I've noticed that lately that when I'm grabbing a camera to have with me when I go out, I've been a lot less picky about whether I grab my K-1 or K-3. Ignoring price, if you happen to have both lying around, there are a lot of ways in which the K-1 is a better camera than the K-3, and a few that the K-3 is better than the K-1. If size, weight and fps don't tremendously matter, then the K-1 is a pretty damn nice APS camera in crop mode. It doesn't have the resolution in APS of the K-3, nor the frame rate, but the focus is better, and its focus points cover much more of the APS frame.

In challenging light, or challenging focus conditions, the K-1 does better, not hugely but noticeably so, than the K-3. However, in decent light and for that matter even some pretty lousy light, walking around taking pictures, I can think of very few cases (if any) where I'd look at the final image and be able to tell whether I shot it with the K-3 and 16-50 or the K-1 and the 28-75.

To be sure, there are lots of times that to get a particular shot, I really need the larger sensor in the K-1, those are usually night time wide angle shots. Also, when I'm photographing musicians and don't want to get great shots of microphones with blurry musicians in the background, the K-1 far outshines the K-3. But I've recently been surprised to realize how often, for basic shooting, it really doesn't matter to me which camera I grab.

I will note that I haven't gotten to the point of grabbing the K-1 and APS only lenses like the 18-250.

--
Larry Colen  l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc


--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow 
the directions.

Reply via email to