[BigMackCam]

In the Ricoh Imaging online store the standard K-3 Mark III costs ¥280,000. The monochrome model would be 25% more expensive than the standard model.

¥280,000 = GBP £1,732 at this morning's JPYGBP spot rate. The K-3III is currently selling here in the UK for £1,899, though I see one retailer (Jessops) has it for £1,804 with a discount code - so the pricing between Japan and UK is quite similar. Given that, I feel the monochrome model represents good value for a low volume product...

[thibs]

Not necessarily.
Its problem is that it doesn't support the new AstroTracer. Otherwise, it makes a lot of sense to choose a non-flagship camera: you don't need the K-3iii's speed, and autofocus, for astrophotography.
L.E. Or price.

Yeah, it's more about the astrotracer issue.
But then, one might say you don't often shoot action in B&W sobyoi don't need K3-III either.

[thibs]

It seems to me that he can still deduce that the k70 still remains in production and without substitutes.

Thought about that too.

[Joetitch]

With the latest craze of colorising b&W films and pictures, I wonder how much longer before the sensors are monochrome and the camera adds colour through AI software?

[BigMackCam]

With the latest craze of colorising b&W films and pictures, I wonder how much longer before the sensors are monochrome and the camera adds colour through AI software?

Given my experience with AI software thus far - Topaz DeNoise AI, Sharpen AI and Gigapixel AI - it has a long way to go before I'd want to depend on it completely. They can be useful tools when applied with user intervention - trial-and-error algorithm choice, masking, manual levels adjustments - but they're far from automatic (at least, not if you want good results). The effectiveness of the AI algorithms depends hugely on image properties and content. In most cases, with a little work, it's possible to get decent results - but often there's further manual post-processing / editing required.

TL/DR; AI is clever, but very much in its infancy so far as image processing is concerned - IMHO...

[I]EDIT: I spent an enjoyable few minutes trying some of my B&W film photos with https://hotpot.ai/colorize-picture - it's actually really clever and does a remarkably good job, but the colours are very much estimations and not that close to the original... plus, in some instances, it just gets things completely wrong. If that's the current state of AI monochrome-to-colour conversion, I think I'll stick to colour sensor cameras for colour images

[Serkevan]

¥280,000 = GBP £1,732 at this morning's JPYGBP spot rate. The K-3III is currently selling here in the UK for £1,899, though I see one retailer (Jessops) has it for £1,804 with a discount code - so the pricing between Japan and UK is quite similar. Given that, I feel the monochrome model represents good value for a low volume product...

Note that VAT in Japan is ~10%; going to the UK's 20% means the Japan price would turn into £1889.

You'd still be ten quid out, so one would have to do with one less beer or so (I'm going to Norway tomorrow and I'm trying to mentalize myself for the 10€ per beer )

---------- Post added 04-08-22 at 02:14 AM ----------

Not necessarily.
Its problem is that it doesn't support the new AstroTracer. Otherwise, it makes a lot of sense to choose a non-flagship camera: you don't need the K-3iii's speed, and autofocus, for astrophotography.
L.E. Or price.

It doesn't support the new Astrotracer *yet* - conceptually, it should be relatively easy to add it to the K-70. I suspect any roadblocks would be related to the processor in earlier Pentaxes being good contenders to a Pentium III

IMO the K-70 makes more sense than the K-3iii as an astro-dedicated camera as well. It's got virtually the same IQ, has a (very convenient for tripod work!) flippy screen and the expensive pentaprism would see approximately zero use in an astro-only camera.

[Mistral75]

Interesting. This suggests that such a body may be intended for dedicated astrophotography, not necessarily using the Astrotracer firmware. It would be a pity if so, because that would cut quite a number of potential low-budget users out of the market. Not everyone can afford a dedicated telescope and equatorial mount, so I hope the Type 3 Astrotracer firmware can be adapted.

People could use the (still to be released) O-GPS2 module, couldn't they?

[Sandy Hancock]

A monochrome 645Z would be my wet dream, but a K-3 III would still be tempting....

[Medex]

A monochrome GR would probable cause me to empty the bank account (if not already empty lol).

A monochrome GRIIIX would certainly drain my money.

A monochrome K1-3 too but later (due to price).

If you have GR2 or GR1 collecting dust, I can try to modify them to monochrome. Additional info - PM

---------- Post added 04-08-22 at 12:46 PM ----------

I’m just a bit skeptical about that monochrome sensor thing... I think it’s a waste of money, although it’s being said that noise levels are lower than normal. Decades passed before photography became colored, now why go back? Monochrome should be a pp choice, just my opinion.
On the other hand, that Astro - K70 is really adding something special.

LUMIX GX7 monochrome, ISO 25600

[thibs]

If you have GR2 or GR1 collecting dust, I can try to modify them to monochrome. Additional info - PM

It isn't collecting dust. I read about conversion but then the internal processing is nuts (of course it is). Not sire I wanna go this route.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

I can understand the monochrome idea, but to me it is a little strange they choose K3 III for that.
To me it would be more logical from them to make a K1 II monochrome.

But I assume it is for promoting K3 III.

It is not logical to make any monochrome model at all, but perhaps for some professionals like Anton Corbijn. Back in the days of old there was film (I thought it was Kodak) that you could either have developed as a B/W or a colour roll. You had to specify that when dropping your roll off at the store. But from B/W going to colour had a huge advantage. The quality of the pictures (that is sharpness and contrast and so on) became better and better. If I compare a B/W from my early days of photographing to a picture made in monochrome mode on a Pentax I go for the last one, because it has all the technical advantages of the developments in photographing. It is just so much better.

Better image quality than that of the standard model in monochrome mode, with more natural resolution and noise.

Seeing is believing and that is of course sellers talk. First have to see it in real time. And I seriously doubt that one can see the difference between the two.
And life usually is in colour...

[AfterPentax Mark II]

A monochrome 645Z would be my wet dream, but a K-3 III would still be tempting....

If it gets wet, you are void of warranty.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

If you have GR2 or GR1 collecting dust, I can try to modify them to monochrome.

Watch out! You can get arrested for GBH!

[Medex]

It isn't collecting dust. I read about conversion but then the internal processing is nuts (of course it is). Not sire I wanna go this route.

Sensor in the image is shown without protecting glass just as example. Whole conversion assume protective glass is placed.
What do you mean by internal processing? For best results (best details) RAW files should be pre-processed using Monochrome2DNG converter. You get monochrome DNG files and postprocess them as usually. Just another example as well as flat image for dust/residual CFA.




---------- Post added 04-08-22 at 01:26 PM ----------

Watch out! You can get arrested for GBH!

what is GBH?

[Mistral75]

By the way, two images of the Pentax K-3 Mark III Monochrome with its so-called 'monochrome design'.