Originally posted by Caat I was surprised by the DR comment - but if it's as good or basically the same as the K-5 I think that's a win (given it's extra resolution).
I'm coming from a K-7 and K-01 so if the K-3 can match the K-01's DR and noise then I'll be very pleased. There hasn't been much systematic noise analysis yet but then I guess that's partly a personal tolerance thing. It'll be better than the K-7 regardless, and I don't need above 3200.
I had the K-7, then the K-5, now the K-3. At 6400 the K-3 seems to be just as good as the K-5 when you adjust for the difference in resolution. If you look at both of them at 1:1 then the K-3 looks noisier, but that is a bad way to compare. The prints from the K-3 look cleaner because of the finer grain.
If you are coming from the K-7, then the difference will be substantial. AF is much, much better. The K-3 doesn't show much color noise. Most of the noise is luminance and is easily cleaned up. The AA filter reduces color moire, but it also makes it harder for the RAW processor to tell the difference between color detail and color noise. Taking the AA filter off reduces color noise (per Fuji).