[reh321]

I know. But as someone from a third party stance that doesn't hate pentax, it wouldn't be a smart move to make it so expensive. There is no good gain for pentax if the camera is as expensive as a full frame body and everyone who hates pentax will immediately point that out. Which will drive away potential sales. If the af is amazing great but at a price of 2000$, I can get several cheaper alternatives that arguably will do just as well in the stills department (maybe not as comfortable of a body) and much better in the video department.This is all conjecture until the price is finally revealed (hopefully tomorrow). But there is definitely good reason to not want it to be pricey. I don't want pentax to fail, I personally want them to succeed.

Edit* just wanted to make an additional note, it's important that pentax bring in new customers, not just keep some and lose a few more to other systems.

Then people should get a K-70 {or have gotten a KP} - or wait for the next "introductory" camera.

[FozzFoster]

What's really exciting for me is a potentially updated roadmap.
Seems the 16-50 will be out soon (maybe along with the K-33?).
The 21 LTD doesn't seem too far out.
I think it's nearly safe to say the 'large aperture wide-angle' is going to be a FF 35mm in the same caliber as the 85mm and 50mm.
The FF tele zoom will probably be an 55-300 PLM FF equiv.

Super interested to see what's coming next!

[Kunzite]

Fair point. I suppose we'll ultimately have to see about the price tag tomorrow. As for the iso at that size, yes it looks pretty darn good. But if it were a slightly bigger image, you'd be able to see things pretty quickly. The colors are very accurate however.

But that's the thing - even at such high ISOs, the colors are very accurate - and there's more detail than on the K-1ii. And this is a low light shot.

[ThorSanchez]

What's really exciting for me is a potentially updated roadmap.
Seems the 16-50 will be out soon (maybe along with the K-33?).
The 21 LTD doesn't seem too far out.
I think it's nearly safe to say the 'large aperture wide-angle' is going to be a FF 35mm in the same caliber as the 85mm and 50mm.
The FF tele zoom will probably be an 55-300 PLM FF equiv.

Super interested to see what's coming next!

I have almost no interest in the roadmaps. They basically say "over the next 3-5 years, if we get support from Ricoh, and interchangeable lens cameras are still a thing, we'd like to potentially work on these vague things."

[FozzFoster]

They basically say "over the next 3-5 years, if we get support from Ricoh, and interchangeable lens cameras are still a thing, we'd like to potentially work on these vague things."

Well I certainly think interchangeable lens cameras are still going to be a thing for ages... You can still buy 35mm film at Walmart...
And they've definitely been pushin K-mount lenses out more than one every 3-5 years, so I'm not sure where you get that number (discounting 645/Q lineups).

[c.a.m]

With regards to the K-3 Mark III and its comparison to cameras in other brands, such as the D500 and X-T4, I'd simply suggest that it is premature to make or speculate such comparisons.

We don't know the price of the K-3 III, and we don't know its full performance.

The published specifications and features seem very interesting to me, and the camera has the potential to be a significant enhancement over my K-3 II -- in many ways.

If I get the new camera, I won't have to acquire any new lenses!

- Craig

[gatorguy]

With regards to the K-3 Mark III and its comparison to cameras in other brands, such as the D500 and X-T4, I'd simply suggest that it is premature to make or speculate such comparisons.

We don't know the price of the K-3 III, and we don't know its full performance.

The published specifications and features seem very interesting to me, and the camera has the potential to be a significant enhancement over my K-3 II -- in many ways.

If I get the new camera, I won't have to acquire any new lenses!

- Craig

Bingo!

[repaap]

I have to say that 2090€ is quite a bit more than what I did hope for. I know what is available in that price.

It all does come down to, you want this kind of camera with mirror box? With bright OVF 1,05 magn. There is nothing else out there. And if I’d fast and responsive. They did meet guys with video in mind too. That mechanical SR is very good beginning. 5 stops.

It is not what Fuji has, but it is darn close. I’m still eagerly awaiting the specs of that(actual bitrate & depth). I’m not worried of record time, because I have cameras for that.

But that video is there to be nice add. Main thing is that OVF and new shutter and AF. As I said, this is something where Pentax is different from the competition. And that is perhaps also why more expensive than others too. We know new prism is expensive, they said that a long time a go.

edit: corrected price.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

I have been reading with interest the comparison between the K-3 III and the Fujifilm X-T4. I was recently carried away by the Fuji hype and it is a great looking camera with all those dials to set stuff, just like we did in the 1960s. So, I bought an X-T3, which is basically an X-T4 without IBIS. I hated it! I realised that there is a reason why modern cameras are shaped the way they are. The ergonomics of a Pentax really are hard to beat. My Nikons come close, but Pentax has the edge in usability and fun factor. So when comparing a (not yet available) K-3 III with an X-T4, I would say: "there is no comparison" They are very different animals, and it is not just the viewfinder that separates them. I have sold the Fuji.

For the record, I have just been out in my garden taking photographs of flowers with my K-5 IIs. What a gem of a camera that is! I now regret leaving it lying fallow for years. And with the new super-resolution facility of Adobe Camera Raw (or Topaz Gigapixel, if you prefer), 16 Mpx is no longer a problem if one needs larger prints.

[house]

It's been obvious for a while that sensor size is a minor part of the price of high end cameras. The OM-D E-M1X is $2k. If the cameras are priced for what they cost apsc and ff will creep closer and closer. The idea that there is a simple M43 > apsc > FF > MF progression regardless of the actual requirements of the photographer is pretty much dead as it should be.

[repaap]

I love my K-1. One of those things, is those dials and the fack that I know it inside out. Just because of how things are. Other thing is OVF. Only thing missing is actually just what this K-3III is promising to give. What is said about sensorsize=image quality, I think that most of that has been already proven wrong already with m4/3 and also some hard facts have been proven to be real advantages/disadvantages. The thing is that differences are small in most of cases. Sure FF does give different 'look'. But if that is not needed, which it is not, then why. MF does give different look, and it is not just MP what counts. That is pure physics.


But formats like aps-c and ff(35mm), there is not 'that' much of difference. I'v shot very much with K-1 and i really like that ff -look, but I do not need that for most of my photos. goos thing is that now I can choose. What I do know is that I had K-3. and two things did drive me to K-1. one was bigger VF and other thing was that FF, it was new and I wanted that -look-. biggest thing was struggle with AF. In normal use it was okay. But anything more demanding, like portraits and events where I had to take photos of people, no. Constant struggle.


I don't have any 'extra' money now but who knows what will happen if reviews will show that what they do promise, is true and it does actually work well. Not early adopter this time, but...couple months late? perhaps...

[reh321]

I love my K-1. One of those things, is those dials and the fack that I know it inside out. Just because of how things are. Other thing is OVF. Only thing missing is actually just what this K-3III is promising to give. What is said about sensorsize=image quality, I think that most of that has been already proven wrong already with m4/3 and also some hard facts have been proven to be real advantages/disadvantages. The thing is that differences are small in most of cases. Sure FF does give different 'look'. But if that is not needed, which it is not, then why. MF does give different look, and it is not just MP what counts. That is pure physics.

24mp are plenty for me, regardless of whether it is "APS-C" or "FF".

[repaap]

24mp are plenty for me, regardless of whether it is "APS-C" or "FF".

For aps-c it is more than capable.


I'm not saying that higher MP(and bigger sensor size) is not needed(disclaimer), it is just not needed all the time.

[reh321]

For aps-c it is more than capable.

I'm not saying that higher MP(and bigger sensor size) is not needed(disclaimer), it is just not needed all the time.

I did say "for me".
No matter how much sensor real estate is available, I have found that 24mp pixels have more than enough information for me.

When I was scanning my collection of Kodachrome slides, I typically saved them as 3000x2000 pixel {basically 6mp} versions,
because I found that they were saving all the detail on the original slides, and I have no reason to fill my disk with pixels that
don't really contain any more information.
When I got my K-30, I took a few photos with the same Pentax-A 50mm f/1,7 lens I mostly used on my "Super Program",
and discovered more sharpness than I had ever gotten with film - so the lens was not holding film back.

[luftfluss]

So, I bought an X-T3, which is basically an X-T4 without IBIS. I hated it! I realised that there is a reason why modern cameras are shaped the way they are. The ergonomics of a Pentax really are hard to beat. My Nikons come close, but Pentax has the edge in usability and fun factor. So when comparing a (not yet available) K-3 III with an X-T4, I would say: "there is no comparison" They are very different animals, and it is not just the viewfinder that separates them. I have sold the Fuji.

I had a similar experience with using a Fuji X-T20 and Pentax K-70 side-by-side. No problems with the Fuji's output - very sharp - but it just wasn't enjoyable to use. I sold my Fuji, too.