Nice D600 vs K-3 Comparison Gallery

**Presidente** · 11-04-2013, 06:42 PM

Originally posted by JJJPhoto

I just found this:

Nikon D600 vs. Pentax K-3 Image Comparison: Pentax Sweeps Nikon

I too stumbled onto this article. It's reassuring since my K-3 is scheduled for delivery tomorrow!

regor · 11-05-2013, 03:40 PM

This comparison shows basically one thing: 24Mpix = 24Mpix ! No doubt that the Nikon has the advantage in low light, at least in the pixel-perper's eye. Both have their plus and minus over the other, and that will be particularly evident at the low and high ends of the FL range. Neither is better, just different.

SyncGuy · 11-06-2013, 02:54 AM

Originally posted by normhead

For me it's the 36 MP resolution of the A7r. K-3 to D600 is 24 MP to 24 MP, which makes it particularly interesting, in that both are modern sensors, both are 24 MP minimizing effects caused by resolution and allowing us to compare APS-c to a 35mm frame. Recognized in this discussion is the fact that for Resolution in landscapes the D800 and probably the A7r are both probably way ahead of either of these cameras. But for those of us who thought 36MP was overkill, this is a , "I have my K-3 for wildlife and action, do I need a D600 for landscape" discussion and the answer to date is a decided no.

But if there was to be a dedicated D800 to A7r comparison, that would be apples to apples and I'd be all for it. But I don't really care because a Pentax 35mm format will be out in 6 months eliminating my interest in either, as long as it stacks up ok in IQ.

Ah... Ok, that fact somehow slipped my mind.. And here i was thinking why are everyone comparing D600 with K3? LoL!

Thanks btw!

TheTimFilm · 11-08-2013, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by Adam

You can always get one camera to get a photo that looks better than from the other, and vice versa. It just depends on the shooting conditions, lens, and settings. I'm sure that most users won't be able to tell the two cameras apart, but now that the d600 is just $250 more than the k-3, are people going to be able to resist the ff urge?

I would go to pentax over nikon. Who wants to pay $250 more for ff when Nikon doesn't want to correct the oil problem on the sensor? not me. Also, as a former owner of a camera store, nikons service is horrible compared to canon or pentax.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 vs K-r vs K-7 - DSLR Comparison	Adam	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	40	09-30-2013 06:22 PM
Current K-5 vs. K-30 autofocus comparison?	Newtophotos	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	08-27-2013 10:31 AM
k-30 vs Nikon D600	zorza	Pentax K-30 & K-50	31	01-02-2013 04:30 PM
Unscientific Comparison: K5 vs. 5DII vs. D600	sb in ak	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	36	12-27-2012 01:13 PM
Camera comparison: One X vs Galaxy S II vs Nexus vs N8 vs iPhone 4S	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	3	04-12-2012 07:41 AM

11-04-2013, 06:42 PM	#346
Presidente Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Smoky Mountains of Tennessee Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 39	Originally posted by JJJPhoto I just found this: Nikon D600 vs. Pentax K-3 Image Comparison: Pentax Sweeps Nikon I too stumbled onto this article. It's reassuring since my K-3 is scheduled for delivery tomorrow!

11-05-2013, 03:40 PM	#347
regor Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Victoria, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 356	This comparison shows basically one thing: 24Mpix = 24Mpix ! No doubt that the Nikon has the advantage in low light, at least in the pixel-perper's eye. Both have their plus and minus over the other, and that will be particularly evident at the low and high ends of the FL range. Neither is better, just different.

11-06-2013, 02:54 AM	#348
SyncGuy Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 821	Originally posted by normhead For me it's the 36 MP resolution of the A7r. K-3 to D600 is 24 MP to 24 MP, which makes it particularly interesting, in that both are modern sensors, both are 24 MP minimizing effects caused by resolution and allowing us to compare APS-c to a 35mm frame. Recognized in this discussion is the fact that for Resolution in landscapes the D800 and probably the A7r are both probably way ahead of either of these cameras. But for those of us who thought 36MP was overkill, this is a , "I have my K-3 for wildlife and action, do I need a D600 for landscape" discussion and the answer to date is a decided no. But if there was to be a dedicated D800 to A7r comparison, that would be apples to apples and I'd be all for it. But I don't really care because a Pentax 35mm format will be out in 6 months eliminating my interest in either, as long as it stacks up ok in IQ. Ah... Ok, that fact somehow slipped my mind.. And here i was thinking why are everyone comparing D600 with K3? LoL! Thanks btw!

11-08-2013, 10:41 AM	#349
TheTimFilm New Member Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 2	Originally posted by Adam You can always get one camera to get a photo that looks better than from the other, and vice versa. It just depends on the shooting conditions, lens, and settings. I'm sure that most users won't be able to tell the two cameras apart, but now that the d600 is just $250 more than the k-3, are people going to be able to resist the ff urge? I would go to pentax over nikon. Who wants to pay $250 more for ff when Nikon doesn't want to correct the oil problem on the sensor? not me. Also, as a former owner of a camera store, nikons service is horrible compared to canon or pentax.