Originally posted by JimmyDranox I saw on DPReview that the new comparison tool, has a setting for daylight and low light. And the cameras tested in this way includes many Nikons, and Pentax K-3. Also Canon 6D, and 5D III. And jpeg and RAW.
In low light, and high ISO, almost every camera perform worst. And I was surprised that Nikon D610 is almost as week in low light as K-3. Canon 6D and 5D III are better in those condition, and in jpeg the difference is quiet big in terms of noise. But they also loose more details that other cameras.
Uhh ohh, i like this thread as i am in very same boat with OP with one exception - i do have K-3, now with latest firmware 1.2. I did upgrade from K-30 i was very satisfied with. Was not maybe best offer but looked viable option to replace via store as upgrade (yeah i still miss K30). What i expected, to get much, i mean much more out from new body, specially from new sensor and then expand my current (nonexistent) gear (i have DA50 1,8, Helios 58mm M7 and Sigma 17-50 f2.8 as my main walkie) (used to have samyang 85 mm F1.4 and tried most pentax DA lenses in range 12 - 300 mm via rentals)
Why i am then is same boat as OP? Because i can not get quality from K3 like i see landing Canon 5D mark III and II, Nikon D810 or D800whatever, even D610. Not talking about phase one - this beast blows any other camera as lightweight wannabe out of ring.
Before all limited LBA-people will struggle to run me down - i am missing limiteds- yes i do (but have tried many of them 15, 21, 20-40 35, 50 different versions). Also you can consider me noob, shooting now 3 years as hobbyist - specially as many of you are shooting from 70-s.
Can i use proper filters - no, have only few and not best ones, as too expensive for me yet. So i use some Cokin ND-s and try survive with them. Sigma needs filters bad, specially on landscapes, so did Samyang. Ghots, flares, comas.
Now to point. Every camera make pictures in right conditions, well.
To have WR - yes, i would call that worry-free and another big bonus. But In landscapes, riverscapes and etc, you have to be able shoot from morning mist to dawn in riverbed or bog. Rivers lakes and bogs, trees tend to be my main objects. People are too complicated and none of my lenses are for reach something flying fast and far away.
First K3 did add detail, maybe too much compared to K30 on my sigma. But those details are not look-able as good similar pictures taken with canons nikons i listed above. i can get sometimes close, but not exactly "there". What i get out you can look here, if you have plenty of time or otherwise nothing better to do:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/kriimurohelisedsilmad/
About latest 400 should be taken with K3. If you can not tell difference by picture, then K3 is not much better than K30. Feel free to critique, if you wish.
One more thing to mention - i don't care shit about auto AF-S or AF-E regimes, in any means. I shoot manual. With all lenses. I use my sigma manual mode full time, so do i with every other pentax lens. Yes i use tracking system to select/set focus point and area, but thats it. Focusing and sharpening is made manual. Nor do i use LCD screen more than just to check white balance and exposure where ok after i did shot. Feel free call me freak, it it makes relief.
What i can say - indoors, without flash (sometimes happens) is K3 not much better than K30 was. It very much depends on lighting, but mostly quite difficult to get proper shots from artists and etc. Reason? High ISO noise. There are sources of light you can rise ISO to 3200 or 6400, and have nice picture taken and in other conditions were you can not go up from 800 without massive noise.
Yesterday, before reading this article here, i was seeking experiences from users, who have used different camera systems. I also looked long comparisons on dpreview testshots. Selected different cameras, ISO-s and looked raw and jpeg results here
Samsung NX1 Review: Digital Photography Review ( just choose your camera selections and go). And avoiding "normhead like suggestions" - about real world pictures - those test-shots are very real.
What i did mention. If i would put them in subjective order, then: Phase one > till anything else is big step down > nikonD810/Canon 5D quite equal, but in different areas, Canon 6D rocks on ISO performance considering price, Sony best models about same as K3, but i would say - K3 details on green grass/hair are worst, with more blur, worse resolution from all mentioned. Also Sony and K3 sensor (also sony sensor) ISO noise is much worse than Canon 6D Or 5D. Nikon and even D4S has some prominent CA. And -last but not least - i did not see much talked excel in Pentax 645Z performance also.... Last made me think about Issue -
will i upgrade to future FF on Pentax, If sensor is again something from existing Sony line??? I have big doubt about it.
And looking these "a lot of noise" in-room pictures previously here on thread.. This adds doubt about ISO handling.
Other hard conditions for K3 are - rain, wet snow, fog, dust in air - mornings and late evenings, so low light + hard to focus atmosphere. You need ISO performance here. If river you can take with underexposed long time and low ISO and see good picture, you can not make same while making panorama or shooting cornfield in wind against the sun. And nor did K30 excel in bog mist and fog, nor does not K3. I would say
better not to try with those.... (yea they work very well in clear night and stars and etc)
So while 6D have old sensor, it's "only" 20 MB - it gives much better ISO by those test in my opinion and even better details in same studio conditions, than Sony or K3 sensor.
Ok, what i do not know -what lens did they use. It may matter a lot. But i assume, they did some reasonable lens choice.
On flickr best landscape shots have done with 6D, 5D, D800, D810 and similar. Pentax lags behind, so do i, like i this or not. Maybe this is because user-base difference, but i doubt. No reason to be overall less skilled by pentaxians.
Considering i have last chance to choose my lens way- i have to decide - stay or go seeking better quality in different brand.
Yes, i know what Pentax offers -small size, collection of prime lenses probably for less money sometimes, good (interesting were- not here in estonia) after-market and two very good FF new long zooms. All those nice features we find at "pro" cameras with lesser price...
But. If i am right, then very core is out of balance -and i mean sensor ability.
All those bells and whistles make K3 "pro level or close to it camera", but as i look it now - maybe not high level enough.
And as such 6D looks like closest by price option. nikon D610 also. Most others are out of topic by price. I will not go with sony (because EVF only).
I know, that i just don't know their bad sides yet.
Whatever camera i choose, there will be a lot to learn, specially light handling, filters and etc. In this means, brand doesn't matter too much. Money and PICTURE quality do.
What i do not like in any forum reviews. A lot of people are not able to consider and talk facts. Are opinions and beliefs. Both lack personal experience or serious testing behind.
So its very difficult to find ones, who will tell what camera or brand gives him what features and what do one loose, on another brand.
But right now, i will proceed looking -is it pentax way, canon way or nikon way to go ahead. At the moment, I am quite serious about testing out 6D or some nikon against K3.