I don't think there is any doubt about the clarity on offer John, due to the 24mp sensor and no AA filter. The jury's out on the noise levels and dynamic range, but I've just picked up a K-3 today and first impressions are very positive.

Cheers
David

I said I was going to skip the K-3, but some recent posts have made me think otherwise. Got one today for my birthday and just had half an hour spare at Stokesay as it was getting dark. Here are the first two I've processed - please bear in mind that it really was very dark and I've under-exposed by a stop to prevent skies burning out (see second image), so it's quite impressive that there is very little shadow noise.

First impressions for me after very limited use are positive - I can't comment on high ISO noise because I've not used a high ISO, but I took a fair few long exposures in very dim light and there is no noise to speak of. Dynamic range looks to be very good and the images have 'pop'. By default the pictures look very contrasty even without any processing. On the downside, it seems to over-emphasise green tones, but this is easy to adjust in PP and will probably be easy to adjust in camera once I get the hang of settings.

The first one has had no sharpening at all, the second one very minimal (25 strength, threshold 4, radius 2 in PS Unsharp Mask).







CC welcomed as always, be as harsh or as complimentary as you like.

Regards
David

I'm a bit jealous, but I hope you take some fantastic images with this silver beauty!

Regards
David

I think these particular shots are the best indication yet of what the K-3 is capable of and if they are anything to go by I don't think we will be disappointed. As we've said many times before, the photographer is more important than the camera, but put a quality tool in the hands of someone like Alan and the results will speak for themselves. There are several things that immediately strike me about these shots:

1. The clarity

2. The resolution

3. The colour rendition

4. The accuracy of focus

I think the fourth is a given where Alan is concerned, but the other three get me excited straight away!

Well done Alan, you have proved to me the potential of this camera with these stunning shots.

Regards
David

Here are a couple taken with the M50 F1.4 yesterday at my 25th Wedding Anniversary, both are with the K-01, both wide open at F1.4, the first at 2000 ISO and the second at 3200 ISO. This particular camera seems to gel perfectly with the old glass.

My Wife Nicky





Mr. Andrew Allport (AndrewA)




Regards
David

On the contrary, all of this information is very useful. I do understand though from what I've read that the M50 F1.7 has a different character to the M50 F1.4 and is closer to the A50 F1.7 in terms of its image quality.

The one thing that has put me off a little with the FA50 is that it seems to create a blue / purple tone on certain items (like the whitewashed stone wall in our cellar for example). The M50 F1.4 in contrast adds warmth, which I much prefer and which is much more flattering on skin tones.

Regards
David

If these 'problems' are the worst that occur I don't think we have anything to worry about!!

The sun is shining through the animal's hairs and I would expect this to produce these kind of effects - this can be visible with the naked eye!

Regards
David

Thanks Gary and John for your advice. I wasn't thinking about changing the M50 John, just whether or not it would be advantageous to have the FA for its autofocus capabilities.

In terms of the IQ between the two, as far as I can tell they are equally as sharp as each other, the FA has more rounded aperture blades, so better bokeh, but the M has more pleasing (to my eye) colour rendition.

I don't think it's worth me spending £180 on the FA.

Thanks again, much appreciated.

Regards
David

I really hope that when you have more time to reflect Gary that you reconsider your decision above. This site and forum can ill afford to lose the opinions of experienced photographers such as yourself - we all need to learn from the best.

We've recently lost a very skilled and experienced tog from this site, someone who contributed heavily in terms of both images and forum posts and I'm sure a lot of us have learned a lot from him.

As I said above, we all need to be big and brave enough to accept the views and opinions of others on our work. The Gallery does not achieve this because it does not attract constructive criticism, we need to make sure the Forum does not go down this route.

Regards
David

I'm not going to get involved in making any comments on the images in this Forum post as it is clearly touching a few raw nerves and I don't wish to add to any of this.

However, as a general observation on this Forum and any others that are image related, it is unreasonable to expect that no critique or criticism will be applied to images that are posted, regardless of the reasons for posting those images. We must expect observations, criticism, and critique and should not get upset when people express their views.

Some of us (myself included) have had some harsh but usually fair comments on here and the people in this thread who have provided their input are photographers I respect.

This is all about us sharing our experience, our expertise and our own opinions; we should all be strong enough to take this, and if not we shouldn't put our images up there in the first place!

Regards
David