Hi Chris

I'm not sure I can advise on IQ just yet as I've only had the K-3 for a week and taken less than 300 shots. However, I can tell you the following:

- Focus Peaking is a big advantage with MF legacy glass - it makes accurate focussing a breeze, much easier than the viewfinder. The K-3 has it, but the K-5ii variants do not

- The K-3 focusses at least 50% faster with screwdrive lenses as it has a more powerful screwdrive motor - this is a significant advantage with non SDM AF lenses

- The K-3 seems to marginally more accurate on focussing, but the K-5ii was already good in this regard

- The K-3 has more accurate metering - stop-down on the legacy lenses appears to be very good indeed

- The K-3 has more accurate white balance settings

- Second SD slot is a boon for RAW and JPEG shooting - I haven't used it yet for flu card as I don't have one

- I can't comment on the relative IQ of legacy glass between the K-3 and the K-5iis, I would expect the K-3 to be the sharper with quality glass, but no idea about the CA's

I have both the K-5iis and K-3 and I would happily recommend either, whether or not the things I've listed above would be worth you paying the extra for a K-3 I'm not sure.

Regards
David

Just giving my honest opinion Alan

If I didn't like them I would be the first to let you know!

Cheers
David

I'm not sure that will be a limiting factor Alan, judging by what you've shown us so far?

Regards
David

Sorry Smeggy, but that's just your interpretation of what I wrote and it is inaccurate. I did not make any observations against any sector of photographers. All I did was post some comments on processing images from the K-3 up to 3200 ISO, you made the connection that I was displaying an attitude against photographers who shoot higher ISO's. I think that I was probably correct when I surmised that most people don't shoot regularly at 12800 or higher, but I didn't make any observations about those that do.

Regards
David

The proof will come in time when we can judge whether or not the K-3 has been a sales success. If it provides what people want at the price they want then it will be a success, if not it will fail.

At the moment it is selling out, this may of course be just because it's the current 'new thing' and will always attract a number of early adopters or it may be because there is genuine and sustained demand.

I don't think Dave was suggesting that we shouldn't be demanding, he was making the point that sometimes we place too much emphasis on technicalities.

Regards
David

Great comment funniest I've seen in ages

Well done Barrie, these are very good indeed, congratulations.

Regards
David

Interesting thread. What is the view of Forum members as to whether or not the 24mp sensor is now exceeding the resolution of many of the lenses we use today? How much more important is using quality glass on the K-3 than it was on the K-5 variants?

Regards
David

I also agree entirely.

I am always open to the views and opinions of others on this Forum, I will not always agree with them but I am open to them, whether they are minority or majority views.

What I don't like is when the comments are personalised like the one from Smeggy above. There is no need to lower discussions about technical equipment down to levels where personal snide comments start to appear. I don't do it and I object to others doing it. This is a camera forum, not a soapbox for aiming personal snipes at people. Regardless of what one may think of someone else there is a value called integrity that dictates how most decent people conduct themselves.

It would be great if we could all get on with enjoying our cameras and making the most out of them that we can, as mentioned by Dave (Fatbiker) if a picture looks nice, it looks nice.

Regards
David

What the hell are you going on about Smeggy? You really have a massive chip on your shoulder and I think it's you in the minority, not me. Your head is stuck firmly in the sand.

If you want to shoot at 51200 that's fine by me but most of us on here don't use that sort of ISO level and never need to. Why don't you just accept reality and move on from your fixation on noise, high ISO's and the K-5 Mk1 in general?

Up to sensible ISO levels the NR to remove noise on K-3 images does not result in 'unacceptable smearing' to my eyes or the eyes of any other reviewers or users I've read so far, this is simply not true.

I never set out to push my views down the throats of others (unlike you) and whatever I post is intended to be useful and helpful information. I cannot imagine why you would think I have any 'alright Jack' attitude as I most certainly do not and I take offence to you suggesting this. If you don't want to buy a K-5iis or a K-3, fair enough, but lots of people do and I will continue to try and provide useful information to anyone who wants it.

Regards
David