Another good review for the K-3


SteveEveritt

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 11:44
From a Canon shooter!
I particularly like the AF comments.
Review
My Flickr link

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" (John Lennon)

davidstorm

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 12:26
Although this review is quite short, it is also very interesting. There are some notable omissions, for example it mentions nothing about noise levels or high ISO performance, but the most interesting part is that the reviewer rates the AF performance very highly, including the tracking capability. For someone used to using high end DSLR's from the main brands that's very encouraging. I can't comment on the tracking performance or the comparative speed against Canon or Nikon bodies, but it is obvious after using the K-3 for a couple of weeks that the AF is faster than previous bodies (especially with screw drive lenses) and it is very accurate.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

tomkeet

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 15:22
Note to myself - must stop reading K-3 reviews.
Regards
Tom

K-3iii's.
SMC PENTAX-DA FISH-EYE 1:3.5-4.5 10-17mm ED [IF], SMC PENTAX-DA* 1:2.8 16-50mm ED AL [IF] SDM,
SMC PENTAX-DA 1:4 15mm ED AL Limited, SMC PENTAX-DA 1:3.2 21mm AL Limited,
SMC PENTAX-F 1:2.8 28mm, SMC PENTAX-FA 1:2 35mm AL,
SMC PENTAX-FA 1:1.4 50mm, SMC PENTAX-DA 1:2.4 70mm Limited,
SMC PENTAX-D FA MACRO 1:2.8 100mm WR, SMC PENTAX-DA* 1:4 300mm ED [IF] SDM,
HD PENTAX-DA 1:5.6 560mm ED AW,
HD PENTAX -DA 1.4x AW AF REAR CONVERTER,
PENTAX AF160FC Auto Macro Ring Flash.

https://pentaxphotogallery.com/artist-gallery/?artist_id=20168301

johnriley

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 15:31
There's not a lot not to like about the K-3. There do seem to be some differing opinions about the AF though. I agree with this one that it's fast, but AP seem to think it's not slow but not that fast. However, they were trying it with generally slower lenses.

I think also it may well depend on the settings used. We can choose focus priority or release priority and I would always use centre point only. Others will have their own preferences.
Best regards, John

tomkeet

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 16:21
Your not making it any easier John.
Regards
Tom

K-3iii's.
SMC PENTAX-DA FISH-EYE 1:3.5-4.5 10-17mm ED [IF], SMC PENTAX-DA* 1:2.8 16-50mm ED AL [IF] SDM,
SMC PENTAX-DA 1:4 15mm ED AL Limited, SMC PENTAX-DA 1:3.2 21mm AL Limited,
SMC PENTAX-F 1:2.8 28mm, SMC PENTAX-FA 1:2 35mm AL,
SMC PENTAX-FA 1:1.4 50mm, SMC PENTAX-DA 1:2.4 70mm Limited,
SMC PENTAX-D FA MACRO 1:2.8 100mm WR, SMC PENTAX-DA* 1:4 300mm ED [IF] SDM,
HD PENTAX-DA 1:5.6 560mm ED AW,
HD PENTAX -DA 1.4x AW AF REAR CONVERTER,
PENTAX AF160FC Auto Macro Ring Flash.

https://pentaxphotogallery.com/artist-gallery/?artist_id=20168301

johnriley

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 16:23
For me Tom, the only problem is justifying the £2000 it will cost for two of them, his and hers.

If we do a wedding, we can't have two different levels of definition in the images depending upon who shot what. They have to be the same.
Best regards, John

spinno

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 16:43
johnriley wrote:
For me Tom, the only problem is justifying the £2000 it will cost for two of them, his and hers.

If we do a wedding, we can't have two different levels of definition in the images depending upon who shot what. They have to be the same.

"business expenses..."
David

jules

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 16:50
More to help push you all...
http://www.markcassino.com/b2evolution/index.php/Pentax-K-3/
http://photographicwanderings.com/2013/11/18/pentax-k-3-review-its-good-buy-it-u...
Cheers Jules...

My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.

www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Last Edited by jules on 24/11/2013 - 16:52

dcweather

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 18:47
johnriley wrote:
For me Tom, the only problem is justifying the £2000 it will cost for two of them, his and hers.

If we do a wedding, we can't have two different levels of definition in the images depending upon who shot what. They have to be the same.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Believe me - they won't notice! When I think of some of the very average wedding photos I've seen the families drool over I wouldn't lose any sleep over it

dcweather

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 19:05
johnriley wrote:
For me Tom, the only problem is justifying the £2000 it will cost for two of them, his and hers.

If we do a wedding, we can't have two different levels of definition in the images depending upon who shot what. They have to be the same.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Believe me - they won't notice! When I think of some of the very average wedding photos I've seen the families drool over I wouldn't lose any sleep over it
-------------------------------------------
John will like this quote from the second review and I agree!
"Life is too short to start looking for moiré."

johnriley

Link Posted 24/11/2013 - 21:44
I can feel that very much dcweather, I spent quite long enough looking for moire!
Best regards, John

Daniel Bridge

Link Posted 25/11/2013 - 01:06
Bear in mind this review (the B&H Photo one) is on a camera shop's website. I doubt they'd be putting up one that said "The AF is a bit disappointing", it's hardly going to help sell the camera.

Anyway, is it just me, or are the first few photos on there suffering from a huge amount of colour fringing?

Dan
K-3, a macro lens and a DA*300mm...
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.