Originally posted by Spodeworld In addition, Pentax Forums In Depth Review (and Administrator "Adam") has constantly remarked that the K3 really only shoots well with SDM/DC based lenses, and is more "picky" about the lenses used with it.
Read the review on this site and you will find that the Amazon reviewer has a reading problem. The PF review does not say those things.
Was it the June 12, 2014 by "Amazon Customer"? I just read that one in detail and while not pure bull, it is pretty stinky. There are a lot of words, but it is obviously the user is either easily confused or has very limited experience with the K-3. To be blunt, my experience with the K-3 fully contradicts the review's list of cons and faults. None of an substance are valid and many simply don't make sense.* My read on the review is that the user has discovered that the K-3 is not a K-5 and that the differences are more than they can handle.
If you want a balanced and accurate review, go to Imaging Resources.
Edit: If the reviewer is a member on this site, I offer my apologies, but stand by my opinion and analysis.
Steve
* I still don't understand the described difficulties with on-tripod work. There is a dedicated button for meter mode and the info is displayed on both the top and rear LCD. Go figure...
---------- Post added 12-01-14 at 11:15 AM ----------
Originally posted by JinDesu If I were to hazard a guess, the k-3's higher resolution allows the user to see where things start being OOF easier
Exactly! That is a well-known side-effect of high resolution media going back a hundred years or more. You can't see what is not there.
Steve
---------- Post added 12-01-14 at 11:38 AM ----------
Originally posted by Spodeworld Also, he wrote:
"DP Review severely down graded the score for Auto Focus Accuracy for the K3 vs the K5 which is rated very high.
This is not true. DPReview did not compare the K-3 to the K-5*, nor did they have issues with the K-3 AF accuracy. They did have strong criticism of the AF tracking (AF-C) for subjects moving directly toward the camera. This they blamed on the AF speed of the in-lens motors and not on the camera.
Steve
* The DPR review of the K-5 AF system from 2010 was favorable, but was listed as a con in the summary. The 2013 review of the K-5II/IIs indicated an improvement in the AF system over the K-5, specifically in low light where the K-3 cleans house. The approaching subject tracking test was not done on any K-5 variant.