[Rondec]

I find this comprehensive 1st hand end-user review Amazon.com: Amazon Customer's review of Pentax K-3 SLR Camera - Body Only very insightfull and plausible, because it seems diligent, knowledgeable and well balanced (he also hails the things he really likes about the K-3),

But the autofocus is the main thing he's unhappy with, see section "Reduced Auto Focus Performance (For Still Shooting)".


Because this review came out half a year after the K-3 had been launched, I think none of his experiences can be attributed to bad firmware.
He cross-references also Adams review as a backup to his findings, and I must admit I totally forgot, that already Adam's review had such AF issues on topic.

On a general note, neither such reviewers nor my mission is, to spoil any K-3 owners' joy they draw from using it in their type of photography. Demands placed on the AF vary extremely between photographers, their way-of-working, their lenses and shooting subjects. Also I couldn't care less about the AF when I was doing my landscapes and cityscapes at f/8.
Only my recent switch to people photo with 50mm/1.8 at f/1.8 changed that, so that I soak up AF reports from users with I believe have comparable high (but not unusually high) demands on the AF.

The reason this AF topic should be brought onto the table as often as possible are those:
1- to make plausible the need for a new APSC model
2- helping Ricoh to understand, why many users avoided / avoid the K-3
3- especially among the current K-5ii(s) customer base
I hope, that Ricoh also scans forums a little? If they only ever read fan statements like "for my photography with my K-3, everything is always hunky-dory", then nothing will improve in the future. Which in turn means, that further market share will be lost. Which is not in our interest in the long run.

I looked at the Amazon reviews. There are 77 reviews that are four or five stars and five that are two or three stars. It is interesting that you would choose one review to look at over everything else. It is pretty clear reading the comments on this forum and in the other reviews that people are pretty satisfied, even those coming from other brands. One reviewer says that the auto focus takes a little longer than his 60D did, but that the photos are sharper and so he is OK with that.

No camera is perfect, but my keeper rate is better with the K3 than with the K5 purely because of having smaller auto focus points and a better auto focus module. Take that for what it is worth. I have shot thousands of photos with the K5 series of cameras and thousands with the K3.

[monochrome]

When respondent after respondent gently rebuts a posters assertions, points out selective quotation, suggests the poster buy and use the product discussed rather than citing anecdote, offers reasonable suggestions and practical advice - when a poster has a singular opinion which is comtrary to the expressed experience of virtually the entire Forum and continues to assert his point (Amazon Review?? Really??) - then it comes time to boriscleto™

AF on my K-3 is much, much better than any prior Pentax camera I've used. Is it as good as the best in the industry? Probably not - they've more to do.

Is it much better the poster claims? Absolutely.

[clackers]

It is weird. Particularly when it's accepted that the screwdrive motor is faster in the K-3 than the K-5.

[Frater]

It is interesting that you would choose one review to look at

That review http://www.amazon.com/review/R2F277QUF0FO0T was prominently highlighted by Amazon as "The most helpful critical review". I find reviews with this Amazon award (actually a customer award) often most helpful myself, because my personal experience (in any product group) is, that these reviews are the ones which tell you the real truth about a product.

Too many 5* are just the usual fanboy raves, or written out of the fresh excitement wie all remember when we unboxed a new camera body the last time. They are not thorough reviews, not in the mood to consider looking for possible weaknesses, and therefore may be safely ignored w/o missing out on anything. 1* reviews are also pretty useless usually. I find those in the middle often most revealing and insightful.

No camera is perfect, but my keeper rate is better with the K3 than with the K-5

Yes, I believe that, but keep in mind, that the AF of the K-5 (original version) is regarded as very poor indeed for some tasks. K-5 users gained a lot when upgrading to the K-3, or to the K-5 II.
It's more the K-5 II users, among which some experienced a step back when "downgrading" to a K-3 (with respect to AF performance for their specific work and demand). That's a minority, I know. I just suspect that my specific work and performance demand may be very similar to these guys.

---

Last edited by Frater; 03-01-2015 at 06:00 AM.

[Rondec]

This review was prominently highlighted by Amazon as "The most helpful critical review". I find reviews with this Amazon award (actually a customer award) often most helpful myself, because my personal experience (in any product group) is, that these reviews are the ones which tell you the real truth about a product.

Too many 5* are just the usual fanboy raves, or written out of the fresh excitement wie all remember when we unboxed a new camera body the last time. They are not thorough reviews, not in the mood to consider looking for possible weaknesses, and therefore may be safely ignored w/o missing out on anything. 1* reviews are also pretty useless usually. I find those in the middle often most revealing and insightful.


Yes, I believe that, but keep in mind, that the AF of the K-5 (original version) is regarded as very poor indeed for some tasks. K-5 users gained a lot when upgrading to the K-3, or to the K-5 II.
It's more the K-5 II users, among which some experienced a step back when "downgrading" to a K-3 (with respect to AF performance for their specific work and demand). That's a minority, I know. I just suspect that my specific work and quality demand may be very similar to these guys.

I shoot with a K5 II and the K3 is better. Significantly so.

[Frater]

Maybe for you, but I suspect that I will be hit hard by the K-3 weaknesses, like http://www.amazon.com/review/R2F277QUF0FO0T has been. So the K-5ii is a comfortable and safe haven to wait for something better than the K-3, maybe.

I'm very curious about a successor, that's why I joined this thread

Ricoh shouldn't wait too long. Instead of hoping, that many APSC fans would want to own clunky, heavy and pricey FF gear out of the sudden, they should regard the APSC segment more seriously, esp. now with the added competition from Fuji with their allegedly excellent X-T1 system. Ricoh should come up with a K-3 successor quicker than Fuji with a X-T1 successor (with better body ergonomics). Furthermore there will be a Nikon D7200. It throws in an already good AF system, and could fix previous annoyances (like the small RAW buffer) easily without much investments into research&development.

[gaweidert]

An interesting review for sure. I personally have found no real issues using a tripod with mine, but I mostly use manual focus legacy glass. I do think that he overstates his case a bit but everyone has their hot buttons.

To base auto focus performance on a piece of third party glass that many people have had focus issues with is a bit harsh. By his own account, the Pentax glass he used performed flawlessly. The Tamron 28-75 lens is a real love it or hate it piece of glass. Reviews are all over the place on that glass and on several different camera brands too. I looked long and hard at the reviews of the Tamron 28-75 before settling upon the Sigma 17-70 instead. Focus confirmation on my K3 is definitely better than on my k5 or even my K5-IIs.

[normhead]

This is clearly a guy who can't learn anything from the folks on the forum.... he's read Amazon and his mind is made up.

OK some comments on your Amazon user... the guy is a clown. I use my K-3 on tripod all the time and his comments a idiocy. You have to look through the tripod to frame, in live view everything is displayed, or you can use your iPad and fulcra if you want to sit beside the camera. OI find none of his menu p;cement complaints valid, He sounds like a guy who hasn't used the camera much. Recently I went back to my K-20D and had many of the same issues. COuldn't find the buttons, some of them were in the wrong place. The menu button was just totally wrong. When I was familiar with the camera none of those things were an issue. After a couple of years with a K-5 and K-3 and a year with the K-3 none of the issue are legit.

SO, I would reject almost everyone of this guy's complaints as stuff you get used to as you use the camera.

As for the K-3 auto-focus thing. Pop Photo actually ran a test... and found the K-3 focussed slightly faster than the D7100 and tracked slightly worse. So here's the thing... they actually set up some kind of test and timed the cameras. I don't care whether it feels faster, if there's an illusion that makes it seem faster I'd like results from a test, not an opinion. SO I use this information to rate the reviewer. Not the other way around. Is someone else wants to crank a lens out to infinity and see how long it gets to minimum focus with some kind of timing mechanism that's great, I'd like to see their results. I absolutely will not take the word of someone's impression over someone who did an actual test.

Anyway frater... I'm dismissing you as a troll. You are officially boricletoed. There are a number of reasons for this...your mind is made up, you're not going to change it because of anything I say, so why would I respond to you... you made me read an Amazon review that was absolute idiocy, just to understand what you were talking about, did you honestly think anyone who's taken 25,000 images with this camera was going to agree with that assessment?... and IMHO it was truly a waste of time.. written by someone without a lot of camera time, and it seriously calls into question your judgement in selecting information on the camera. Furthermore, if you get sucked in by stuff like that, you clearly have a preference for the negative. There are hundreds of positive reviews for the K-3 out there, and you have to go to someplace like Amazon reviews to find something that you can believe...

Enough time wasted.... you're Boriscletoed...

[Frater]

I'm surprised about your fierce fanboy attitude. There's no reason for that.

I discovered the excellent Amazon review only yesterday. My decision to better skip the K-3 is a year old, and was based on experiences of a couple of forum users, which made an upgrade from a K-5ii (not from the K-5) to the K-3, and reported a higher failure rate on blurry photos due to AF misses or reduced SR effectiveness, which they were not used to before. Their statements and analyses had and have a much higher credibility to me, as the usual blurb of an usual fanboy defending his beloved gear mindlessly.

[thibs]

Yes there're reasons for that.
I'm really annoyed by all his FUD.
Boriscletoed.

[Frater]

I suggest, everyone who's 100% happy with his K-3, wouldn't be interested in a successor anyway, therefore shouldn't be in this thread
(Only joking, of course everyone would be curious).


But if this thread doesn't get rid of the fanboys (they usually stay to the bitter end), then let's at least follow the
fanboy's code of conduct it's rules are simple enough, so that even fanboys can follow it easily:

§ 1: If someone identifies a design flaw on your camera model, respond:
- you are a troll
- your unit is broken and requires servicing
- you are the problem, you must have used it in some wrong way
- it'll shurely be fixed via firmware soon
- you do pixelpeeping, go out and just take photographs

§ 2: If someone identifies a design flaw on a competitor's model, respond:
- oh yeah so true, well spotted!
- excellent write-up
- very well known issue
- always been like that, and will always be, with that brand
- thanks for telling the truth

[derekkite]

Maybe for you, but I suspect that I will be hit hard by the K-3 weaknesses, like Amazon.com: Amazon Customer's review of Pentax K-3 SLR Camera - Body Only has been. So the K-5ii is a comfortable and safe haven to wait for something better than the K-3, maybe.

I'm very curious about a successor, that's why I joined this thread

Ricoh shouldn't wait too long. Instead of hoping, that many APSC fans would want to own clunky, heavy and pricey FF gear out of the sudden, they should regard the APSC segment more seriously, esp. now with the added competition from Fuji with their allegedly excellent X-T1 system. Ricoh should come up with a K-3 successor quicker than Fuji with a X-T1 successor (with better body ergonomics). Furthermore there will be a Nikon D7200. It throws in an already good AF system, and could fix previous annoyances (like the small RAW buffer) easily without much investments into research&development.

You are trolling. Get some experience with the K-3, then come back. We are all intimately acquainted with the quirks advantages and failings of the K-3 because we all shoot hundreds of shots a week with it.

If all you are doing is quoting reviews of others, maybe you could dig through the long threads that I personally posted reviewing the autofocus of the K-3 based on my personal experience. Maybe you can quote when I said that the DA*300 was like a new lens on the K-3.

Stop trolling, you are not welcome here.

---------- Post added 03-01-15 at 07:34 AM ----------

I suggest, everyone who's 100% happy with his K-3, wouldn't be interested in a successor anyway, therefore shouldn't be in this thread
(Only joking, of course everyone would be curious).


But if this thread doesn't get rid of the fanboys (they usually stay to the bitter end), then let's at least follow the
fanboy's code of conduct it's rules are simple enough, so that even fanboys can follow it easily:

§ 1: If someone identifies a design flaw on your camera model, respond:
- you are a troll
- your unit is broken and requires servicing
- you are the problem, you must have used it in some wrong way
- it'll shurely be fixed via firmware soon
- you do pixelpeeping, go out and just take photographs

§ 2: If someone identifies a design flaw on a competitor's model, respond:
- oh yeah so true, well spotted!
- excellent write-up
- very well known issue
- always been like that, and will always be, with that brand
- thanks for telling the truth

You are going over the top. Fanboys. Bah. Go to some of those who responded and look at the photos they have posted to this site. These are serious amateur photographers who know intimately the hardware far better than you can imagine.

We have been polite. I'm through with polite. Get out of here.

[Frater]

Get some experience with the K-3, then come back

No most likely not. I am interested in the K-3 successor, not in the K-3, that's why I joined this thread.
I skipped the K-3 and just made the reasons clear for that.

To call a Pentaxian a troll just because of this decision and justification is not OK.

I said that the DA*300 was like a new lens on the K-3

I don't and didn't challenge that. It is also my impression from my forum readings, that there are lenses which like the K-3 AF, and benefit from it.

[aleonx3]

No most likely not. I am interested in the K-3 successor, not in the K-3, that's why I joined this thread.
I skipped the K-3 and just made the reasons clear for that.

To call a Pentaxian a troll just because of this decision and justification is not OK.


I don't and didn't challenge that. It is also my impression from my forum readings, that there are lenses which like the K-3 AF, and benefit from it.

I have both k-5IIs and k-3 and I do not agree with the review you referred to at the Amazon site. I have shots events after events using both cameras, I do find that the k-3 both focuses better and with better AWB than my k-5IIs; plus I can crop without fear of losing too much pixels.

Sure, the k-3 successor (when it is released) will be better in almost every aspect of it. But for price that you can get on a k-3 (especially during the last few promotions), where can you find such as fine camera at such a low price? It is a no-brainer to me anyway....

And you are basing one person's view on your judgement of the entire camera?

[Frater]

And you are basing one person's view on your judgement of the entire camera?

No of course not. As said before, I stumbled over that review yesterday, but my decision to skip the K-3 is a year old, and based on forum discussions, not on formal reviews and not on Amazon customers.

Now, a year later, one could re-consider. But it is too late probably, now that a successor becomes more likely? What are the signs?

• Many take the lowered US prices and frequent promotions as an early sign of stock clearance for a direct APSC successor.
• Getting customers used to low prices with frequent promotions cannot be the long-term agenda for a top-of-the-line model?
• Someone stated, that statistically, Pentax APSC bodys have been replaced after 14 months on average. That would be due now. OK, let's allow some more time this time because of the FF development.

What are the signs against it?

• No rumors yet
• Ricoh may see it as more profitable to postpone the K-3 successor launch after the FF launch. What, if the FF is expensive but a real big-bang? Then a good number of Pentaxians wanted to get it immediately, without waiting for a K-3 successor.
  But if the K-3 successor was launched first or at the same time, and shared most technology advances with the FF, just the sensor being a bit smaller, and overall much cheaper, then this would be the body most Pentaxians wanted to go for.