Hmmmm... A bit disappointed

jayman_1975 · 01-08-2015, 07:58 PM

Just got my k3 in the mail yesterday..... It was one of two that I ordered from different places and the following applies to both copies so the lemon factor is not an issue here. I have turned off in camera NR exactly as I have done in my k5II. Having compared sample shots with the same lens (d fa 50 macro and da 50 1.8)

I can honestly say the k5ii produces noticeably sharper images.... Jpg out of camera. Now before everyone tells me not to shoot JPEG because of all the reasons, I can get really nice jpgs out of the k5II and I find it's easier than having to edit 1000 holiday pics. When I'm shooting for utmost quality i shoot raw. Are you telling me that the k3 is useless for shooting JPEG and if I want decent pics I have to shoot them all in raw with this camera? I bought this because I wanted better, faster autofocus but not at the expense of being able to kick out really good jpgs, which my k5II did a great job of.

Just a note, this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed and roughly 1000-1250 ISO. It was like a blizzard outside so I couldn't do any outdoor testing. I really hope things change with better light, but if that's the case then I don't see why everyone raves about the k3. I do have to say I really like the new button layout and changes to the user interface. If I can get this shooting like my k5II I can see I'll prefer it.

Last note, I checked lens focus and both the dfa 50 2.8 macro and the da 50 1.8 are dead on

Adam · 01-08-2015, 08:07 PM

Originally posted by jayman_1975

Just a note, this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed and roughly 1000-1250 ISO. It was like a blizzard outside so I couldn't do any outdoor testing. I really hope things change with better light, but if that's the case then I don't see why everyone raves about the k3. I do have to say I really like the new button layout and changes to the user interface. If I can get this shooting like my k5II I can see I'll prefer it.

Indoor tests like that don't say much about a camera. Take it outside once the weather subsides and you'll be very pleased

But I will say one thing: the higher you crank up the ISO, the less of a benefit you get from the K-3's added resolution. Also, at lower ISOs it's generally better to leave in-camera noise reduction off, as it blurs detail.

jayman_1975 · 01-08-2015, 08:11 PM

One other thing, I have read that the k3 has better noise control when reduced to the k5 resolution instead of at full 24mp. I'm not sure if this is part of the issue here but I did look into dropping the resolution but the next step down is 14mp which is actually lower than the k5.

r0ckstarr · 01-08-2015, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by jayman_1975

this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed

I'm willing to bet there's some motion blur there. Got any examples to post?

Last edited by r0ckstarr; 01-24-2015 at 02:43 AM. Reason: spelling

jayman_1975 · 01-08-2015, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by r0ckstarr

I'm willing to be there's some motion blur there. Got any examples to post?

I was so frustrated I just deleted everything. Tomorrow I'll do round two and get some examples

---------- Post added 01-08-15 at 09:50 PM ----------

So at 1/20 you think the SR. isn't cutting it? I can shoot to almost 1/10 with my k5II free hand. Seems like a step back. Guess I shoulda done my homework a bit better.

r0ckstarr · 01-08-2015, 08:58 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jayman_1975

So at 1/20 you think the SR. isn't cutting it? I can shoot to almost 1/10 with my k5II free hand. Seems like a step back. Guess I shoulda done my homework a bit better.

No, I am not saying the camera is the fault. Without a sample to show, there isn't much more to say. You're going from a 16mp camera to a 23mp camera. You're going to notice things (user error, technique, ect.) a lot more clearly with the larger resolution that you didn't see in the smaller K5 images.

Post an example and we can go from there.

Shamwow · 01-08-2015, 09:41 PM

Are you viewing 100% crops or looking at pictures the same size? Comparing 100% crops doesn't really make sense.
Also, comparing photos at that shutter speed is adding too much room for error.

Stoogie · 01-08-2015, 11:34 PM

I went through the same thing when I upgraded from a k-5ii to my k-3. Try putting it on a tripod and you'll see that it's not the camera, it's just a bit more difficult to shoot hand held, maybe due to the higher pixel count. Motion blur seems to show up more, but it does force you to use better technique

abmj · 01-08-2015, 11:44 PM - **1 Like**

Let's see. Lens completely opened away from the sweet spot, ISO 1250, handheld at 1/20 and shot indoors with no flash. And you are not getting sharp images.

Imagine that!

Have you done any adjustments to the in-camera sharpness, contrast, noise control, etc? The factory defaults aren't going to give the best possible results under such difficult conditions.

I agree with Adam. Try it again under somewhat better shooting conditions before drawing any conclusions.

Unregistered User · 01-09-2015, 01:52 AM

Originally posted by jayman_1975

I was so frustrated I just deleted everything. Tomorrow I'll do round two and get some examples

---------- Post added 01-08-15 at 09:50 PM ----------

So at 1/20 you think the SR. isn't cutting it? I can shoot to almost 1/10 with my k5II free hand. Seems like a step back. Guess I shoulda done my homework a bit better.

You have gone from 16 to 24 MP so you will have to use a little bit faster shutter speeds to get the sharpness. I had the same experience and was, as you, disappointed at first. Now I can use slower speeds than when I got it due to better technique. The same happened to the Nikon guys when the D800 came. There are a few threads with insights on these issues.

Obin Robinson · 01-09-2015, 04:39 AM - **1 Like**

I think you're going to need to give it a little more time. When I got my K-3 it was an upgrade from my K-m. At first I thought "this is nice but not as nice as I thought it would be." What I didn't factor is that I had years to perfect my K-m but no time to explore the capability of the K-3. Learn all the modes and all the adjustments you can make with the K-3. Once you get the hang of it you'll find yourself taking photos which will exceed what you can do with the K-5II.

obin

Transit · 01-09-2015, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by jayman_1975

Just got my k3 in the mail yesterday..... It was one of two that I ordered from different places and the following applies to both copies so the lemon factor is not an issue here. I have turned off in camera NR exactly as I have done in my k5II. Having compared sample shots with the same lens (d fa 50 macro and da 50 1.8)

I can honestly say the k5ii produces noticeably sharper images.... Jpg out of camera. Now before everyone tells me not to shoot JPEG because of all the reasons, I can get really nice jpgs out of the k5II and I find it's easier than having to edit 1000 holiday pics. When I'm shooting for utmost quality i shoot raw. Are you telling me that the k3 is useless for shooting JPEG and if I want decent pics I have to shoot them all in raw with this camera? I bought this because I wanted better, faster autofocus but not at the expense of being able to kick out really good jpgs, which my k5II did a great job of.

Just a note, this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed and roughly 1000-1250 ISO. It was like a blizzard outside so I couldn't do any outdoor testing. I really hope things change with better light, but if that's the case then I don't see why everyone raves about the k3. I do have to say I really like the new button layout and changes to the user interface. If I can get this shooting like my k5II I can see I'll prefer it.

Last note, I checked lens focus and both the dfa 50 2.8 macro and the da 50 1.8 are dead on

lucky you haven't got the K-5iis then

stevebrot · 01-09-2015, 09:07 AM

Less sharp photos? It is the curse of higher resolution. Repeat your tests with a tripod and close attention to focus and prepare to be amazed.

Steve

wibbly · 01-09-2015, 09:11 AM

sounds like you're actively looking for problems, and may be inventing ones that aren't problems at all.

it's something everyone does, but don't jump to conclusions.

there are so many threads about this exact conclusion made by people who JUST got the k3, have a peek.

johnmflores · 01-09-2015, 09:19 AM - **1 Like**

Send the bad K-3s to me and I will take care of them.

01-08-2015, 07:58 PM	#1
jayman_1975 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Posts: 385	Hmmmm... A bit disappointed Just got my k3 in the mail yesterday..... It was one of two that I ordered from different places and the following applies to both copies so the lemon factor is not an issue here. I have turned off in camera NR exactly as I have done in my k5II. Having compared sample shots with the same lens (d fa 50 macro and da 50 1.8) I can honestly say the k5ii produces noticeably sharper images.... Jpg out of camera. Now before everyone tells me not to shoot JPEG because of all the reasons, I can get really nice jpgs out of the k5II and I find it's easier than having to edit 1000 holiday pics. When I'm shooting for utmost quality i shoot raw. Are you telling me that the k3 is useless for shooting JPEG and if I want decent pics I have to shoot them all in raw with this camera? I bought this because I wanted better, faster autofocus but not at the expense of being able to kick out really good jpgs, which my k5II did a great job of. Just a note, this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed and roughly 1000-1250 ISO. It was like a blizzard outside so I couldn't do any outdoor testing. I really hope things change with better light, but if that's the case then I don't see why everyone raves about the k3. I do have to say I really like the new button layout and changes to the user interface. If I can get this shooting like my k5II I can see I'll prefer it. Last note, I checked lens focus and both the dfa 50 2.8 macro and the da 50 1.8 are dead on

01-08-2015, 08:07 PM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594	Originally posted by jayman_1975 Just a note, this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed and roughly 1000-1250 ISO. It was like a blizzard outside so I couldn't do any outdoor testing. I really hope things change with better light, but if that's the case then I don't see why everyone raves about the k3. I do have to say I really like the new button layout and changes to the user interface. If I can get this shooting like my k5II I can see I'll prefer it. Indoor tests like that don't say much about a camera. Take it outside once the weather subsides and you'll be very pleased But I will say one thing: the higher you crank up the ISO, the less of a benefit you get from the K-3's added resolution. Also, at lower ISOs it's generally better to leave in-camera noise reduction off, as it blurs detail. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
I'm new here and a little disappointed	wilton	Welcomes and Introductions	48	07-01-2014 03:16 AM
Should i get a 8-bit or 10-bit (wide gamut) monitor?	HenrikDK	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	11	08-08-2013 03:51 PM
14 Bit vs 12 Bit Raw Real Life Example	cali92rs	Pentax DSLR Discussion	16	07-05-2013 01:44 PM
First shots - K5IIs.. hmmmm	JayX2A	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	20	03-10-2013 02:03 AM
People a bit playfull, just a bit	devisor	Post Your Photos!	4	10-15-2009 12:25 AM

01-08-2015, 08:11 PM	#3
jayman_1975 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Posts: 385 Original Poster	One other thing, I have read that the k3 has better noise control when reduced to the k5 resolution instead of at full 24mp. I'm not sure if this is part of the issue here but I did look into dropping the resolution but the next step down is 14mp which is actually lower than the k5.

01-08-2015, 08:13 PM	#4
r0ckstarr Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,507	Originally posted by jayman_1975 this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed I'm willing to bet there's some motion blur there. Got any examples to post? Last edited by r0ckstarr; 01-24-2015 at 02:43 AM. Reason: spelling

01-08-2015, 08:43 PM	#5
jayman_1975 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Posts: 385 Original Poster	Originally posted by r0ckstarr I'm willing to be there's some motion blur there. Got any examples to post? I was so frustrated I just deleted everything. Tomorrow I'll do round two and get some examples ---------- Post added 01-08-15 at 09:50 PM ---------- So at 1/20 you think the SR. isn't cutting it? I can shoot to almost 1/10 with my k5II free hand. Seems like a step back. Guess I shoulda done my homework a bit better.

01-08-2015, 08:58 PM - 1 Like	#6
r0ckstarr Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,507	Originally posted by jayman_1975 So at 1/20 you think the SR. isn't cutting it? I can shoot to almost 1/10 with my k5II free hand. Seems like a step back. Guess I shoulda done my homework a bit better. No, I am not saying the camera is the fault. Without a sample to show, there isn't much more to say. You're going from a 16mp camera to a 23mp camera. You're going to notice things (user error, technique, ect.) a lot more clearly with the larger resolution that you didn't see in the smaller K5 images. Post an example and we can go from there.

01-08-2015, 09:41 PM	#7
Shamwow Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: LA Posts: 90	Are you viewing 100% crops or looking at pictures the same size? Comparing 100% crops doesn't really make sense. Also, comparing photos at that shutter speed is adding too much room for error.

01-08-2015, 11:34 PM	#8
Stoogie Senior Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: Mission, B.C. Photos: Albums Posts: 166	I went through the same thing when I upgraded from a k-5ii to my k-3. Try putting it on a tripod and you'll see that it's not the camera, it's just a bit more difficult to shoot hand held, maybe due to the higher pixel count. Motion blur seems to show up more, but it does force you to use better technique

01-08-2015, 11:44 PM - 1 Like	#9
abmj Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Central California Posts: 600	Let's see. Lens completely opened away from the sweet spot, ISO 1250, handheld at 1/20 and shot indoors with no flash. And you are not getting sharp images. Imagine that! Have you done any adjustments to the in-camera sharpness, contrast, noise control, etc? The factory defaults aren't going to give the best possible results under such difficult conditions. I agree with Adam. Try it again under somewhat better shooting conditions before drawing any conclusions.

01-09-2015, 01:52 AM	#10
Unregistered User Guest	Originally posted by jayman_1975 I was so frustrated I just deleted everything. Tomorrow I'll do round two and get some examples ---------- Post added 01-08-15 at 09:50 PM ---------- So at 1/20 you think the SR. isn't cutting it? I can shoot to almost 1/10 with my k5II free hand. Seems like a step back. Guess I shoulda done my homework a bit better. You have gone from 16 to 24 MP so you will have to use a little bit faster shutter speeds to get the sharpness. I had the same experience and was, as you, disappointed at first. Now I can use slower speeds than when I got it due to better technique. The same happened to the Nikon guys when the D800 came. There are a few threads with insights on these issues.

01-09-2015, 04:39 AM - 1 Like	#11
Obin Robinson Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 272	I think you're going to need to give it a little more time. When I got my K-3 it was an upgrade from my K-m. At first I thought "this is nice but not as nice as I thought it would be." What I didn't factor is that I had years to perfect my K-m but no time to explore the capability of the K-3. Learn all the modes and all the adjustments you can make with the K-3. Once you get the hang of it you'll find yourself taking photos which will exceed what you can do with the K-5II. obin

01-09-2015, 04:48 AM	#12
Transit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Whanganui NZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,624	Originally posted by jayman_1975 Just got my k3 in the mail yesterday..... It was one of two that I ordered from different places and the following applies to both copies so the lemon factor is not an issue here. I have turned off in camera NR exactly as I have done in my k5II. Having compared sample shots with the same lens (d fa 50 macro and da 50 1.8) I can honestly say the k5ii produces noticeably sharper images.... Jpg out of camera. Now before everyone tells me not to shoot JPEG because of all the reasons, I can get really nice jpgs out of the k5II and I find it's easier than having to edit 1000 holiday pics. When I'm shooting for utmost quality i shoot raw. Are you telling me that the k3 is useless for shooting JPEG and if I want decent pics I have to shoot them all in raw with this camera? I bought this because I wanted better, faster autofocus but not at the expense of being able to kick out really good jpgs, which my k5II did a great job of. Just a note, this was all done indoors with no flash and shooting at f3.2, 1/20 shutter speed and roughly 1000-1250 ISO. It was like a blizzard outside so I couldn't do any outdoor testing. I really hope things change with better light, but if that's the case then I don't see why everyone raves about the k3. I do have to say I really like the new button layout and changes to the user interface. If I can get this shooting like my k5II I can see I'll prefer it. Last note, I checked lens focus and both the dfa 50 2.8 macro and the da 50 1.8 are dead on lucky you haven't got the K-5iis then

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-09-2015, 09:07 AM	#13
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Less sharp photos? It is the curse of higher resolution. Repeat your tests with a tripod and close attention to focus and prepare to be amazed. Steve

01-09-2015, 09:11 AM	#14
wibbly Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Edmonton Posts: 600	sounds like you're actively looking for problems, and may be inventing ones that aren't problems at all. it's something everyone does, but don't jump to conclusions. there are so many threads about this exact conclusion made by people who JUST got the k3, have a peek.

01-09-2015, 09:19 AM - 1 Like	#15
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Send the bad K-3s to me and I will take care of them.