[geomez]

... I already really like the Camera, there's not a thing they can say at this point that is going to change that. Why would I read a review by some guy who probably hasn't used the camera as much as I have?

Good point Norm.

[starbase218]

The issue to me isn't the brand, it is the mount. I don't care if it says Pentax or Ricoh on it. But, if Ricoh decides to stop selling k mount cameras, switching to another mount would be a pretty expensive proposition.

This is no different from any other brand though. But if it causes you sleepless nights, I recommend you switch to a brand you have more faith in and get your sleep back.

What I meant was, buying new into a different system really isn't a fair price comparison. If you bought your existing gear used anyway, it won't have lost much value (the lenses, anyway). If you handle it smartly and wait for the right moment, you could buy new lenses and bodies without losing too much money, if at all. Of course if you want to switch brands fast then you may not have the time to do so, and it will cost you slightly more. But even then, if you're not upgrading (e.g. from crop to fullframe) the loss shouldn't be that much. Just doing a quick search now brought up a Nikon 17-55/2.8 for 550 euros. You may be able to get it for 500, which is about the same money as I see Pentax 16-50/2.8's go for.

---------- Post added 04-13-2014 at 11:38 AM ----------

Hmmm...Atari?

Let me make one thing very clear: you say I need to keep the brand alive. I don't need to do anything, other than what I choose to do.

[Matthew Saville]

Just a heads-up that DPR (which I think stands for Delayed Pentax Reviews) has finally finished their K-3 review, giving it an 83% score and their gold award. They are very positive about it on the whole (though as always they have a few niggles, particularly in video, JPEGs, and AF, and are cooler towards some features, like the AA-simulation and multi-area WB, than one might expect).

Here's the link: Pentax K-3 Review: Digital Photography Review

I found it ironic that they didn't like the JPG sharpening, considering that I found the K-3 to have by far the most versatile and powerful JPG sharpening of any digital camera, ever.

Just goes to show, some people fully embrace versatility and an over-abundance of control, and other people choose to ignore or avoid it as if it's a disadvantage. Oh well.

I'm in overall agreement with other responses here, too, that while I do agree with some of their minor niggles, I don't understand their overall score. The K-3 should get an awesome ranking.

Then again, DPR barely ever gives a camera even THIS high of a score, so it's still saying quite a lot!!!!

=Matt=

[ALiEN|PoV]

Let me make one thing very clear: you say I need to keep the brand alive. I don't need to do anything, other than what I choose to do.

Your subconscious makes choices all of the time, regardless, IF you choose to or not.

[Giklab]

@Matthew Saville You are quite incorrect. They didn't ignore or put down the amount of options, they even explicitly pointed out the amount of sharpening options (and all the other options too). They just didn't like what the sharpening gave them. Let's face it, some people like one output more than some other.

I for one utterly loathe the NR algorythm. The different settings do not mean the same thing, NR High at ISO 25k is more like NR Normal at ISO 51k. The algorythm smoothes out noise but leaves ugly spots and large patches of color which are not there if NR is OFF. Seriously, have you ever compared an ISO 1600 shot with NR ON and OFF? (which brings me to how the camera misrepresents the noise above ISO 3200, but this is getting OT)
Those are my reasons, you might have different preferences.

[Rondec]

Just to clarify my opinion. I actually thought the review was well done, I just didn't like the fact that for some reason DPR decided to put the K3 in its own category, with different expectations (apparently) from the D7100 and D70, the APS-C cameras closest to it in price. It seems a little arbitrary and ends up grading the K3 against the still-mythical D400 and 7D MK II.

Funny that such a well-done review comes down to a score that seems a little at odds with the review itself.

[Giklab]

Just to clarify my opinion. I actually thought the review was well done, I just didn't like the fact that for some reason DPR decided to put the K3 in its own category, with different expectations (apparently) from the D7100 and D70, the APS-C cameras closest to it in price. It seems a little arbitrary and ends up grading the K3 against the still-mythical D400 and 7D MK II.

I see it as a confirmation that the K-3 aims above those models. A pro buying APSC would be buying for the reach, which means they probably shoot wildlife, which means they need a badass buffer (which the D7100's is very much not). Such a pro also needs a really tough body, and I think it's obvious which camera is better in that respect.

The 70D is a bit better than the D7100 WRT the buffer, but then it has a lower-specced AF system (hey, anyone notice that the K-3 outspecces the Canon here? Sign of things to come?). The 70D is also a bit better built as far as I could tell while trying it out.

The 'semi-pro' designation just screams D400 or 7DII. I dare say the author might have tried to convey that message.

[ElJamoquio]

I see it as a confirmation that the K-3 aims above those models. A pro buying APSC would be buying for the reach, which means they probably shoot wildlife, which means they need a badass buffer (which the D7100's is very much not). Such a pro also needs a really tough body, and I think it's obvious which camera is better in that respect.

That pro also needs good telephotos...?

[geomez]

All this argument about the K-3's semi-pro destination vs the mid-level designation of the 70D and D7100. And then some of us trying to justify the different designations by assuming what a "semi-professional" "needs". I just don't get it. Where is a list of DPR's guidelines for the different designations? Who says a semi-pro needs fast fps and a big buffer? Who says a semi-pro needs an all metal body vs a half-metal body like the D7100 vs an all-but-the-back-panel metal body like the K-5II?
Fact of the matter is we don't really know by what criteria DPR categorizes cameras, so it's futile to argue.
What we do know is that Canon, Nikon, and Pentax's top-of-the-line crop sensor dslrs all compete at similar price points and are all more similarly spec'ed than they are different.

[starbase218]

Your subconscious makes choices all of the time, regardless, IF you choose to or not.

Maybe, but that's not really relevant, is it? It is after all my subconscious. I trust that the choices that matter will float to the surface.

Anyway, if you still don't get me, there's no point in me trying to explain any further.

[ALiEN|PoV]

Maybe, but that's not really relevant, is it? It is after all my subconscious. I trust that the choices that matter will float to the surface.

Anyway, if you still don't get me, there's no point in me trying to explain any further.

I do, but; I disagree. Choice. And a healthy discussion of different POVs. Albeit, yours is a bit alien to me

[starbase218]

I do, but; I disagree. Choice. And a healthy discussion of different POVs. Albeit, yours is a bit alien to me

Well, I never "signed up" to help promote the Pentax brand, nor do I care much for that. Just as I don't care about promoting Panasonic just because I own a TV from them, or Apple because I'm writing this on a MacBook. Of course that's not entirely the same thing because I can still connect any blu-ray player to my TV, should Panasonic go bankrupt. But that still doesn't mean I "have to" help promote Pentax. It's my choice whether or not I want to do that, and it's not why I have the camera in the first place. So I won't, and that's that. I even changed the standard "Send from my iPhone" message on my phone to say "Typed with my hands", as a silent protest to people bragging about what they have. It's not what I have that counts, it's what I do with it, and what that means to me.

And btw, you are the alien here.

[rbefly]

They say the curse of an obsessive liar is that they must keep track of their lies; The truth is much simpler, it's the same each time.
So, apparently one reviewer at DPR didn't get the memo regarding the special new niche occupled (alone) by the K-3. It's Semi-Pro, try to remember!
A new review of the Fujifilm X-T1 EVF SLR-style camera, concludes with this line;

"The X-T1 also offers extremely strong competition to enthusiast APS-C SLRs like the Canon EOS 70D, Nikon D7100 and Pentax K-3"
Fujifilm X-T1 Review: Digital Photography Review

But that's not how the K-3 is rated now, is it?
Reviewers- Fujifilm X-T1; Andy Westlake, Jeff Keller.
Reviewers, Pentax K-3; Richard Butler, Jeff Keller.
Can we expect a flurry of damage-control quasi-explanations and clarifications, maybe even a retraction? No, I'll bet the post pointing this latest gaffe out, gets deleted (screen shot!). Too obvious ? Never stopped' em before, has it?
I was willing to forego blaming the K-3 reviewers for the transparently-biased category change. Likely that fabrication came from a higher pay grade, slanted to look like a compliment to the K-3; when it actually was intended to isolate it from the N/C rivals. So, this is a simple but embarrassing case of missed communication, an 'Whoops!' moment that serves to highlight DPR's duplicity. Happens all the time, fortunately.
The K-3's Pro-Grade, not enthusiast!
Ron

[starbase218]

They say the curse of an obsessive liar is that they must keep track of their lies; The truth is much simpler, it's the same each time.
So, apparently one reviewer at DPR didn't get the memo regarding the special new niche occupled (alone) by the K-3. It's Semi-Pro, try to remember!
A new review of the Fujifilm X-T1 EVF SLR-style camera, concludes with this line;

"The X-T1 also offers extremely strong competition to enthusiast APS-C SLRs like the Canon EOS 70D, Nikon D7100 and Pentax K-3"
Fujifilm X-T1 Review: Digital Photography Review

But that's not how the K-3 is rated now, is it?
Reviewers- Fujifilm X-T1; Andy Westlake, Jeff Keller.
Reviewers, Pentax K-3; Richard Butler, Jeff Keller.
Can we expect a flurry of damage-control quasi-explanations and clarifications, maybe even a retraction? No, I'll bet the post pointing this latest gaffe out, gets deleted (screen shot!). Too obvious ? Never stopped' em before, has it?
I was willing to forego blaming the K-3 reviewers for the transparently-biased category change. Likely that fabrication came from a higher pay grade, slanted to look like a compliment to the K-3; when it actually was intended to isolate it from the N/C rivals. So, this is a simple but embarrassing case of missed communication, an 'Whoops!' moment that serves to highlight DPR's duplicity. Happens all the time, fortunately.
The K-3's Pro-Grade, not enthusiast!
Ron

When all is said and done, it may be that the reviewers are biased against Pentax. But can you say with certainty that you are not biased towards Pentax? I think no-one can say that, ever. The real question is if the reviewers were honest with themselves.

[ElJamoquio]

I would check into if the DPR review was just ignorant as well. Most people still don't know that Fuji was (is?) lying out-there-ass about ISO sensitivity.

Until there's a decent measurement of the XT1 ISO response I would assume the DPR review is at best flawed.

My bias: I have a bias against Fuji because they lied to me (about ISO). I have a bias against Pentax because they lied to me (about raising their prices). I have a bias against Nikon because their UI is meant to torture my fingers and brain. I have a bias against Sony because they screwed a friend of mine in a business deal.

My bias is strongest against Fuji I think.