[civiletti]

The funny thing is that people who dismiss the comparison in this thread are actual Nikon FF owners.

I dismiss it and own no digital Nikon or Canon.

[derekkite]

Truth and accuracy are good things to be biased toward.
.



In much the same way, as Falk suggested, no-one needs to ride to the rescue of the K-3 by jumping to conclusions. It's going to be a good camera, don't worry. I remember some of the same talk when the K-5 came out, that some preliminary images 'proved' that there was no need for Pentax to consider FF, aps-c was able to being indistinguishable images and performance, when really it always came down to something no-one can argue with - that the K-5 images are good enough for me. Nothing wrong with that. Similar thing is happening here.

Look - I value it when people point out fallacies for me, when people shine a light on hyperbole, and this review contained some of each. Just trying to keep things real.

.

Has anyone concluded that Pentax doesn't need to develop a full frame camera? I haven't heard.

The question is whether I need to buy one. My opinion, so far with what is on the market, is that if I want a full frame body that will satisfy me, I need to spend what a D800 costs. I don't intend to spend that much, and the price of a K-3 will get me what I want. From the link posted on this thread, I don't think I'll be disappointed with the IQ.

I suspect that when it comes time to buy another body, 3-4 years from now, full frame bodies by Pentax and others will be very attractive in price and features. EVF's may even be worth a look. But not now.

[shaX 07]

The real question is..... How can an intelligent person not consider buying a Pentax camera? That's what I would like to know.

[lister6520]

I wonder if this discussion is also taking place between Nikon owners... That damn dog shot has got everybody all het up here. The way I see it, you take a tripod, put the same QR plate on both cameras, then all that leaves you to do is focus and press the shutter button, and bingo, the internet blows up

I don't find it at all odd that the dog would have stayed motioneless for long enough to swap out a camera with a QR plate. I don't know much about dogs but I do about cats and I know for sure they can remain motionless transfixed on something interesting for minutes on end, oblivious to anything going on near them, much longer than it would take to swap cameras.

The other thing one might do if comparing cameras is to have them both installed on a moveable rail. It takes less than a second to swap cameras into the centre position that way. I had once built something similar, though not actually for comparing cameras it did pretty much the same thing.

[tuco]

The real question is..... How can an intelligent person not consider buying a Pentax camera? That's what I would like to know.

No reason what so ever. However, I recently saw an online conversation that sums up what Ricoh needs to work on. One guy was telling another he should try the wonder Pentax limited lenses on his mirrorless. The other guy replied that he would like to but can't find any in a store to see and test out.

[shaX 07]

If someone was going to fake the test, wouldn't you think they wouldn't use a picture of something like a dog that they know is going to create controversy? I mean really.

[Belnan]

There are basically two schools of thought when it comes to accessing the image quality of a camera. There are the pixel peeping measurebaters who like to want to quantify every aspect of an image. The other camp prefers to talk about the aesthetic qualities of a photo that may be rather subjective. Both of these ideas have their place and neither are incorrect but when you have to get down to the pixel level to justify one cameras IQ over another what is the point. This is why I really enjoy sites T.O.P. over DxO. I have to say in this instance I agree with the reviewer and the main point is that the K-3 is pretty much as good and in some ways better than the d600 wrt IQ.

If the autofocus is up to par than this is no doubt on of the best dslr's you can buy and it may be the best under 2 grand. I cant wait for this camera to get in the hands of some actual photographers, and mine too.

[jsherman999]

Has anyone concluded that Pentax doesn't need to develop a full frame camera? I haven't heard.

Maybe you've not been paying attention the past few years.

Some people will argue for pages here and on dpreview that Pentax producing a full frame camera is 1) utterly unnecessary in light of how good the aps-c output is - for them, and/or 2) a path that leads directly to bankruptcy for Pentax/Hoya/Ricoh.

[jsherman999]

I just don't value your opinion as much, Jay, when I realize that your most recent Pentax camera is the K20 -- literally generations old compared to current cameras. I used a K20 and using any current generation Pentax camera is a completely different experience from that.

Fair enough, but I'm not comparing my K20D to anything, or being subjective with anything, I'm sticking to the facts for the most part.

As to whether APS-C is "good enough" is a completely different question that can only be answered by the individual purchasing a camera. I don't see you shedding light on anything, just banging the full frame drum every chance you get. You have made decisions that work for you, but they certainly don't apply to everyone else out there.

I'm hoping that my message hasn't been misconstrued and morphed in people's minds to "Pentax bad, Nikon Good." My main point has been consistent for three years - that Pentax needs to make a FF camera and lenses if K-mount is going to thrive, or even survive in the MILC/phone era. Nikon just keeps getting used as a convenient foil by me because they make a FF camera and can serve as an example (and I have personal experience with the equipment, something I can't say about Canon.)

[normhead]

Has anyone concluded that Pentax doesn't need to develop a full frame camera? I haven't heard.

Not nearly as many as those who argue Canon and Nikon don't need to have an MF camera.

The question is whether I need to buy one. My opinion, so far with what is on the market, is that if I want a full frame body that will satisfy me, I need to spend what a D800 costs.

I don't know how you get a way from that. Sony A-7r, with a K-mount adapter would probably work for us landscape guys. If you need the resolution, then FF is the bargain way to get it. For me giving up the superior resolution within the crop frame for wildlife images just wouldn't be worth it. I may at some point get an FF, but I won't be giving up APS-c for it. As my sig says. APS-c is the best compromise. Especially if you can only go with one system. When they come out with a K-02 FF, mirrorless with solid tethering so I can focus on a 4x5 screen and tilt shift for landscapes, I'll be all over it. Right now, no one makes what I want.

[bxf]

The obvious conclusion: for those who, for whatever reasons, prefer APS-C, but wonder how much IQ they'd be sacrificing viz-a-viz FF, the answer is: not much.

[crewl1]

Boy, that's not true at all. Trust me, multiple dogs are commonly "mesmerized" by the same thing.

I had a Weimeraner who would freeze when it saw my pet cockatiel.
It would stay in that position for minutes and would not move unless you stood to block his view or dragged him away.
I guess it was the pointer instinct.
So I can understand those dogs staying in one spot for multiple pictures.

[Eric Auer]

I read thru this whole thread, And that was the dumbest thing I did all day.

My own fault.

Luckily I have some Makers Mark to help me wash this all away........

[bossa]

The dog was watching a horse. Did you read the writer's comment at the bottom?

Famous last words "The dog was watching a horse" Ah yes, that explains everything

This thread is OOC: People seem to be expecting a smaller sensor, of the same generation tech, to outperform a larger one. There's around one stop difference in noise in these sensors and there's around one stop difference in DOF in the equivalents lenses, so, as I said pages back, why not accept the difference and just try to take the same picture using equivalent lens and ISO settings, handicapping the FF by one stop ISO?

I'm pretty sure the DA*55 @ f/2.8 is a very sharp lens which would give my Sigma 85 F1.4 (@ f/4) on FF a run for it's money where the same number of pixels is involved. In fact, I'll predict that the K-3 would match the D600 IQ at any Hi-ISO in that scenario, where the K-3 was allowed one stop ISO advantage.

Comparing sharpness where both lenses are set to f/4 and where DOF is vastly different due to FL is delusional to say the least.

[Dr Orloff]

I can't believe the minutiae of discussion about a dog watching a horse. I have a dog and every now and then my dog likes to watch things, it happens.

These images have been run through Lightroom and just a few minor tweaks here and there could have them looking very similar indeed. It is clear that the K3 does a fine job and that setup gives results very similar to the D600. I find the noise from the K3 sensor more than the D600, but the difference isn't enough to jump systems. The comparison that interests me more is the K3 versus the K5. Looking in detail at iso400 then I think that the K5 does a little better than the K3 on noise, which is consistent with what I saw from the first set of official sample JPEGs. But of course you get a lot more pixels for that compromise and plenty of other improvements as well with the K3. It is clearly a piece of kit that can hold its own against anything and the headlines are proving that. I'm pleased though that the K5's iq is still right up there with the next generation.