[Rondec]

I think the whole point is that every camera is a set of compromises. Not every camera can do 20 fps or has 15 EV dynamic range at base iso. Based on their specs, camera brands have targeted their cameras to different segments of the market. So, A9 and A9 II cameras are more focused on action photography than on landscapes. Does that mean you can't take a sunrise photo or a mushroom photo with one? Of course not, but if that is your main interest, I would say that you would do well to look at a different model.

In the same way, the K-3 III is targeted at action. You can, of course, take any type of photo with one, but you may find that you'll have to work a bit harder to get certain ones. Honestly, if your main goals are macro and landscape photography, you would probably save money and have an easier time with a K-1 II or a KP.

[Breakfastographer]

I'm feeling somewhat more sanguine about noise on the K3iii than some posters here. It just doesn't seem plausible that Pentax would commit to a maximum iso of 1.6 million if the performance at iso 3200 say were worse than current models. Although I'm sure iso 1.6 M is pretty dreadful, I would expect 2 or 3 stops down to be useable.

As someone else said, we won't really know until we start to see actual samples and lab tests.

The only thing we know is that the KP seems to be keeping up with the current full frame mirrorless competition


If the K-3 III is only a little better than the KP, it should do fairly well against full frame cameras of similar overall resolution imo.

[siva.ss.kumar]

Okay, that makes sense and it would be great as well.

Have I mentioned yet how much I'm interested in seeing what the new body can do?

No you haven't (in the last 5 posts)
If AF-H is for Hyperfocal, then only supported lenses (Pentax branded) will be enabled with this option.

[RobG]

did anyone else notice it only has 1 UHS-2 slot? after using this setup on the A7iii and comparing it to the Canon R6, kind of feel skimping on having 1 UHS2 slot means it just has 2 UHS1 slots. That said as long as the slots can actually hit 90MB/s in UHS1 mode I that's a far better result than what Pentax cameras can do now (unless the KP is faster, which I've never tested)

It's likely that the UHS-2 slot is to support the bandwidth needed to write 4K video. The other card would be recording JPG so it doesn't need the bandwidth. The UHS-2 card will also be recording the RAW files, so more speed will help clear the buffer faster.

[ffking]

I think the whole point is that every camera is a set of compromises. Not every camera can do 20 fps or has 15 EV dynamic range at base iso. Based on their specs, camera brands have targeted their cameras to different segments of the market. So, A9 and A9 II cameras are more focused on action photography than on landscapes. Does that mean you can't take a sunrise photo or a mushroom photo with one? Of course not, but if that is your main interest, I would say that you would do well to look at a different model.

In the same way, the K-3 III is targeted at action. You can, of course, take any type of photo with one, but you may find that you'll have to work a bit harder to get certain ones. Honestly, if your main goals are macro and landscape photography, you would probably save money and have an easier time with a K-1 II or a KP.

Totally agree - in fact I wrote something on similar lines last night, then my internet dropped out as I tried to send

Life was simpler in the film days - if money was no object there were 35mm cameras that were objectively the best - but even then (latterly) I used a 67 for landscape and pack shots and travel projects and a Z-1 for wildlife and everyday shooting. It's always been necessary to have different cameras if you're going to get the best images in different areas of photography. Partly it also comes down to hat you're prepared to put up with to get the best image you can - in the case of professional wildlife photographers, it's considerably more than wet knees, but there's also factors like cost of equipment, weight of equipment, distance from home, danger - all sorts. We all have a point we won't go further than to get an image, and the camera manufacturers can't remove many of those hard decisions for us at all, let alone in one body

[cmohr]

Oh it was a problem. I don't even take my K-3 out during mushroom season, it' completely replaced by the K-1. Same for flowers, my K-3 is reduced in use to hikes when I want a lighter set up, although even then I often take the K-1. Same for canoe trips when GPS data is often needed.

The K-3 is reduced to action and bird photography. I'm looking or camera that can do what both my K-3 and K-1 can do. Cameras like D500 remains the only viable looking option if I really want to go that route.

Maybe Pentax can make a go with this, cutting features from the K-3 series, maybe they can't. It's a gamble. Personally, I won't pay the projected price increase for a camera missing features I want. The question is will there be enough Pentax buyers to make this camera profitable if buyers like myself don't buy in. You assume there will be. They could also be an exodus of people moving to D500s. What we want is available, just not from Pentax. When you don't make many models, excluding customers by stripping down gear makes no sense.

I don't have a problem with the quality of K-3 images. I'm not convinced 12 FPS will get me a lot more images than the 8 of my current K-3. I'm not paying 2 grand for this camera while my current k-3 is still working. And with my K-1 now doin most of the heavy lifting, my K-3 will be lasting a long time. Maybe long enough for Pentax to come to their senses. Maybe not. it doesn't matter. I like my K-3, I'm not suffering (except for the lack of tilting back screen and GPS, problems the K-3iii doesn't solve), so why would I change?

I bought a D*ist, a K100D, a K20D a K-x, 2 K-5's a K-3 and a K-1. Pentax is definitely culling the herd with this camera. Just my opinion ot course. As long as the camera brings in more customers than it loses that will be fine for Pentax. But not for me.

You answered all your own questions here.

So why, if you have no intention or interest in buying this camera, are you popping up in this thread, an bashing the Pentax brand.

[Rondec]

You answered all your own questions here.

So why, if you have no intention or interest in buying this camera, are you popping up in this thread, an bashing the Pentax brand.

I don't think he (or most of the others) are "bashing" Pentax. They are among the crowd who show up for any new piece of gear or glass to say, "This doesn't interest me so it probably won't sell well."

This has been true of every new release recently. K-1 II (not enough improvement over the K-1 and did I mention how terrible the accelerator is?), KP (horrible ergonomics and can you believe they took away a card slot?), DFA *50 (can you believe the size of this piece of glass and who in their right mind would pay over a thousand dollars for a fast 50? My FA 50 cost 200 dollars!), and now the K-3 III. I don't think Pentax is going to sell tons of them -- mainly because the price is going to be pretty high. At the same time, I expect them to actually turn a profit on each one they do sell and that is the more important thing.

We have seen from Olympus that selling lots of well reviewed cameras at a loss is a recipe for disaster. Better to sell fewer and actually turn a profit on those.

---

Last edited by Rondec; 12-24-2020 at 09:32 AM.

[River Rat]

With the discussion on what sensor is being used, Would I be wrong in assuming the sensor used is perhaps 3 years old due to the length of time it's been since first announced? How much time is needed to develop all the proprietary software? Seems to be a big feat for a limited staff to pull off in a short time. Enlighten me please.

[Kunzite]

No camera is bought by a majority, not even those from the #1 brand (whatever that might be). Normhead's is a passing comment, but the bashing happens.

[Smolk]

Better to sell fewer and actually turn a profit on those.

That's right, and that's what Ricoh seems to be doing. It's not a market share battle only.

[Zygonyx]

I believe it is this sensor:
Noise on the X-T3 should be 6% worse than the X-T2, and it is! – breakfastographer

At least nobody has dug up any other sensor it could be.

X-T3 is BSI, X-T2 is FSI.

*interesting*
Do you know if Fuji has since improved the X-T4 files re. noise ?

[bxf]

So why, if you have no intention or interest in buying this camera, are you popping up in this thread, an bashing the Pentax brand.

Norm is sometimes vocal, and sometimes even abrasive, and he has been lamenting the absence of a feature that he considers important for his use. I have not seen where he bashes Pentax.

[duan]

~2:00 Wakashiro-san talks about ONLY using transparent LCD for information overlay on top of the image. Transparent LCD is nothing new, I don't think my KP has one for VF but basically any black-ish things that could be switched ON/OFF on top of the image in the optical VF comes from that (i.e. AF grid and cropping frame indicator and such in K-1 as I understand). What is new (to Pentax DSLR anyway) is that they stopped projection of typically red illuminated AF dots from behind one surface of pentaprism.

Projection through a reflective surface meant that the surface used to be partially transparent, which also meant that the light from the focusing screen used to be partially lost there due to small transmission. Not any more.

I was wondering why the pentaprism housing of Pentax K-3 Mark III looked so different than previous DSLR in cutaway images. Thank you for pointing that out.

1. K-3 Mark III

Source of image: 「PENTAX K-3 Mark III」ファインダー開発の苦労を聞く

2. K-5 Mark IIs

Source of image: Pentax K-30 vs K-5 IIs Cross Sections

[someasiancameraguy]

That's right, and that's what Ricoh seems to be doing. It's not a market share battle only.

Completely agreed. I'd rather buy into a company that has been actually turning a profit and likely to have longevity rather than something like Olympus where service and future lineup could magically disappear one day. Pentax is arguably slow in development, but it gets there. People asked for a full frame, we got the K-1. People asked for better lenses, we got new * series. People asked for better AF, we got the K-3 III. Now I see people asking for a flippy and video specs (including me). Who knows, it might just happen that we get the full flippy and video in a while.

[neokind]

It's likely that the UHS-2 slot is to support the bandwidth needed to write 4K video. The other card would be recording JPG so it doesn't need the bandwidth. The UHS-2 card will also be recording the RAW files, so more speed will help clear the buffer faster.

It may help, but it’s probably not necessary for that. One of my cameras has 4K and no uhs ii slot. It’s probably to help clear the buffer more quickly while high speed shooting.