[FozzFoster]

Could we expect more than three options for that top dial?
Photo
Live View
Video

I feel like it's a dial that could have been a button.
Seems like wasted space.

Any chance there could be more options upon release?

---------- Post added 11-17-20 at 12:21 PM ----------

At least the video option is not on the power switch... looking at you K-70.

[house]

Could we expect more than three options for that top dial?
Photo
Live View
Video

I feel like it's a dial that could have been a button.
Seems like wasted space.

Any chance there could be more options upon release?

I don't think it's logically possible to have more options. Unless they invent completely new modes of photography. Hybrid and tethered could be options I guess.
The dial is imho a great solution. The camera can only be in one mode at a time so a dial that clearly sets the mode is a good idea. The previous live view button plus movie switch is messy and results in one extra button/switch.

[Breakfastographer]

K-3 Mark III (in the centre) compared to K-1 (on the left) and K-3 II (on the right).


Source: Pentax K-3 III: new pics and size comparisons – breakfastographer

It seems the mount flange is positioned higher on the K-3 Mark III than on the two other cameras. In other words, the volume under the mirror box seems to be bigger.

This might be linked to the new autofocus module.

The K-3 III is photographed at close range with a wide angle lens, the others at distance. Makes the K-3 III look bloated. Se how the grip opens outward, that's not what it's like. Those photographs give the wrong impression of the camera due to lens choosen for the photographs.

I think it's a bit of both. I first tried to work the image of the silver K-3 III into shape, but the black one seemed to have less distortion overall, or at least seemed better aligned.

So yes, the lens used for the photos makes a difference, everything at the front of the camera looks bigger than in the "beauty" shots (for lack of a better word) of the K-1 and K-3 II. However, if you go to this article, there is a picture of a K-3 III next to the K-3 II in the same, angled orientation, and it does seem the K-3 III has a bit of a bigger "beard" (can that be used for hipster marketing?) with broader cheek pouches and the mount set higher. Maybe I'll rework that image to show them to scale based on the size of the mount.

[FozzFoster]

I don't think it's logically possible to have more options. Unless they invent completely new modes of photography. Hybrid and tethered could be options I guess.

I don't know why, it just seems empty to me :P
Wouldn't it be less bulky/costly to just put those modes on a button and one could cycle through and observe the mode from the top/rear LCD?
Sorta like the AF Mode button on the side of the camera...

[house]

it does seem the K-3 III has a bit of a bigger "beard"

Absolutely. We've been talking cross purposes. It's clear from the bottom view that he mirror box potrusion comes all the way down to the underside of the camera. The K-3 mirror box does not come down to the base. Also the mount looks slightly shifted upwards.

[grahame]

From the photo on page 1, it looks Pentax uses a convex mirror? Is it how they make the OVF larger on a small APC-S camera? If it is true, does it mean the viewfinder is not necessary as bright?
Also I wonder how did they make the AF sensor work correctly under the convex mirror.

Maybe I am wrong. It is only the focusing screen showing in the magic mirror.

It looks very strange in the photo: a focusing screen is flipped down and covers the shutter

[Breakfastographer]

However, if you go to this article, there is a picture of a K-3 III next to the K-3 II in the same, angled orientation, and it does seem the K-3 III has a bit of a bigger "beard" (can that be used for hipster marketing?) with broader cheek pouches and the mount set higher. Maybe I'll rework that image to show them to scale based on the size of the mount.

Done.

[Mistral75]

(...) if you go to this article, there is a picture of a K-3 III next to the K-3 II in the same, angled orientation, and it does seem the K-3 III has a bit of a bigger "beard" (can that be used for hipster marketing?) with broader cheek pouches and the mount set higher. Maybe I'll rework that image to show them to scale based on the size of the mount.

Done.

Absolutely. We've been talking cross purposes. It's clear from the bottom view that he mirror box potrusion comes all the way down to the underside of the camera. The K-3 mirror box does not come down to the base. Also the mount looks slightly shifted upwards.

Indeed, it's pretty obvious in this one. Thank you @Breakfastographer.

[stevebrot]

I wouldn't argue that an articulating screen is advantageous for some macro photography, but we've many fine macro photographers in these forums who performed their work without one. The K-3III is unlikely to be any less capable for macro than the cameras they used.

Mornings with wet gut
Dream of refconverter-A
No flippy future

Steve

[BigMackCam]

Mornings with wet gut

Meh... makes us appreciate the result all the more...

I could drive at a steady 70mph without cruise control too. Cruise is easier, for sure... but I don't need it

[UlrichSchiegg]

The size of the K-3 iii is written in the Spec by Ricoh.

"Approx. 134.5mm (W) x103.5mm (H) x 73.5mm (D) (excluding protrusions)"

[RobG]

Ok. Your poetic approach is much amusing..

Hey, even Basho (who popularised the form) wrote haiku that were meant to be humorous or ridiculous.
Unfortunately my poem lacked a season word, so it's not traditional even though it followed 575 syllables. I don't think breaking wind is a season word...

[Breakfastographer]

From the photo on page 1, it looks Pentax uses a convex mirror? Is it how they make the OVF larger on a small APC-S camera? If it is true, does it mean the viewfinder is not necessary as bright?

1. The mirror, whatever shape it is, would need to receive all the light that would otherwise fall on the sensor, in order to give 100% coverage in the viewfinder, which the K-3 III has. With the viewfinder having 100% coverage of what the sensor sees, and the camera having a prism (rather than pentamirrors), one would hope the only reasons for losing light will be to feed the autofocus and metering sensors.
2. As stated as part of the product introduction event, the viewfinder will be brighter than previous Pentax DSLRs. A direct comparison was made to the KP, and it was implied by the presenter the K-3 III's viewfinder was significantly brighter, although the Pentax engineer stated it would be "nearly 10%" brighter, which doesn't sound like a huge difference.

---------- Post added 11-17-20 at 05:30 PM ----------

Hey, even Basho (who popularised the form) wrote haiku that were meant to be humorous or ridiculous.
Unfortunately my poem lacked a season word, so it's not traditional even though it followed 575 syllables. I don't think breaking wind is a season word...

Wind occurs mostly in the fall... and there it is again!

[Cerebum]

1. the viewfinder will be brighter than previous Pentax DSLRs. A direct comparison was made to the KP, and it was implied by the presenter the K-3 III's viewfinder was significantly brighter, although the Pentax engineer stated it would be "nearly 10%" brighter, which doesn't sound like a huge difference.

[COLOR="Silver"]

Oh I don't know, if you add 10% to your exposure for example, the difference is significant. Adding 10% through physical changes is good going, also, there is a point at which a viewfinder could be deemed too bright. I never had a problem with the brightness on any of my previous cameras, so adding 10% onto the KP, well, I'm impressed

Re flippy screen for macro, how good is image sync for close up stuff? Maybe they figured that was a better solution!

[Not a Number]

If the difference is "noticeable", meaning you can detect a difference in side-by-side or consecutive viewing, then it is significant.