K-3 compares well to D800

john5100 · 01-01-2014, 02:07 PM

Thank you Michael for the comparison and for sharing with us. I look forward to your extended review.

danny09 · 01-01-2014, 02:15 PM

Thank u MJS for sharing ure useful unbiased comparisons. What were the AA filter settings? I presume turned off?

**Miguel** · 01-01-2014, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

you must have the two images mixed up!

Nope, just verified. It's obvious to me. But that's the Internet for ya!

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

I think we can all agree that both images are acceptably good

Yup.

M

RonHendriks1966 · 01-01-2014, 02:36 PM

I guess that up to normal prints you won't notice the difference between them. The DA*60-250mm is also a very good lens to go with the K-3.

konquerian · 01-01-2014, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

Dear Forum Members,

I am a professional photographer who has been shooting Nikon gear since the 1980s. Currently my primary camera is a D800 -- probably the finest camera I have ever owned. On a lark over Christmas vacation I rented the new Pentax K-3 + 60-250mm f/4 from Lens Rentals to see if it could compare to my (rather heavy and bulky) D800 + AF-S 80-400mm VR setup. Well, the short answer is that I am VERY impressed with this new Pentax camera + lens combination. Neither Nikon nor Canon offer anything like it.

I will be writing up a more in-depth review during January, but attached are two test comparison images that demonstrate just how good this camera is in the real world. The "big boys" should be very concerned -- Ricoh/Pentax have a real winner here.

Links to the 9000x5400 pixel images (6Mb each)

More later.

J Michael Sullivan

Very interesting comparison with the K3 and D800, and excellent photos. On your first photo comparison, I noticed the Pentax shot has a much warmer tone than the D800 shot (however I have always known of Nikon's cooler color tones), but I'm wondering about which camera more accurately captured the colors in that scene. I was a Nikon shooter who switched to Pentax two weeks ago, and it would be informative if you could share that bit of info with me. Thanks in advance Michael and again, great comparison!

**MJSfoto1956** · 01-01-2014, 02:50 PM

the first two comparison shots were done using default camera JPEG. So in theory, those would be representative of how these cameras/lenses "see" the world. In RAW things change because you can (and should) create custom profiles to match the "look" you are after as an artist.

As far as the original question: I would say that the Pentax images (in general) look to my eye to be a bit warmer than Nikon's (with the yellows having a touch of bias towards the green). Nikon's color I would characterize as mostly "neutral".

**MJSfoto1956** · 01-01-2014, 02:52 PM

oh, both cameras have the latest firmware updates...

Steve.Ledger · 01-01-2014, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

.....representative of how these cameras/lenses "see" the world. In RAW things change because you can (and should) create custom profiles to match the "look" you are after as an artist.

This is the right information & attitude and it's refreshing to read. Thank you.

Paul the Sunman · 01-01-2014, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by Miguel

Nope, just verified. It's obvious to me. But that's the Internet for ya!

Yup.

M

I agree with Miguel. The Nikon looks a little sharper to me. However, yes, without zooming, they look pretty comparable.

normhead · 01-01-2014, 08:07 PM

After awhile, you pay a lot for not much. If it's so close it's a 50/50 split on which is sharper, that's not really an advantage for one or the other. In fact, that would be an argument, they are pretty much the same.

Paul the Sunman · 01-01-2014, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by normhead

After awhile, you pay a lot for not much. If it's so close it's a 50/50 split on which is sharper, that's not really an advantage for one or the other. In fact, that would be an argument, they are pretty much the same.

I'm pretty happy with this conclusion, as I have a K3 on order at the moment.

It's interesting that sensor size is not as big a factor in IQ as it used to be. The four thirds cameras are producing great results these days too. Sure, DoF is an issue, but so is the heft of one's lens kit. There may be room for multiple formats for some years to come.

kenyee · 01-01-2014, 09:01 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

As an aside, I am really only interested in what final PRINTS look like. I'm not a big fan of pixel peeping. It is for this reason that I decided to scale both images to actual print resolutions. While technically an "apples to oranges" comparison, if a system can product great 20"x30 prints

I think the K-3 should do fine at that resolution.
If you go up to 3'x4', you'll be more impressed w/ the D800. I was really impressed w/ 645D prints at that size...no noise w/ nose to the print

Class A · 01-01-2014, 09:43 PM

Hi Michael,

thanks for sharing your thoughts.

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

As an aside, I am really only interested in what final PRINTS look like. I'm not a big fan of pixel peeping. It is for this reason that I decided to scale both images to actual print resolutions. While technically an "apples to oranges" comparison, if a system can product great 20"x30 prints, then I could care less if it is FX, DX, or whatever.

Scaling to the same print size is not an "apples to oranges" comparison at all. It is the most fair comparison you can do.
The D800 with its higher number of MP will benefit, but deservedly so. The D800 will also have more potential to printer bigger, however, given a certain print size such as 20x30 then it is exactly the right thing to do to scale images from both cameras to that size (or a common resolution, such as 12MP).

Originally posted by Adam

It could also be thanks to the shorter focal length perhaps?

I could not view (and hence not examine) the images, but 250mm on APS-C is equivalent to 375mm on FF, so potentially any difference should be negligible.

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

So in theory, those would be representative of how these cameras/lenses "see" the world.

When comparing JPGs out of camera, you are mainly comparing the JPG engines.
Different manufacturers use different tone curves and colour profiles (often hues are deliberately changed to yield more pleasing blues for the sky or greens for foliage).

So I disagree that a JPG comparison tells you how the camera/lens "sees" the world. It rather tells you the RAW->JPG conversion philosophy of the manufacturer.

If you really wanted to obtain a neutral view on the camera/lens as such, you would have to use a neutral converter (such as dcraw) with neutral settings. However, I'm with you that it does not really matter where you start from, only whether you can get to where you want to be with post processing.

rob1234 · 01-01-2014, 11:37 PM

What an excellent post - many thanks.

ALiEN|PoV · 01-02-2014, 12:42 AM

Well, when I first look at it: I look where I think most people look. I look at the tree and the bark, and that gives the impression of the d800 being sharper. My first reaction: d800 sharper.

Then I look at the fence...just right of the tree, and I notice that the color cast has an impact on the perceived sharpness. The edges of the shadows, and the backdrop is clearly sharper on the K3, albeit much noisier.

Hmmm, interesting. Now I go old-school and make both images B&W. It seems that the color cast, and the very light moire pattern (prevalent when pixel-peeping in B&W) colored (pun intended) my initial judgment. So, I retract my initial statement, and I'd say the K3 is slightly sharper.

01-01-2014, 02:40 PM	#20
konquerian Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: California, USA Posts: 18	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 Dear Forum Members, I am a professional photographer who has been shooting Nikon gear since the 1980s. Currently my primary camera is a D800 -- probably the finest camera I have ever owned. On a lark over Christmas vacation I rented the new Pentax K-3 + 60-250mm f/4 from Lens Rentals to see if it could compare to my (rather heavy and bulky) D800 + AF-S 80-400mm VR setup. Well, the short answer is that I am VERY impressed with this new Pentax camera + lens combination. Neither Nikon nor Canon offer anything like it. I will be writing up a more in-depth review during January, but attached are two test comparison images that demonstrate just how good this camera is in the real world. The "big boys" should be very concerned -- Ricoh/Pentax have a real winner here. Links to the 9000x5400 pixel images (6Mb each) http://www.haywood-sullivan.com/MAGNAchrom/articleimages/IMGP2287.layers.jpg http://www.haywood-sullivan.com/MAGNAchrom/articleimages/_D8A8207.layers.jpg More later. J Michael Sullivan Very interesting comparison with the K3 and D800, and excellent photos. On your first photo comparison, I noticed the Pentax shot has a much warmer tone than the D800 shot (however I have always known of Nikon's cooler color tones), but I'm wondering about which camera more accurately captured the colors in that scene. I was a Nikon shooter who switched to Pentax two weeks ago, and it would be informative if you could share that bit of info with me. Thanks in advance Michael and again, great comparison!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K mount lenses to D800 - good or bad idea?	Fontan	Photographic Industry and Professionals	8	06-04-2012 07:40 PM
How does Nikon 85/1.8 compares to FA77?	yusuf	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	42	06-02-2012 05:05 PM
5D mark 3 beating Nikon D800...hands down - Video	D4rknezz	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	17	03-31-2012 11:09 AM
5D Mk 3 Vs D800	D4rknezz	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	03-02-2012 10:42 PM
Hank Williams Jr. Compares Obama to Hitler.- Fox & Friends - 10/3/11	jogiba	General Talk	7	10-04-2011 08:49 AM

01-01-2014, 02:07 PM	#16
john5100 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,725	Thank you Michael for the comparison and for sharing with us. I look forward to your extended review.

01-01-2014, 02:15 PM	#17
danny09 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: SF Bay Area Posts: 417	Thank u MJS for sharing ure useful unbiased comparisons. What were the AA filter settings? I presume turned off?

01-01-2014, 02:32 PM	#18
Miguel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Near Seattle Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,743	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 you must have the two images mixed up! Nope, just verified. It's obvious to me. But that's the Internet for ya! Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 I think we can all agree that both images are acceptably good Yup. M

01-01-2014, 02:36 PM	#19
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	I guess that up to normal prints you won't notice the difference between them. The DA*60-250mm is also a very good lens to go with the K-3.

01-01-2014, 02:50 PM	#21
MJSfoto1956 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Boston Posts: 1,305 Original Poster	the first two comparison shots were done using default camera JPEG. So in theory, those would be representative of how these cameras/lenses "see" the world. In RAW things change because you can (and should) create custom profiles to match the "look" you are after as an artist. As far as the original question: I would say that the Pentax images (in general) look to my eye to be a bit warmer than Nikon's (with the yellows having a touch of bias towards the green). Nikon's color I would characterize as mostly "neutral".

01-01-2014, 02:52 PM	#22
MJSfoto1956 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Boston Posts: 1,305 Original Poster	oh, both cameras have the latest firmware updates...

01-01-2014, 03:22 PM	#23
Steve.Ledger Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Far North Qld Posts: 3,301	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 .....representative of how these cameras/lenses "see" the world. In RAW things change because you can (and should) create custom profiles to match the "look" you are after as an artist. This is the right information & attitude and it's refreshing to read. Thank you.

01-01-2014, 08:04 PM	#24
Paul the Sunman Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,846	Originally posted by Miguel Nope, just verified. It's obvious to me. But that's the Internet for ya! Yup. M I agree with Miguel. The Nikon looks a little sharper to me. However, yes, without zooming, they look pretty comparable.

01-01-2014, 08:07 PM	#25
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	After awhile, you pay a lot for not much. If it's so close it's a 50/50 split on which is sharper, that's not really an advantage for one or the other. In fact, that would be an argument, they are pretty much the same.

01-01-2014, 08:25 PM	#26
Paul the Sunman Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,846	Originally posted by normhead After awhile, you pay a lot for not much. If it's so close it's a 50/50 split on which is sharper, that's not really an advantage for one or the other. In fact, that would be an argument, they are pretty much the same. I'm pretty happy with this conclusion, as I have a K3 on order at the moment. It's interesting that sensor size is not as big a factor in IQ as it used to be. The four thirds cameras are producing great results these days too. Sure, DoF is an issue, but so is the heft of one's lens kit. There may be room for multiple formats for some years to come.

01-01-2014, 09:01 PM	#27
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 As an aside, I am really only interested in what final PRINTS look like. I'm not a big fan of pixel peeping. It is for this reason that I decided to scale both images to actual print resolutions. While technically an "apples to oranges" comparison, if a system can product great 20"x30 prints I think the K-3 should do fine at that resolution. If you go up to 3'x4', you'll be more impressed w/ the D800. I was really impressed w/ 645D prints at that size...no noise w/ nose to the print

01-01-2014, 09:43 PM	#28
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Hi Michael, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 As an aside, I am really only interested in what final PRINTS look like. I'm not a big fan of pixel peeping. It is for this reason that I decided to scale both images to actual print resolutions. While technically an "apples to oranges" comparison, if a system can product great 20"x30 prints, then I could care less if it is FX, DX, or whatever. Scaling to the same print size is not an "apples to oranges" comparison at all. It is the most fair comparison you can do. The D800 with its higher number of MP will benefit, but deservedly so. The D800 will also have more potential to printer bigger, however, given a certain print size such as 20x30 then it is exactly the right thing to do to scale images from both cameras to that size (or a common resolution, such as 12MP). Originally posted by Adam It could also be thanks to the shorter focal length perhaps? I could not view (and hence not examine) the images, but 250mm on APS-C is equivalent to 375mm on FF, so potentially any difference should be negligible. Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 So in theory, those would be representative of how these cameras/lenses "see" the world. When comparing JPGs out of camera, you are mainly comparing the JPG engines. Different manufacturers use different tone curves and colour profiles (often hues are deliberately changed to yield more pleasing blues for the sky or greens for foliage). So I disagree that a JPG comparison tells you how the camera/lens "sees" the world. It rather tells you the RAW->JPG conversion philosophy of the manufacturer. If you really wanted to obtain a neutral view on the camera/lens as such, you would have to use a neutral converter (such as dcraw) with neutral settings. However, I'm with you that it does not really matter where you start from, only whether you can get to where you want to be with post processing.

01-01-2014, 11:37 PM	#29
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	What an excellent post - many thanks.

01-02-2014, 12:42 AM	#30
ALiEN\|PoV Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Hey! Click. Photos: Albums Posts: 38	Well, when I first look at it: I look where I think most people look. I look at the tree and the bark, and that gives the impression of the d800 being sharper. My first reaction: d800 sharper. Then I look at the fence...just right of the tree, and I notice that the color cast has an impact on the perceived sharpness. The edges of the shadows, and the backdrop is clearly sharper on the K3, albeit much noisier. Hmmm, interesting. Now I go old-school and make both images B&W. It seems that the color cast, and the very light moire pattern (prevalent when pixel-peeping in B&W) colored (pun intended) my initial judgment. So, I retract my initial statement, and I'd say the K3 is slightly sharper.