[Rondec]

As I pack a bag to head your way I think I understand what the writer is getting at.
The K-3 is slightly heavier and extra batteries are required to cover the increase in power consumption.
Is it an issue? - not really IMHO.

But compared with what? Mirrorless? If that is the bar, then they should mention it at the end of every SLR review. If it is to other comparable SLRs, then I don't buy that a K3 is heavier or requires more batteries than a D7100 or, a 70D. And for that matter, you get an awful lot of shots out of one battery as compared to mirrorless options.

Sorry. I think the review is OK. The thing that bothers me the most about any DP Review review of Pentax gear is the obligatory comment about "not choosing this brand if you are already invested in another brand." I don't even know what that means. If you own a T1i and a kit lens is it worth considering a K3? How about a D3100? It is just an odd comment to make, particularly after they spent a lot of time "testing" the auto focus system in ways that they don't test other cameras. How well would the D7100 or the D5200 do on such a test, I wonder?

[ak_kiwi]

But compared.......

Sorry I should have been clearer.
I was comparing to the K5ii as mentioned on page 1 of the review - "takes the rugged design of the K-5 II / K-5 IIs"
(Post edited for clarity)

Sorry. I think the review is OK

I too think the review ok and is very fair.
The focusing comments in the review I find interesting too, as I have personally not shot that way and prefer to use center point focusing. But like I say -it's an interesting conclusion

[monochrome]

People say they shoot Pentax because they want to be different, yet get all bent out of shape when people talk bad about Pentax.
Can't have both in this world unfortunately, if you want to be different, you open yourself up to criticism.
If you really want to be different, you should toughen up and don't let the negative comments and reviews bother you.

In a perfect world a reviewer would celebrate the diversity of the camera market and Pentax's decision to be good but different.

In a perfect world, everyone would understand, if you want to be Pentax (different) then a negative review should enrapture you. It should validate the difference. Otherwise just make the same-old same-old.

Every time I pick up my K3 or K10D or K-01 or Q/Q7 or one of my film cameras I actually smile a little bit - sometimes a big bit. EVERY time.

I'm just guessing here, but I think a Canon wouldn't suit me and a Nikon wouldn't evoke the same visceral, pleasureable respone. I'm happy that the cool people think Pentax is for geeks and nerds and that they feel a need to other me - that's what they're doing, validatiing themselves by 'OTHERing' me. I'm talking photography club people here; DPR is just an anonymous website, but it takes its direction from the market and that's people.

If they didn't feel the need to damn us with faint praise we really wouldn't be different at all.

[cali92rs]

In a perfect world a reviewer would celebrate the diversity of the camera market and Pentax's decision to be good but different. In a perfect workd, if you want to be Pentax (different) then a negative review should enrapture you. It should validate the difference. Otherwise just make the same-old same-old.

Every time I pick up my K3 or K10D or K-01 or Q/Q7 or one of my film cameras I actually smile a little bit - sometimes a big bit. EVERY time. I'm just guessing here, but I think a Canon wouldn't suit me and a Nikon wouldn't evoke the same viscerable, pleasureable respone. I'm happy that the cool people think Pentax is for geeks and nerds and that they feel a need to other us - that's what they're doing, validatiing themselves by 'OTHERing' us. If they didn't feel the need to dman us with faint praise we really wouldn't be different at all.

I agree...in a perfect world, which is far from the one we live in.
In this world, if you dare to be different, you should expect some arrows coming your way. I think Pentaxians should welcome the arrows and not try to turn them into us.

Honestly, reading the comments, I think, sheesh, no wonder they look down on us...I know, it's only the minority that whine, but they are the most vocal.

Also, Pentax IS a different kind of camera company...they choose build quality and small size over speed. That's fine.
But I think we should realize that most people do not value those attributes as much as we do, if they did, it would be Pentanonikon, Not Canikon. Most reviewers, and people in general, don't care as much for the attributes that we cherish, and is judged in that lens (no pun intended).

[monochrome]

I haven't read the revew.

I compare and contrast service providers for my clients. I start my evaluations by expressing the Philosophy of each company reviewed, then their process, then their quality of delivery. Given that clients select only from companies that have a history of institutional performance, they should select the provider(s) whose philosophy and process best matches their desired characteristics, and accept ongoing performance IN THAT CONTEXT. That is the 'Institutional Best Practices' framework n my business. It is also contrary to almost every media imperative one can read on the subject. Media opinion is the only thing that matters is final performance and you are a chump if you don't have THE BEST performance.

DPR doesn't review in context. DPR assumes consanguinuity of all camera users and tells them which camera is BEST for the group as a whole. That's what's so infuriating - they have to 'Other' us - exclude us from the group - to justify the review. The fury of the responses simply confirms for the average DPR reader their othering of 'Those Crazy, Benighted Pentaxians'.

But holy moly - it's just a camera review. They aren't condeming my child to a life-time label and 15 years of mind-altering drugs just because he 'Runs With Scissors'.

[Rondec]

I haven't read the revew.

I compare and contrast service providers for my clients. I start my evaluations by expressing the Philosophy of each company reviewed, then their process, then their quality of delivery. Given that clients select only from companies that have a history of institutional performance, they should select the provider(s) whose philosophy and process best matches their desired characteristics, and accept ongoing performance IN THAT CONTEXT. That is the 'Institutional Best Practices' framework n my business. It is also contrary to almost every media imperative one can read on the subject. Media opinion is the only thing that matters is final performance and you are a chump if you don't have THE BEST performance.

DPR doesn't review in context. DPR assumes consanguinuity of all camera users and tells them which camera is BEST for the group as a whole. That's what's so infuriating - they have to 'Other' us - exclude us from the group - to justify the review. The fury of the responses simply confirms for the average DPR reader their othering of 'Those Crazy, Benighted Pentaxians'.

But holy moly - it's just a camera review. They aren't condeming my child to a life-time label and 15 years of mind-altering drugs just because he 'Runs With Scissors'.

I guess it doesn't really matter. It just rankles a little bit that they are so quick to point out areas in which Pentax "lags" behind Canon/Nikon and gloss over areas in which Pentax is better (sometimes significantly so).

At the same time, I do think there are a lot of "pros" listed in the review and I think if someone reads it honestly, they would have a hard time not putting the camera up there above the D7100 from an APS-C stand point. The whole video thing is neither here nor there to me and although I know it is a big deal to DP Review, I shoot still photography with my SLRs...

[stevebrot]

Admittedly, DPR's test of the k-3 AF was a bit more extreme than any test they have done for the D7100 or the 70D.

They just know better how to test now than they did a year ago. I was impressed with the lengths they went through in working with Ricoh to tune the AF system. In the past, they would have just said that the AF tracking sucks. This time they gave the system a good workout, attempted to characterize the issue and find workarounds, posted examples of their findings and then concluded that the AF (relative to some of the competition) sucks, at least with the Pentax glass they had mounted.

That was very objective and I appreciate the trouble they went to.


Steve

[RobA_Oz]

I guess it doesn't really matter. It just rankles a little bit that they are so quick to point out areas in which Pentax "lags" behind Canon/Nikon and gloss over areas in which Pentax is better (sometimes significantly so).

At the same time, I do think there are a lot of "pros" listed in the review and I think if someone reads it honestly, they would have a hard time not putting the camera up there above the D7100 from an APS-C stand point. The whole video thing is neither here nor there to me and although I know it is a big deal to DP Review, I shoot still photography with my SLRs...

As a standalone review, I think it is quite positive, and it's hard to argue with most of the points they make. The problem is that DPR staff are immersed in a culture that gives credibility to the two largest DSLR makers, simply because it's saturated with advertising, user forums, publications generally and sellers that give the impression they're the only ones that matter. The photographic industry is not the only one in which this occurs, of course, even political discourse is limited by this effect. The less-analytical call it the "vibe", but there's no magic involved – it all comes down to communication. So, let's not blame DPR for not being able to totally rise above all that. It'd be nice if they could, but we shouldn't expect it. They're only human, just like the rest of us, and, in spite of the curmudgeonly comments made here sometimes, we're social animals and the herd instinct takes over in spite of our best efforts, sometimes.

[stevebrot]

still at 83% vs D7100 at 85% and on par with 70D at 83%, so in the end, DPR is saying D7100 is better among all APS-C DSLR....

Based on AF performance and value, yes. Compare the conclusion comments for all three cameras as well as the ratings graphs.


Steve

---------- Post added 04-10-14 at 02:39 PM ----------

Reading the comments, I don't understand the inferiority complex.

Me neither. I thought it was a very comprehensive and ultimately fair review. I don't know if it makes sense to get one's knickers in a wad over a few rating points +/-. I sensed a certain amount of disappointment and frustration on the part of the reviewers that the AF performance was still below standard for the class.


Steve

---------- Post added 04-10-14 at 02:43 PM ----------

particularly after they spent a lot of time "testing" the auto focus system in ways that they don't test other cameras. How well would the D7100 or the D5200 do on such a test, I wonder?

My take was that they did the additional testing to illustrate how the system fails. They explicitly stated that the standard for the class was to not fail in that way (subject approaching camera).


Steve

---------- Post added 04-10-14 at 02:45 PM ----------

I haven't read the revew.

You should. It is actually pretty good, except of course for the endless digest of the menus...


Steve

---------- Post added 04-10-14 at 02:49 PM ----------

At the same time, I do think there are a lot of "pros" listed in the review and I think if someone reads it honestly, they would have a hard time not putting the camera up there above the D7100 from an APS-C stand point. The whole video thing is neither here nor there to me and although I know it is a big deal to DP Review, I shoot still photography with my SLRs...

Absolutely...and if anyone wants to read a truly scathing review, simply spend some time with the ones they did on the Sony A7/A7r. About the only things the said good was that the system is compact, is FF, allows for lots of adapted lenses, and is REAL good for video. The list of cons is one of the longest I have seen on DPReview.


Steve

[macTak]

I have to say, I was a bit surprised by the poor performance DPR found in tracking AF (subject moving rather straight towards camera). Hasn't one of the French camera magazines (was it Chasseur?) done a similar test for years (for all brands) with a moving car, and while Pentax did not come out on top, their cameras still put in a respectable performance (I don't recall whether I saw this test for the K-3 itself, but it would be interesting if it was actually considerably worse than prior cameras).

[ruggiex]

I think the review is not bad but the writing itself can use some editing so it doesn't repeat "it's great at this but..." pattern over and over. Equally, I'm tired of seeing Pentaxians trying to prove we are worthy by ways of complaining every little thing. DPR hasn't changed their tone towards Pentax all this time and none of that really is going to change anything. At least there isn't a bunch of errors in the review itself this time which is an improvement I think.

[cali92rs]

As a standalone review, I think it is quite positive, and it's hard to argue with most of the points they make. The problem is that DPR staff are immersed in a culture that gives credibility to the two largest DSLR makers, simply because it's saturated with advertising, user forums, publications generally and sellers that give the impression they're the only ones that matter. The photographic industry is not the only one in which this occurs, of course, even political discourse is limited by this effect. The less-analytical call it the "vibe", but there's no magic involved – it all comes down to communication. So, let's not blame DPR for not being able to totally rise above all that. It'd be nice if they could, but we shouldn't expect it. They're only human, just like the rest of us, and, in spite of the curmudgeonly comments made here sometimes, we're social animals and the herd instinct takes over in spite of our best efforts, sometimes.

I buy that...
I also think that Canon and Nikon both make damn fine cameras as well.

[crussellsprout]

Interesting to see that the JPEG noise performance (with NR 'off') of the K3 is very good according to DPR, being better than the K5/K5IIs and even with the Df. It's noise performance is not as strong when comparing RAW results, though.

[snofox]

A Gold Award, and still complaints. So Nikon scores 4% higher than Pentax? 4% of WHAT!!!????

Every time I pick up one of my Canons or Pentaxes, I know that I am in for a great time, and I know also that once I get finished with the Photoshop end of things, no one will ever know which camera I used for any particular shot.

The K3 review tells me that I can expect more of the same. Bravo. As for the rest of it, it is oogala.

[ENicolas]

DPR is generally objective in its reviews, and given the amount of time they spent with the K-3 I'd say they about nailed it.

Is this a fast action camera? It can be used as such, but I doubt any sports shooters would opt for it. Is it heavy compared to its size? Hell yes - over 2 pounds with the battery grip. Add to that the amount of heavy 30-year-old glass you can mount and your bag can suffer serious bloat.

But the main features are really at the top of this class of camera: great image quality, excellent noise performance at low ISO, good at high ISO. Excellent all-metal build, excellent viewfinder and LCD monitor.

And they are right about the AA simulator: mainly hoopla to offer a crutch to those who are unsure about buying a camera without an AA filter. I shoot a lot of vineyards and moire can be an issue in the background - but is always fixable in post. I've never used the AA simulator and I really like the sharpness the K-3 sensor delivers.

So the 83% is about right: DPR rarely if ever scores above 89%. So given this review and DxO raving about the sensor I think we can say Ricoh has done a good job. Best APS-C DSLR on the market!