[KDAFA]

The above review noted that "Colour fidelity is second to none". I've noticed the same point being highlighted and commended in a number of other online reviews.

I see this as one of the (less-known?) strengths of the K-3. Certainly I've been enjoying my pictures taken with it - the colours are really very nice; something quite special.

Two subjective comments to add:

1. Coming from the K-7 and K-5II, the K-3 seems able to capture/represent a somewhat wider range of colours or hues. It does the standard "Pentax colours" - for which Pentax are famous - and then some. I can't explain it technically. One user similarly described himself noticing colours on the K-3 that he hadn't before.

2. Perhaps owing in part to its excellent colour accuracy, I've found the K-3 a very versatile and supremely dependable camera, able to handle equally well diverse sorts of subject matter. Put it another way, the camera doesn't really seem to have certain "scenes" it does especially well - rather, it seems very even-handed and capable throughout, with the results somehow looking subjectively "professional".

A parallel is seen in pro audio. Recording studios typically utilise specialised reference monitor speakers, designed to have an absolute minimum of sonic colouration. This makes them tonally neutral and very accurate, and thus able to handle with equal ease diverse genres of music which the studio might be recording.

Shooting with the K-3, I get this subjective feeling, a sort of "confidence", that thanks to its colour accuracy, no matter what is being shot the colours are going to come out pretty much fine - and often, more than merely fine.

Ricoh/Pentax are on to a good thing here with the colour accuracy.


P/S: The above should be understood in light of the fact that in my shooting style I employ little/mild post-processing. Typically I see something that looks beautiful to begin with (eg. having good colours/lighting/contrast; with an interesting "story" or perspective angle, etc.), and then capture it; with little PP following, just a mild touch-up, usually. Thus the way a camera handles colour has a big impact for me.

---

Last edited by KDAFA; 01-29-2014 at 10:53 AM.

[saladin]

Lol, DPreview STILL don't have a review done? That's a disgrace, given the Df review got churned out asap.

[jimr-pdx]

Thanks to Spodeworld for finding a new review from Neocamera. It's particularly useful for pointing out the differences between the K-5 'family' and the K-3, including the features that didn't make it onto the K-3. Overall, they do like the camera.
It's at the bottom of the list on page 1.
Ron

Neocamera has a fully dedicated page to this topic - maybe that part has changed since your note. I had not heard elsewhere that the in-cam corrections (CA and vignetting) do not slow the K-3 like they did the K-5... but I've been known to skim reviews now & then

[rbefly]

Hi Jim, thanks for posting that. I must have put up page 4 (the K-5 vs K-3 part) of the review first. The part you linked is page 1, which I've now added.
The online reviews seem to be all in, except for you-know-who. Some of the print magazines may (should?) do one soon, I think there's already a couple listed here, IIRC.
Ron

[mikemike]

I'm surprised that so many sites and magazines are able to review such a complicated camera so fast.

[jbinpg]

Neocamera has a fully dedicated page to this topic - maybe that part has changed since your note. I had not heard elsewhere that the in-cam corrections (CA and vignetting) do not slow the K-3 like they did the K-5... but I've been known to skim reviews now & then

I have all in-camera lens corrections enabled on my K-3 for everything except burst shooting. There is no more than maybe a half second delay before the image is re-processed and displayed.

Jack

[unkipunki]

Not so much a review as a regurgitation of other's findings. Overall highly praising the K3 but with the ubiquitous 'noise at ISO1600'. I assume another reviewer test with JPG shots and omitting to test noise reduction capability in post processing from RAW.


Pentax K-3 DSLR

---------- Post added 12-02-14 at 18:11 ----------

I also disagree about the lack of luxurious feel and aesthetics.

[rbefly]

Thank you unkipunki, I've added it to the list.
Ron

[sandpipe]

I found this Editor's Choice review on Pentax's facebook page:

Pentax K-3 review | Digital Trends Reviews

[rbefly]

Thanks for finding that, sandpipe! That's a very well-balanced and useful review.
I've added it to the list.
Ron

Found this one today...

You Tube

You Tube

[rbefly]

Thanks for finding this, Tjompen 1968!
I've added it to the list,
Ron

[wizofoz]

I looked, but didn't find this review on the list. Perhaps I missed it.

You Tube

You Tube

[rbefly]

Thanks for finding this, wizofoz. It seems familiar to me, but I couldn't find it on the list, either. Anyway, it's up now!
Ron

[unkipunki]

Here's another late comer review that really really likes the K3. I don't think it's already on the list.


Pentax K-3 new DSLR camera Review | Stuff


They don't like the video performance and haven't clocked that the Flucard is a novel WIFI solution, but love it all the same.