I respect Alan's views and his images very much indeed, but I can't help thinking there's something amiss with your K-3 Alan if you are routinely using it at +0.7Ev or +1Ev. That seems way too high to me, my K-3 is routinely used at -0.3 or -0.7Ev and I don't have any issues generally with lifting shadows. If I used my K-3 at those levels I would get blown highlights in a lot of images.

I've said a lot of times before and I stand by it, that my K-3 is as good as my K-5iis when it comes to processing images and I haven't noticed any significant reduction in dynamic range. It's not better, but it is as good. Also, I support Jules's view that noise is not worse on the K-3, it is just different. I prefer the noise pattern on the K-3 to that on the K-5iis and find it easier to deal with. To add a caveat, I don't shoot higher than ISO 3200.

I also agree with Gary in that the K-5iis is a seriously good camera and is very close to the K-3 in overall performance. The K-3 leaves it behind in some areas though, e.g. metering, AF, speed of performance, focus peaking to mention a few. I suspect there is variation between different cameras of the same model in the metering department and I remember vividly a conversation with fritzthedog when I met up with him at Tickhill earlier this year when he was telling me he has to over expose on his K-5iis by a couple of stops to get correctly exposed images. That is not the case with mine and I wonder if similar variations are present on different examples of the K-3? This is the only explanation I can think of to understand Alan's comments.

Regards
David

Fabulous and well deserved, congratulations Tim.

Regards
David

That's a good point John and was one of the primary reasons I chose the laptop that I did. It is the best laptop screen I've ever used, clearly not as large as a decent monitor, but excellent in every other way,

Regards
David

Number 3 is another very fine image indeed, full of character. The fourth is also very fine and although it doesn't appeal to me personally I can fully appreciate the skill involved in shooting it.

Regards
David

It's easy with mine - Asus N56VZ, very powerful and fast laptop with a great full HD screen.

Regards
David

The Gallery images are much better Dr O, especially the 'large' view. They now retain their original colour, contrast and detail, downsizing notwithstanding.

Regards
David

I used to own a K-m, same sensor as the K10D. For landscapes, on a tripod, it was magic at ISO 100 or ISO 200, lovely warm images that looked very natural. However, for general shooting it was not a flexible beast and was beaten hands down by my K-x with a 12mp CMOS sensor, which in turn was beaten by my K-5, which in turn was beaten by my K-5iis..........

I agree that the CCD images are nicer when unprocessed, but the RAW files from the CMOS cameras from K-x onwards have so much processing potential and you really must shoot in RAW and process to fully realise your camera's capabilities.

There is no doubt in my mind that the K-5 sensor is better than that on the K-m (and hence better than that on the K10D). If you're not convinced, it is not very expensive to own a second CCD sensor body and use both as you choose!

Regards
David

Every time I take a picture with my rubbish APS-C cameras (K-01, K-5iis and K-3) I cringe and my mind instantly craves the full frame experience that so many people with rival brand cameras are enjoying. Their lives must be so fulfilled compared to mine. Why must I suffer such an appalling lack of quality images? My life is a mess, it's not worth going on, I think I will just lose the will to live.

Number 1 is a good shot, but doesn't grab me like the second one does. That is just a fantastic image, I am not sure how you could have bettered it.

Regards
David

Since acquiring the DA*300 and the DA*50-135, I rarely use any other lenses, except at times when I'm doing landscapes or I need a general walkaround lens. The 12-24 then comes into its own for landscape and this too is a special lens.

My favourite is the DA*300, such superb IQ and a pleasure to use. It makes possible shots I couldn't take with a Sigma 150-500 due to the faster max aperture and more compact design and despite the lack of zoom I actually find it more flexible for my needs. I'm not planning on ditching my DA*'s any time soon.

Regards
David