[morenjavi]

Z5 and adapter came today.

Initial Honeymoon Phase thoughts:

Hello.

I found a lot of valuable points in this thread. Thanks to all the contributors.
You commented that you are using your old M-lenses with and adapter, but maybe you can comment about how the camera can expose with such lenses. I understand that focusing is easier with the EVF, but not sure about exposure and EVF behaviour with M lenses mounted.

I was reading this thread because I'm thinking about get a Z5/Z6/Z6 II.
My equipment now: K3-II (main camera), K5 (secondary). Sigma 17-50 (main) + da 50-135 (portraits). I have other lenses, some manual, some old... not so important.
As most users here, I'm amateur photographer, but I also make some paid works. That's where my problems come from.
On one side, for the kind of photography I do (portraits, ceremonies, families...), I really appreciate a sensor with better color depth, dynamic range, shadow/highlight recovery, etc... this kind of things that will give you richer skin tones. This is a fact for me: a modern FF sensor will give me the 'extra' I'm looking for.
On the other side, I have my problems with the AF. I'll benefit from a more modern face/eye AF system. For the kind of portraits I do, It'll make my life easier, really easier.

So this leads me to a camera that improves on those two points: higher quality and better AF.
After a long search, I have come to the conclusion that a system that will suit me very well will be a nikon Z: it will give me quality and better AF that I'm looking for.
Why not just buy a K-1 or K-1 II?
I can get a used K-1 maybe for 1K€ or a bit more, maybe new or near new, yes.
A K-1 II is near 2k€.
The new K3-iii is also near 2k€, but I have discarded this route, there is a lot of things I can buy with 2k€.
Buying a K-1 will give me a terrific sensor, I've been editing RAW files from K1, they are fantastic, maybe a bit heavy in size for me... more processing power... but the true reason is that K1 is aging, so it will not solve the AF problems (same AF module than the K5) and will not give me other advantages that I get with a FF Z. Also, for me, 24Mp FF is just what I need.
K-1 II can be a better option, but here I get the same AF than my k3-II, that I want to improve.
Also there is another problem for me with the Pentax FF: I don't have FF lenses. Yes I have and old tamron 28-75, a manual samyang 85 and some old M lenses... nothing equivalent to my 'workhorse pair' sigma 17-50 and da 50-135. So, I must add buying a quality lens such as the HD 24-70, that cost around 1k€ more. So, a K1-II + 24-70 kit (modern equipment) will cost near 3k€... too much for me... 'mucho, demasiado'

I feel it's time to get a new main camera. I can still keep my dear K3-II, maybe the DA 50-135 and keep lenses that could be used with the Z.
So this is why this thread is so valuable for me, real experiences of Pentax users with the Nikon Z.
The starter equipment I'm thinking of:
* 'cheap side': Z5/Z6 wih 24-70 f4 S. I can get Z5 and Z6 more or less for the same price, so I suppose Z6 is better option. I can get this kit for 1,8k€, 1,6k€ used. That is, for less than 2k€ I can get a great camera+standard lens.
* expensive side: z6ii + 24-70, maybe 24-120 instead, maybe adding a Viltrox 85mm later. Starting at 2,4k€, but still less than K1 II + HD 24-70.

So i'll thank if you continue telling your experiences here, I'm interested in comparing Z5/Z6/Z6 II EVF, blackout, refresh rate when you zoom... this kind of thins that make shoting experience better or worse. Important differences between Z5/Z6/Z6 II.

Sorry for the long post, I just needed to write this in some place
Regards.

[LeeRunge]

The Z5 is currently $999 for the body and $1799 for the combo with the 24-200 and $1599 with the 24-70 F4 on Nikons site. That’s a lot of camera for the money. If you opt Z6 it’s $1599 for the body.

Z6 has a better burst rate but expensive cards (and 1). Z5 has twin SD UHS-ii slots. Z5 also charges via USB-C if you want that, it’s great for travel. The sensor on the Z6 is better at very high ISO but the Z5 sensor is better at low iso, so pick which you prefer there.

$999 is a deal tbh.

[reh321]

The Z5 is currently $999 for the body and $1799 for the combo with the 24-200 and $1599 with the 24-70 F4 on Nikons site. That’s a lot of camera for the money. If you opt Z6 it’s $1599

I suppose prices without and with an appropriate lens are interesting, but when talking about legacy lenses, the price and strengths/weaknesses of adapters are incredibly important.

[mee]

Hello.

I found a lot of valuable points in this thread. Thanks to all the contributors.
You commented that you are using your old M-lenses with and adapter, but maybe you can comment about how the camera can expose with such lenses. I understand that focusing is easier with the EVF, but not sure about exposure and EVF behaviour with M lenses mounted.

Hello to you! I'm glad to be of some help.


It is an interesting questions. I just tried it on my Z5 using a Pentax M 28 f/2.8 connected with a cheap Fotasy PK adapter. In aperture Priority mode, the camera's settings will change on the fly. So if you have the lens ring set to f/2.8, and the camera senses 1/20, and you keep the ISO the same but change the lens aperture ring to say f/4.0 the camera will now say 1/10 (as example). So it is metering on the fly to give you 'correct' results of the light of your scene.


You can set the viewfinder not to correct for the lack of light (for instance if you step from f/2.8 to f/4 you can see the viewfinder get darker) OR you can set the viewfinder to correct (where it pretty much maintains the same brightness).

When the viewfinder settings get too dark though, the viewfinder will get grainy so keep that in mind. It isn't as clean yet on the view when in darker settings. It doesn't affect the image quality, just the viewfinder.

It makes it easier to get a more accurate exposure though since what you see in the viewfinder is essentially what you get (again, if you set it up in this manner).

I was reading this thread because I'm thinking about get a Z5/Z6/Z6 II.
My equipment now: K3-II (main camera), K5 (secondary). Sigma 17-50 (main) + da 50-135 (portraits). I have other lenses, some manual, some old... not so important.
As most users here, I'm amateur photographer, but I also make some paid works. That's where my problems come from.
On one side, for the kind of photography I do (portraits, ceremonies, families...), I really appreciate a sensor with better color depth, dynamic range, shadow/highlight recovery, etc... this kind of things that will give you richer skin tones. This is a fact for me: a modern FF sensor will give me the 'extra' I'm looking for.
On the other side, I have my problems with the AF. I'll benefit from a more modern face/eye AF system. For the kind of portraits I do, It'll make my life easier, really easier.

So this leads me to a camera that improves on those two points: higher quality and better AF.
After a long search, I have come to the conclusion that a system that will suit me very well will be a nikon Z: it will give me quality and better AF that I'm looking for.
Why not just buy a K-1 or K-1 II?
I can get a used K-1 maybe for 1K€ or a bit more, maybe new or near new, yes.
A K-1 II is near 2k€.
The new K3-iii is also near 2k€, but I have discarded this route, there is a lot of things I can buy with 2k€.
Buying a K-1 will give me a terrific sensor, I've been editing RAW files from K1, they are fantastic, maybe a bit heavy in size for me... more processing power... but the true reason is that K1 is aging, so it will not solve the AF problems (same AF module than the K5) and will not give me other advantages that I get with a FF Z. Also, for me, 24Mp FF is just what I need.
K-1 II can be a better option, but here I get the same AF than my k3-II, that I want to improve.
Also there is another problem for me with the Pentax FF: I don't have FF lenses. Yes I have and old tamron 28-75, a manual samyang 85 and some old M lenses... nothing equivalent to my 'workhorse pair' sigma 17-50 and da 50-135. So, I must add buying a quality lens such as the HD 24-70, that cost around 1k€ more. So, a K1-II + 24-70 kit (modern equipment) will cost near 3k€... too much for me... 'mucho, demasiado'

That DA 50-135mm is such a gem optically. You can get a nice 70-200 f/4 for full frame and get near equivalence though (and one without that horrid SDM).

I owned a K-1 for a time. It actually was where I realized it was time to sell the Pentax kit and move on. Image quality is incredible with it. But yes the Autofocus is lacking, its big, its heavy, its loud. Ricoh wasn't releasing enough lenses (at the time) to make all the issues with it worthwhile for me.

I ended up selling the K-1 and a bunch of K mount lenses and buying a D750 and a bunch of F mount lenses. It was a much more modern and fresh system in my opinion.


I used that for several years until the Z system launched the 2nd gen bodies and ended up dipping my toe in the water with the Z5 and an FTZ adapter. I really like the Z body. It's Full Frame but as small as my previous APS-C K-5 II. I made it a bit taller for easier hand gripping with a battery grip. Been a joy thus far!

I will say for you, Ricoh may very well release a K-1 III with the K-3 III's processor and a modified autofocus system from it at some point. But when that point will be is another guess. And that may be enough to keep you with the system. That said, they are likely the smallest brand out there and it shows in their release schedule. So you could be left waiting for years.

I feel it's time to get a new main camera. I can still keep my dear K3-II, maybe the DA 50-135 and keep lenses that could be used with the Z.
So this is why this thread is so valuable for me, real experiences of Pentax users with the Nikon Z.
The starter equipment I'm thinking of:
* 'cheap side': Z5/Z6 wih 24-70 f4 S. I can get Z5 and Z6 more or less for the same price, so I suppose Z6 is better option. I can get this kit for 1,8k€, 1,6k€ used. That is, for less than 2k€ I can get a great camera+standard lens.
* expensive side: z6ii + 24-70, maybe 24-120 instead, maybe adding a Viltrox 85mm later. Starting at 2,4k€, but still less than K1 II + HD 24-70.

So i'll thank if you continue telling your experiences here, I'm interested in comparing Z5/Z6/Z6 II EVF, blackout, refresh rate when you zoom... this kind of thins that make shoting experience better or worse. Important differences between Z5/Z6/Z6 II.

Sorry for the long post, I just needed to write this in some place
Regards.

The Z6 has the top/shoulder LCD and a bit better autofocus system (plus better video support), but it uses a single XQD card
The Z5 doesn't but has dual SD slots.


The Z6 II has an even better Autofocus system and an XQD slot as well as an SD slot. I was going for that but couldn't find one in stock before seeing the Z5 launched and on sale. The Z5 has the same EVF as the Z6II and Z6 though so you'd still get the same experience with respect to that.


The Z6 I and II also have a BSI sensor which does a little better at higher ISO than the Z5 but its slight. Maybe half a stop to a stop at most once you get past ISO 1600.


I will say with artificial lighting, I've noticed stronger yellow channel out of my Nikon NEF files than I can recall with my Pentax DNG files. It's as easy as moving a slider down a bit, but something worth mentioning. I noticed this even with the D750.

Oh and you will likely have to adjust the white balance as whatever its at will be recreated in your view. It took a bit of finagling to get that to look like what I see with my own eyes.


One thing you may or may not be expecting with the mirrorless is just how quiet they are! No more CLA-CLAK!#!# from the mirror flapping. Just a gentle 'ticka' from the mechanical shutter actuating. It's such a pleasure.

[cls]

Jumping in - my apologies if I am posing the same question in multiple places, but, it seems the folks on this thread have precisely the experience in both options I am considering with the kind of subjects I focus on, so have the perspective I need to make a decision.


What would be the advice here for someone who:
- photographs moving things: wildlife, dog/dog sport, kids as well as dabbling with macro (bobbotron mentioned exactly the kind of photos I am really wanting to experiment with - dogs running /dog sport with large aperture)

- limited by current gear and wish to advance my photography (K20D, Sigma 100-300 f4, Sigma 17-70 are the main lenses I use, but have some older lenses that I don't use much, as well, slowly trying to optimize my lenses).

- has the budget for a new body and maybe some used lenses


I was looking at the K3iii and can afford it, had it in the cart, but started going down the Nikon Z research path and see that it answers the two potential drawbacks of the K3iii which was for me the APS-C and the size/weight, but adds the problem of replacing lenses or working with adaptors, and potentially the EVF. The used market here (northern Canada) is not so great at present, and I have no camera stores, rental options, etc. where I live.

[luftfluss]

Jumping in - my apologies if I am posing the same question in multiple places, but, it seems the folks on this thread have precisely the experience in both options I am considering with the kind of subjects I focus on, so have the perspective I need to make a decision.


What would be the advice here for someone who:
- photographs moving things: wildlife, dog/dog sport, kids as well as dabbling with macro (bobbotron mentioned exactly the kind of photos I am really wanting to experiment with - dogs running /dog sport with large aperture)

- limited by current gear and wish to advance my photography (K20D, Sigma 100-300 f4, Sigma 17-70 are the main lenses I use, but have some older lenses that I don't use much, as well, slowly trying to optimize my lenses).

- has the budget for a new body and maybe some used lenses


I was looking at the K3iii and can afford it, had it in the cart, but started going down the Nikon Z research path and see that it answers the two potential drawbacks of the K3iii which was for me the APS-C and the size/weight, but adds the problem of replacing lenses or working with adaptors, and potentially the EVF. The used market here (northern Canada) is not so great at present, and I have no camera stores, rental options, etc. where I live.

Last year I got to play around with a Z5 and was really impressed. The EVF is very nice - I liked it at least as much as the OVF in my Pentax bodies, which is a first for me because previous EVFs left me cold.

In the USA, you can get a Z5 + 24-70/4 or 24-200 for about the same price as a K-3 III. It's very tempting as a general-purpose kit. And with the FTZ adapter you gain access to all the legacy Nikon F-mount glass.

The biggest question, IMO, is what genres of photography are you into?

[someasiancameraguy]

Jumping in - my apologies if I am posing the same question in multiple places, but, it seems the folks on this thread have precisely the experience in both options I am considering with the kind of subjects I focus on, so have the perspective I need to make a decision.


What would be the advice here for someone who:
- photographs moving things: wildlife, dog/dog sport, kids as well as dabbling with macro (bobbotron mentioned exactly the kind of photos I am really wanting to experiment with - dogs running /dog sport with large aperture)

- limited by current gear and wish to advance my photography (K20D, Sigma 100-300 f4, Sigma 17-70 are the main lenses I use, but have some older lenses that I don't use much, as well, slowly trying to optimize my lenses).

- has the budget for a new body and maybe some used lenses

I was looking at the K3iii and can afford it, had it in the cart, but started going down the Nikon Z research path and see that it answers the two potential drawbacks of the K3iii which was for me the APS-C and the size/weight, but adds the problem of replacing lenses or working with adaptors, and potentially the EVF. The used market here (northern Canada) is not so great at present, and I have no camera stores, rental options, etc. where I live.

As others and I have said, the EVF experience on the Nikon Z bodies are great. It's an OLED screen rather than field sequential screen that allows for much better color information when moving your eye or moving your camera. Field sequential screens will exhibit color tearing and will give you a smeared image. You'll get similarly great EVF experiences on newer Canon and Sony bodies as well.

Now onto your specific requirements. Budget for a new body + maybe some used lenses should be around 3K USD. Drawbacks you want to avoid are aps-c and weight. Anything dog/kids/sports/wildlife with large aperture and fast autofocus will be expensive. That said if you can't afford the latest and greatest, the Sony system is the most mature and has third party options from Sigma, Tamron, and even Samyang AF lenses that will keep up without breaking bank. The system is also easiest to adapt Pentax glass to.

Some examples of how far 3k USD can go.

Sony option:
A7 III / A7C + Sigma 24-70 2.8

Canon:
Canon RP + EF to RF adapter + EF 24-105 4.0 + EF 70-200 IS USM 4.0 + EF 100 2.8 Macro (approx 3200 USD)

Nikon:
Z5 + F to Z adapter + similar lenses to canon (also approx 3200 USD)

Any body from the EOS R system, Nikon Z, or Sony A7 III and later will satisfy your needs. You should keep in mind that most of the weight savings associated with MILCs is dumped back into heavier more well corrected optics by manufacturers.

[Biff]

Very interesting thread. While I haven't been particularly drawn to EVF cameras, the price/performace/size proposition is getting more compelling, and I'm tempted to give one a try. And I say this while really liking my Pentax gear.

Nikon Z5/Z6 seems like a good fit, or maybe Sony because of the Pentax lens adaptability..

There is a very strong used camera market where I live, many choices, almost daily, as well as the big boxes, not to mention sales at B&H.

Sorry if this borders on hijacking the thread.

[cls]

While I haven't been particularly drawn to EVF cameras, the price/performace/size proposition is getting more compelling, and I'm tempted to give one a try. And I say this while really liking my Pentax gear.

This is totally my position - I like my Pentax gear - but ... the options are compelling, specifically I am very compelled by stunning images coming from professionals in the field using these systems - making me rethink where I am going to put my upgrade dollars, and knowing that almost anything at all will be a significant upgrade to autofocus and speed from my current body and that there is a skill gap that I am continually working to close.

[cls]

As others and I have said, the EVF experience on the Nikon Z bodies are great. It's an OLED screen rather than field sequential screen that allows for much better color information when moving your eye or moving your camera. Field sequential screens will exhibit color tearing and will give you a smeared image. You'll get similarly great EVF experiences on newer Canon and Sony bodies as well.

Now onto your specific requirements. Budget for a new body + maybe some used lenses should be around 3K USD. Drawbacks you want to avoid are aps-c and weight. Anything dog/kids/sports/wildlife with large aperture and fast autofocus will be expensive. That said if you can't afford the latest and greatest, the Sony system is the most mature and has third party options from Sigma, Tamron, and even Samyang AF lenses that will keep up without breaking bank. The system is also easiest to adapt Pentax glass to.

Some examples of how far 3k USD can go.

Sony option:
A7 III / A7C + Sigma 24-70 2.8

Canon:
Canon RP + EF to RF adapter + EF 24-105 4.0 + EF 70-200 IS USM 4.0 + EF 100 2.8 Macro (approx 3200 USD)

Nikon:
Z5 + F to Z adapter + similar lenses to canon (also approx 3200 USD)

Any body from the EOS R system, Nikon Z, or Sony A7 III and later will satisfy your needs. You should keep in mind that most of the weight savings associated with MILCs is dumped back into heavier more well corrected optics by manufacturers.

Any body from the EOS R system, Nikon Z, or Sony A7 III and later will satisfy your needs. You should keep in mind that most of the weight savings associated with MILCs is dumped back into heavier more well corrected optics by manufacturers.

Thank you! Weight really isn't a big factor, so I am not too concerned there, I am just really becoming limited mostly by the FPS/autofocus of the K20D - solvable by upgrading to almost any body at all, and thinking more about increased DOF capability by using my FF lenses on an actual FF camera. Unfortunately, I cannot seem to solve both in Pentax.

[Biff]

If you're coming from a K20D and stay with OVF then I strongly recommend upgrading to a KP.

[morenjavi]

Hello. I'm afraid I'm hijacking the thread... again

So finally I'm about to push the 'buy me' button for a Nikon Z camera.
Since my last post, I've doing a lot of research, reading reviews, downloading sample pics... and came to some conclusions.
About the body, a 24Mp FF will be perfect for me. I decided to get the Z6 II. It's the last version, it's more refined, a bit more powerfull, has better autofocus, etc.
About lenses, I was considering two options:
A. the basic kit (24-70/4) + a prime (maybe 85 z, maybe 50 z)
B. the do it all 24-120/4
I don't have any Nikon lenses, and I was not considering conversors for my Pentax lenses. Unfortunately, I need to sell most (maybe all) of my Pentax equipment to finnance the new one.

My initial plan was simple:
1. Sell initial (less used) equipment, but keep what I need for doing my 'work', that is, keep two cameras and two lenses.
2. Buy Z6 II + basic kit
3. Test Z camera and decide what more to sell
4. Keep one Pentax camera & lens, sell the everything else
5. Buy prime for portraits or more 'artistic' pics.

I finished step 1., and I'm surprised because I did it successfully and quickly.

My final decision about lenses is to buy the 24-120/4. It seems a great lens and It will cover all my need for my paid works. No need to have two cameras, no need to change lenses, less stress. Z6 II + 24-120/ weighs the same as my K3 II + sigma 17-50 (exactly the same), but I'll get more quality, speed, 3rd party compatibility, etc. Later, I'll add a prime, but I need to be used to FF to see what focal length is better for me. I was reviewing my most used focal lengths and the 24-120 will cover 90% easily. It's F4, not so slow, and the Z6 II have a great ISO performance, It literally leaves my K3 II in the dust. And believe me, I love my K3 II.

So It's possible that I have to sell all my Pentax equipment to finnance the Z6II + 24-120. I think I don't need to keep another camera + DA 50-135. My DA lens is a great lens, with nice bokeh, maybe I'll keep it for some time. Let's see what happens when I receive and use the Z6II.

My final budget is around 3k€. I've seen that there are a lot of options with this budget, in Canon/Sony world.
What is interesting about this situation, is that I'm looking for camera/lenses/system that fill my needs, starting from scratch. I'm excited.

[LeeRunge]

Hello. I'm afraid I'm hijacking the thread... again

So finally I'm about to push the 'buy me' button for a Nikon Z camera.
Since my last post, I've doing a lot of research, reading reviews, downloading sample pics... and came to some conclusions.
About the body, a 24Mp FF will be perfect for me. I decided to get the Z6 II. It's the last version, it's more refined, a bit more powerfull, has better autofocus, etc.
About lenses, I was considering two options:
A. the basic kit (24-70/4) + a prime (maybe 85 z, maybe 50 z)
B. the do it all 24-120/4
I don't have any Nikon lenses, and I was not considering conversors for my Pentax lenses. Unfortunately, I need to sell most (maybe all) of my Pentax equipment to finnance the new one.

My initial plan was simple:
1. Sell initial (less used) equipment, but keep what I need for doing my 'work', that is, keep two cameras and two lenses.
2. Buy Z6 II + basic kit
3. Test Z camera and decide what more to sell
4. Keep one Pentax camera & lens, sell the everything else
5. Buy prime for portraits or more 'artistic' pics.

I finished step 1., and I'm surprised because I did it successfully and quickly.

My final decision about lenses is to buy the 24-120/4. It seems a great lens and It will cover all my need for my paid works. No need to have two cameras, no need to change lenses, less stress. Z6 II + 24-120/ weighs the same as my K3 II + sigma 17-50 (exactly the same), but I'll get more quality, speed, 3rd party compatibility, etc. Later, I'll add a prime, but I need to be used to FF to see what focal length is better for me. I was reviewing my most used focal lengths and the 24-120 will cover 90% easily. It's F4, not so slow, and the Z6 II have a great ISO performance, It literally leaves my K3 II in the dust. And believe me, I love my K3 II.

So It's possible that I have to sell all my Pentax equipment to finnance the Z6II + 24-120. I think I don't need to keep another camera + DA 50-135. My DA lens is a great lens, with nice bokeh, maybe I'll keep it for some time. Let's see what happens when I receive and use the Z6II.

My final budget is around 3k€. I've seen that there are a lot of options with this budget, in Canon/Sony world.
What is interesting about this situation, is that I'm looking for camera/lenses/system that fill my needs, starting from scratch. I'm excited.

I think you’ll have a good time with the Z6ii and a 24-120 F4. I have the older F mount version and it’s a pretty widely usable lens in most situations. I use the 24-200 the most on my Z5 but that’s mainly because of travel. I also have the 35/85 1.8’s and love both of them. The 6ii will have better AF than the Z5 which I find works quite well once you get used to how the AF system works with it, but the 5 is a slower shooting camera.

Nikon Jpegs look great and the RAW’s have more DR than the K3 series (I still have a K3). Resolution is the same but it’s just more DR and better in low light than the K3’s. Use one of the front buttons as the “lock on” for the AF-C tracking which will make it fast to engage.

And we’ll get the trickle down from the Z9 in the next 5/6/7 series Z camera’s.

Nikon’s in good shape with the Z system. Ton’s of F mount glass if you want to FTZ any of them too. My F glass works perfect with the FTZ.

[morenjavi]

Nikon Jpegs look great and the RAW’s have more DR than the K3 series (I still have a K3). Resolution is the same but it’s just more DR and better in low light than the K3’s. Use one of the front buttons as the “lock on” for the AF-C tracking which will make it fast to engage.

I have the K3 II. I've been comparing RAWs, noise and DR, color... Z6 II is way better, cleaner, recovers shadows and highlights better. Maybe 2-3 stops 'better' in quality. Also It's fully supported in Capture One, even the 24-120 lens is supported in my 'old' CO 12, beause Z6 RAWs include a embedded profile with lens corrections. No problems with PEF metadata (this is not Pentax fault's, but it's a problem in CO), I'll get compressed RAWs if needed. Of course, Face/EYE AF will be a new experience for me, I hope to say goodbye to the 'focus-and-recompose' thing.

Nikon’s in good shape with the Z system. Ton’s of F mount glass if you want to FTZ any of them too. My F glass works perfect with the FTZ.

It's a good option, I could get maybe a pair of good primes without spending too much money, but maybe later. Z6ii+24-120/4 will 'eat' my entire budget for the moment.

[cls]

Well, now you are all making me second guess my decision to wait for the K1iii and buy the K3iii! It truly came down to that or the Z6ii. (I'm still learning how to use the K3iii, and waiting for new SD cards, so no images yet).