|
Forum: General Photography
09-30-2018, 08:40 PM
|
| |
The other replies have said most of it, but there's nearly a 100 gram difference between the two (the K-3ii is slightly lighter, so the difference is 80-odd grams), which isn't startling any way you look at it, but any reduction in the load on your neck or back is welcome, no matter how fit you might think you are.
However, that weight reduction is signified by the reduction in the overall appearance of bulkiness, with the KP.
Having said that, the mirror box and the glass pentaprism are always going to make a DSLR heavier than a MILC, all other things being equal. Only the development of a light-weight synthetic material with similar optical properties to glass is going to carve a substantial slice out of a DSLR weight.
Still, we can always hope for an interchangeable OVF/EVF model, too. Imagine having the option of a direct view onto the focussing screen, just like with the LX...
|
|
Forum: General Photography
09-30-2018, 02:45 PM
|
| |
You do remember correctly – that was their clear intention at that time. I was speculating as to what they could do now, to maintain some presence in a rising-mirrorless segment, in the same way that they shifted from the larger film bodies in the K-series to the M-series, as a response to the Olympus OM bodies. I wasn’t suggesting that was the way they would move in the APS-C segment: rather, a way they could move.
The rest of your post there makes eminent sense to me, nonetheless.
|
|
Forum: General Photography
09-30-2018, 06:45 AM
|
| |
Possibly not if they manage to merge the two lines, by which I mean retain the overall dimensions of the KP, add a second card slot plus whatever else they deem necessary to shift it up to “flagship” APS-C status such as more AF points, higher frame rate, bigger buffer,
GPS and IR, and maybe offer a second slim battery grip to augment the small internal one, perhaps even a deeper hand grip with a supplementary battery.
…and 4k video.
Edit: fixed error
|
