should I upgrade from Pentax K10D to K3

[marino1]

<p>I am in the process of learning to become a photographer. I have a pentax k10D and wondered if I should upgrade to a K3 or wait. I have had the K10D for 5 years (yes I am a slow learner). Just hope to get some thoughts. Thanks</p>

 

[john_shriver]

<p>You can learn well with either camera. The major advantage of K-5, K-5II, and K-3 over the K-10D is <strong>much</strong> better performance in low light, as high ISO settings.<br>

Also, cameras depreciate -- lenses don't.</p>

[stemked]

<p>The K10D is a nice camera; the K3 certainly is an up grade. In addition to what John noted it is smaller, higher resolution, feels a little less chunky. i like the leveler on the K3, especially for landscapes. You can preview your images, better video capacity with the K3 and you can turn on or off a filter that either prevents artifacts or allows for sharper images. the K3 is a nice camera, but it won't on it's own help you take better images. I gave my K10D to my aunt and she now takes some nice images with it. You can't go wrong with either camera.</p>

[dennis_kushner2]

Upgrade your lenses. Bodies are just a tool & won't make your photos any better. I bought a used K10D 3

years ago just to use all my Screwmount & K mount lenses I had since 1973. List what lenses you have

& what you like to shoot & we can help you better.

[Timo Hartikainen]

<p>I had K10D for 5 or 6 years..I would still use it, but it had some kind of malfunction in 2013 (<a href="/pentax-camera-forum/00bxUj">http://www.photo.net/pentax-camera-forum/00bxUj</a>) so I had to buy a new body, at that time it was a K-5II for me. I very seldom need lots of pixels for big prints, so I guess I could still cope with K10D. I don't know if this helps you, but I just wanted you to know my opinion of that K10D, it's a good camera and one of the best I have had.. the K-5II is also a very good camera.</p>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Thomas,<br>

It is a bit challenging to provide some meaningful thoughts because we don't know what kind of photography you are practicing. Sometimes a new body incorporates technology and ergonomics that can provide greater capabilities for better shots. Sometimes not.<br>

So please share what you shoot, perhaps including links to images.<br>

Thanks,<br>

ME</p>

[marino1]

<p>Thanks to all that have responded. This is very helpful.<br>

I do have these lenses:</p>

Pentax 18 - 55 mm lens f4.5 - 32

Tamaron 80 - 210 mm lens f4.5 - 32

SMC Pentax-M macro 1:4 100mm f4 - 32

smc DA 50mm f/1.8 Lens

 

I am really enjoying black and white photography right now and you can see my recent images on photo.net at <a href="/photodb/user?user_id=1002445">Thomas Marino</a>

 

 

[Jochen_S]

<p>Getting a 2nd camera, to carry both at once is a good idea in general. - You can skip a few lens changes that way and have a bit of redundancy (for worst cases). The tech gap between both appears big enough to make the k3 look like a real upgrade. Rechecking your portfolio here I believe it might work for you. The flowers studio shots will probably benefit from more than twice your current resolution and look impressive when printed large. - same about the detail heavy landscapes. -The 100mm macro is probably a really great performer and worth getting the K3 - my early FA one has a jammed AF cam but was the best lens I had so far. - Ooops are you still doing that kind of work with your SLR? Or was it a P&S thing? (I spotted a Panasonic in an EXIF) - Just asking since its harder to do with narrower DOF.<br>

I guess the K10D is still doing a lot of things well enough. - I skipped that model back then, was more after the K100D's higher ISO and hoped to get lower noise with less pixel density too. A bit later I got K20D and fell into a Pentax hiatus, being not too confident about lenses that appear already a bit soft on my current bodies, looking much better on a higher pixel density sensor or slight improvements of the AF making a big difference with the screwdriver lenses I have. - You own at least 2 nice primes for it. Maybe you'll end wanting more.<br>

If your photographic interest is limited to rather static subjects you can't go too wrong with Pentax I think.<br>

Just prepare that you might end lusting after really good primes and expensive zooms (no not those with endless range, the others) with such a camera. </p>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Thanks Thomas for the link to your images.<br>

It seems like your subjects are more static than action based. If you have a requirement to print larger than 11x14 frequently, then I'd say that a K-3 would serve you well. Same goes for shooting action. But since it appears you are not, I'd recommend you consider upping the quality of your lenses, the results of which will be applicable to all camera bodies.<br>

Also, if you don't have a decent tripod, make that the priority. Same goes for flash.</p>

<p>ME</p>

[RickW]

<p>Thomas, you have some beautiful work posted there.<br>

My digital camera path was istD --> K10D --> K-7 --> K-5. My son now has my K10D, and is taking lovely photos with it. That camera's sensor is just superb.<br>

The primary reason I moved to the K-7 and then to the K-5 was low light photography: I do a lot of shooting when traveling on business, and that usually happens in the evening or at night. The K10D is rather noisy at its max ISO, and mine has vertical pattern noise in dark backgrounds at ISO 1600 that is impossible to process away.<br>

If the images you've posted are representative of your interests, though, I agree with the comments above that suggest spending on lenses rather than a new body.</p>

[marino1]

<p>I thank you all for your responses. It has been great to have this type of support as I try to advance my photography abilities. </p>

<p>Tom</p>