I have ever owned, since 1960, is just the icing on the cake!

Winder · 08-14-2015, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by jeffryscott

Anybody used both? Thoughts?

I previously had K5II, loved it, but AF was a bit too slow for my needs at the time. Now have Fuji and mostly love the camera, but am thinking of the K3II or K3. No particular reason except that I really liked the handling of the K5II and Fuji's can be a little quirky

I have used both. I almost bought the XT-1 instead of the A7II. The X-T1 is a great little camera with some really great glass. I have not shot with one since the new firmware 4.0 was released. The K-3 (I own) is faster in every way. IF you shoot primarily JPEGs and people, then I think the Fuji has an advantage with its colors and skin tones right out of the box. If you shoot RAW and want to deal with custom color profiles then the K-3 is going to give you better results. The K-3 is a much more refined camera. The Fuji can be a lot of fun to use, the lenses are really good, and Fuji has done a great job getting lenses to market..

Clicker · 08-15-2015, 06:19 AM

For "no particular reason", just stay with what you have, GAS ia a bitch

jeffryscott · 08-15-2015, 02:10 PM

Originally posted by Clicker

For "no particular reason", just stay with what you have, GAS ia a bitch

Done stupider things for the same reason

Just posted my Fuji stuff on FM so we shall see ....

I was looking back at some of the images from the K5II and really enjoy the files. Fuji is fantastic, but it may just be time for a change. Seems the K3/K3II may have corrected the minor flaws in the K5II so it may be worth a look ...

Clicker · 08-15-2015, 03:46 PM

I would go straight to the K3II, been looking at getting back to Pentax from there regardless of FF on the horizon.

I'm just clearing up my Canon stuff to some needy people first....

**Rondec** · 08-15-2015, 04:25 PM

I guess from what I've seen I think Fuji is about jpeg shooting and their jpeg engine isn't matched by another brand. But if you shoot RAW, then it is awash. The K3 is definitely very responsive and works really well. I wouldn't complain about the photos I get from it or their ability to be post processed.

aleonx3 · 08-15-2015, 05:46 PM

I am sure all up-to-date line of DSLRs from any brands are fine; I just don't feel there is sufficient advantage over the k-3 for me to switch over or to even try other brands. I am eagerly waiting for what comes after k-3II (with newer sensor that Sony has in the works) and also remotely interested in the development and offering of Pentax FF.

lesmore49 · 08-16-2015, 01:42 PM

Originally posted by Canuck_west

Fuji has a great number of excellent primes. Pentax doesn't. ☺

What do you call the Pentax Limited primes ?

**Rondec** · 08-16-2015, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by lesmore49

What do you call the Pentax Limited primes ?

I think it was meant as a tongue in cheek response.

jeffryscott · 08-16-2015, 02:27 PM

Although quirky, I do really like the Fuji and the prime's offer quality and speed, but are more expensive and bigger than the Limiteds, which I also lust for. But, I've decided, for now, against making any move. One reason is timing - Fuji has a huge sale and new prices are close to what used prices were two days ago. Another reason is I need to step back and make sure I make a more rational choice

One con against coming back to Pentax is still AF speed, while it is good for most of what I do, I do enjoy bird photography (when I have a proper long lens). While the CAF is better in the K3 series than my former K5II, from what I've read, it still lags, substantially, from Canon or Nikon. But I much prefer the Pentax ergonomics. One thought is to keep the Fuji for my main kit, but add a DSLR with a long lens for birds. I was looking at the 150-450 while contemplating Pentax, but now I am sorely tempted to get a D7000 body (same sensor as K5II) and Nikon's new 200-500 5.6. That combo is cheaper than the Pentax 150-450, but since the lens is not yet out, it is unknown how it stacks up optically. I've also thought of a 7D and the venerable Canon 400 5.6L, but not too excited about that camera body's higher ISO compared to the Nikon or Pentax offerings

There are multiple good choices, and really can't go wrong with any.

tuco · 08-18-2015, 12:32 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Rondec

I guess from what I've seen I think Fuji is about jpeg shooting and their jpeg engine isn't matched by another brand...

I had an XP1 for a while. It was okay and I'd still have it if it wasn't so slow at focusing. When I pick up a digital camera, I expect everything to be fast since I shoot a lot of slow film cameras. But back to the Fuji's RAW vs JPEG. The JPEG engine is good but I still would rather process RAW most of the time. There is still shadows that can be pulled up and highlights pulled down.

I didn't process this much. But I liked how it rendered the different skin tones of these gals. And it's hard to say how much different it would be from any other camera in its class without a side-by-side. But it seemed pretty accurate anyway. Fuji's X-Trans RAW files ( at least from Adobe's LR) are not always that great with fine foliage detail.

08-14-2015, 07:33 PM - 1 Like	#1
jeffryscott Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 253	K3ii vs Fuji XT-1 Anybody used both? Thoughts? I previously had K5II, loved it, but AF was a bit too slow for my needs at the time. Now have Fuji and mostly love the camera, but am thinking of the K3II or K3. No particular reason except that I really liked the handling of the K5II and Fuji's can be a little quirky Thanks.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Fuji XT-1 Camera Body	Qwntm	Sold Items	2	09-27-2014 02:02 AM
Fuji XT-1 - completely silent shutter	Winder	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	0	09-10-2014 07:12 AM
Pentax K-01 vs Fuji X-Pro 1 vs Olympus OM-D	Winder	Pentax K-01	749	06-14-2014 03:42 PM
SMC Pentax-FA 1:1.4 50mm vs. Fuji Fujinon 1:1.8 55mm	carpents	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	12-28-2009 03:11 AM

08-14-2015, 08:37 PM	#2
Canuck_west Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 59	Fuji has a great number of excellent primes. Pentax doesn't. ☺

08-14-2015, 08:41 PM	#3
noelpolar Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Goolwa, SA Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,310	Funny. ---------- Post added 15-08-15 at 01:13 PM ---------- My view of the K3, in this context, is that it is just so comfortable and competent that when you have it you take so much for granted. You then fixate on some other aspect of a "competing" camera....buy it..... and begin to realise..... I have a K5II and K3.

08-14-2015, 09:09 PM	#4
jeffryscott Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 253 Original Poster	Originally posted by Canuck_west Fuji has a great number of excellent primes. Pentax doesn't. ☺ What about the limiteds? Not as fast, but smaller? How do they compare optically? Been looking at the 50-140 Fuji, and thinking back to my 50-135 Pentax. The Fuji is probably better, but the Pentax is smaller, lighter and very, very good. The potential FF camera with the 31 and 77 intrigues me ... I wonder how much it will grow, size and cost-wise over the K3 series. Not very rational thinking to switch as the Fuji is quite remarkable and the lenses are lovely, but I just got my kid a Pentax K20D as her first cam and it got me reminiscing about the K5II ....

08-14-2015, 09:22 PM	#5
Bagga_Txips Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Waterford Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 454	I have a K5 and a K3. The K3 is much more responsive in every way than the K5. A year or two ago, before I got my K3, I was asked to take a shot using a Canon plus standard/kit zoom lens, and I was impressed by how quiet it was, but didn't see much difference in the speed of focus. Since then I bought a Pentax 18-135 and a Sigma 17-50, and they both seem just as quiet as that Canon setup. But the K3 seems to be quiet, nippy, and very responsive. I think we worry too much about technical quality, and not enough about fun, joy of ownership and usage. I liked my K5 a lot, but was jealous of my wife's cool shiny blue K30. But I love this K3, so the fact that it gives me better results than any camera I have ever owned, since 1960, is just the icing on the cake!

08-14-2015, 09:33 PM	#6
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by jeffryscott Anybody used both? Thoughts? I previously had K5II, loved it, but AF was a bit too slow for my needs at the time. Now have Fuji and mostly love the camera, but am thinking of the K3II or K3. No particular reason except that I really liked the handling of the K5II and Fuji's can be a little quirky I have used both. I almost bought the XT-1 instead of the A7II. The X-T1 is a great little camera with some really great glass. I have not shot with one since the new firmware 4.0 was released. The K-3 (I own) is faster in every way. IF you shoot primarily JPEGs and people, then I think the Fuji has an advantage with its colors and skin tones right out of the box. If you shoot RAW and want to deal with custom color profiles then the K-3 is going to give you better results. The K-3 is a much more refined camera. The Fuji can be a lot of fun to use, the lenses are really good, and Fuji has done a great job getting lenses to market..

08-15-2015, 06:19 AM	#7
Clicker Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,241	For "no particular reason", just stay with what you have, GAS ia a bitch

08-15-2015, 02:10 PM	#8
jeffryscott Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 253 Original Poster	Originally posted by Clicker For "no particular reason", just stay with what you have, GAS ia a bitch Done stupider things for the same reason Just posted my Fuji stuff on FM so we shall see .... I was looking back at some of the images from the K5II and really enjoy the files. Fuji is fantastic, but it may just be time for a change. Seems the K3/K3II may have corrected the minor flaws in the K5II so it may be worth a look ...

08-15-2015, 03:46 PM	#9
Clicker Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,241	I would go straight to the K3II, been looking at getting back to Pentax from there regardless of FF on the horizon. I'm just clearing up my Canon stuff to some needy people first....

08-15-2015, 04:25 PM	#10
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,662	I guess from what I've seen I think Fuji is about jpeg shooting and their jpeg engine isn't matched by another brand. But if you shoot RAW, then it is awash. The K3 is definitely very responsive and works really well. I wouldn't complain about the photos I get from it or their ability to be post processed.

08-15-2015, 05:46 PM	#11
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	I am sure all up-to-date line of DSLRs from any brands are fine; I just don't feel there is sufficient advantage over the k-3 for me to switch over or to even try other brands. I am eagerly waiting for what comes after k-3II (with newer sensor that Sony has in the works) and also remotely interested in the development and offering of Pentax FF.

08-16-2015, 01:42 PM	#12
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,349	Originally posted by Canuck_west Fuji has a great number of excellent primes. Pentax doesn't. ☺ What do you call the Pentax Limited primes ?

08-16-2015, 01:55 PM	#13
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,662	Originally posted by lesmore49 What do you call the Pentax Limited primes ? I think it was meant as a tongue in cheek response.

08-16-2015, 02:27 PM	#14
jeffryscott Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 253 Original Poster	Although quirky, I do really like the Fuji and the prime's offer quality and speed, but are more expensive and bigger than the Limiteds, which I also lust for. But, I've decided, for now, against making any move. One reason is timing - Fuji has a huge sale and new prices are close to what used prices were two days ago. Another reason is I need to step back and make sure I make a more rational choice One con against coming back to Pentax is still AF speed, while it is good for most of what I do, I do enjoy bird photography (when I have a proper long lens). While the CAF is better in the K3 series than my former K5II, from what I've read, it still lags, substantially, from Canon or Nikon. But I much prefer the Pentax ergonomics. One thought is to keep the Fuji for my main kit, but add a DSLR with a long lens for birds. I was looking at the 150-450 while contemplating Pentax, but now I am sorely tempted to get a D7000 body (same sensor as K5II) and Nikon's new 200-500 5.6. That combo is cheaper than the Pentax 150-450, but since the lens is not yet out, it is unknown how it stacks up optically. I've also thought of a 7D and the venerable Canon 400 5.6L, but not too excited about that camera body's higher ISO compared to the Nikon or Pentax offerings There are multiple good choices, and really can't go wrong with any.

08-18-2015, 12:32 PM - 1 Like	#15
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,029	Originally posted by Rondec I guess from what I've seen I think Fuji is about jpeg shooting and their jpeg engine isn't matched by another brand... I had an XP1 for a while. It was okay and I'd still have it if it wasn't so slow at focusing. When I pick up a digital camera, I expect everything to be fast since I shoot a lot of slow film cameras. But back to the Fuji's RAW vs JPEG. The JPEG engine is good but I still would rather process RAW most of the time. There is still shadows that can be pulled up and highlights pulled down. I didn't process this much. But I liked how it rendered the different skin tones of these gals. And it's hard to say how much different it would be from any other camera in its class without a side-by-side. But it seemed pretty accurate anyway. Fuji's X-Trans RAW files ( at least from Adobe's LR) are not always that great with fine foliage detail.