Why? Because my K5 is still a great camera capable of excellent results. I like using compact primes and older lenses and Pentax has a fine selection of those to choose from.

I don't believe there are any conspiracies here, I think the side by side comparison has been performed with integrity. The K3 images do look a little better. However, in the real world I don't think there is anything in it. Maybe the Nikon slighty overexposes or the white balance is slightly more accurate with the Pentax or there are differences between the lenses. These are RAW's run through Lightroom and in practice you would just apply minor tweaks to your satisfaction, no big deal. It is clear that the K3 though is a match for the D600 in most areas, or slightly better, which is clearly pretty impressive.







I am less convinced by the claim that the K3 holds its own at higher ISOs. Noise performance is the aspect of the K3 that interests me the most. I have looked at how the K3 fares against both the D600 from those samples and against the K5 (a similar scene run through LR default settings with no noise reduction) at ISO400. The results are consistent with my conclusions from an analysis of the first K3 samples.

The winner, although not as good as I might have expected:





The runner-up:





Bringing up the rear (imo):

I hope that is indeed the case and if it is then wow, how did they do that. I trust nothing but a comparison of the RAW files. If it is as good as this evidence suggests and indeed completely contradicts the performance suggested by the initial JPEG samples then I will be ordering a K3 in a heartbeat.

The FA43 is another option sitting between those two focal lengths. More expensive but used ones can be good value. I much prefer the FA43 to the DA35/2.4.

The light and colours in the first two scenes are great, but the compositions aren't really working for me. There's too much going on for me in the first. The lead-in line (which here I find rather divisive) leads me to the tree then the sunken tree tries to pull me away then the background boats vie for attention then the background light on the hill (which is lovely) draws me to the top left. But the elements feel competitive rather than complimentary and I find my eye flitting about all over the scene. I also find some of the detail on the grass and trees too sharp. I think the mono takes away some of that dividing line and simplifies the scene a little but not enough.

ith the third I think the tree and the boathouse are again competing for attention, splitting the focus and both placed too close to the edge of the scene. It feels like two images in one with neither optimal. The background boats aren't adding anything here for me.

The last is close for me but no cigar. The highlights from the snow and their reflection I find too strong. The foreground comes down to too narrow a strip at the bottom of frame and so overemphasiss the middle of the scene which looks rather too empty. The distant hills are very nice, those twin peaks look really good but all are rather dwarfed by the empty midground. I therefore think I would like this more in a panoramic format, leaving the spur of land to the right and dispensing with the rest of the shore. It would give more prominence to the distant hills, which are the real subject of this image for me.

Very nice, no critique this time just a fine image to enjoy.

Following the very quick sale of the GV-1 posted today in the classifieds here is a second chance for anyone that was disappointed.

The GV-1 has 28mm and 21 mm framing lines. It is of excellent quality and offers a clear, bright view. A good partner to the new GR or any of the earlier GRD series. Excellent for conserving batteries as using the viewfinder means the screen can be turned off.

The viewfinder is in excellent condition and comes in original pouch.

Same asking price as the just sold item, £100 delivered. If in the UK this would be by RMSD and this item could be posted on 31st October (to coincide with a trip to the UK).

Payment preferred by bank transfer, References as to my integrity as a seller are available.

That was just a joke and so was I. Is there a legal issue with making a catalogue like this available on the site? It surely would be of interest to many users.

Could do but a PDF would be more convenient for everybody. Maybe you have bought shares in Royal Mail?

I would be interested to read it although it would be better off with a collector. How about someone with a good scanner preparing a PDF version which could be available in an article for all users of the site?