[AIW]

Hi there!,

New to the forum and new to DSLR photography in general. I've always been an avid fan of photography but found it to be quite an expensive hobby to get into, nonetheless, our local electronics store was trying to clear their inventory of Pentax products, and since my dad was a Pentax shooter back in the day and he had a few nice lenses, I finally decided to pull the trigger on a Pentax K3 which I got, brand-new, with a 50-200mm f4.5-5.6 lens for $369.99.

I've been using it for 8 months now and to be honest, I am not getting the results I was expecting. I understand that a photo is as good as the person taking it and I believe that has been the case 90% of the time but I am not getting the sharpness (like the Canon 60/70D & Nikon D7xxx series) out the images that I was expecting from a mid-range semi-pro camera, it might be something to do with the setting perhaps? If so, then can somebody guide me? The lenses I use are the following;

1. Pentax SMC Pentax DA 50-200mm f/4-5.6 ED WR
2. SMC Pentax-M 50mm F1.4
3. Soligor 24mm f2.5
4. SMC Pentax-M 28mm F2.8

Moreover, as soon as I take a photo, in the preview there seems to be some sort of pattern imprinted on the photo, which can be seen briefly in the gallery but then it disappears. Any idea why this happens? Is it normal? Is my camera faulty?

Lastly, can you guys list down a selection of lenses for the K3? Lenses that are under 80mm focal length and under F3.5 aperture.

Apologies in advance, if my post seems dumb, I am just a beginner.

I'd appreciate any help that I can get. Thanks!

[Adam]

To be honest those aren't the sharpest lenses, so they're probably holding you back a bit (with the exception of the M 50mm). It's better to have a good lens on a worse camera than a worse lens on a good camera. High-resolution cameras like the K-3 are particularly sensitive to good shooting technique and sharp lenses.

Since you got the combo so cheap, do you think there might be something wrong with it? That's less than 50% of its current market value.

Anyway, could you post an example of a photo you're not happy with? That might help us help you with your technique

As for the pattern you're describing, it could just be the file loading. Sometimes, you'll be shown a low-resolution or low-quality thumbnail first.

Lastly, can you guys list down a selection of lenses for the K3? Lenses that are under 80mm focal length and under F3.5 aperture.

Here you go This list includes genuine Pentax lenses only:

<= 80mm <= F3.5 Lenses | PentaxForums.com

I'd recommend the DA 16-85mm (not listed above unless you increase the search to 85mm) as a high-quality everyday lens. It could replace all your existing lenses for everyday shooting.

[rrstuff]

The 50-200 is not a very sharp lens. There are user reviews here on the forum that you should check out. If you can return it I would do that, and get a 16-85 instead. The prime lenses are ok, especially the pentax ones, but they will be hard to focus wide open and they might not be as sharp as modern lenses. Good cheap normal zooms are sigma 17-50, tamron 17-50, pentax 16-45. A good cheap prime to start with is 35 F2.4, or any of the DA limited lenses which are quite cheap on the used market. For a long zoom, I know people like the DA 55-300, but I found it not that sharp. On the other hand, I am quite happy with a sigma 50-150 F2.8, which can be a bit hard to find. Overall K-3 should be about as sharp as the D7100 and sharper than the canon 80D.

[redcat]

I finally decided to pull the trigger on a Pentax K3 which I got, brand-new, with a 50-200mm f4.5-5.6 lens for $369.99.

where did you get that K3 for 369$ ? one thing you should consider is the focus, did you calibrate your lens to focus correctly ? it's more about nailing focus than sharpness of the lens/camera as K3 is an award winning camera (best of the class). I'll paste here some of my photos shot with K3 and a dirty cheap lens (helios, takumar, coslinar) so you can check the sharpness

[Obin Robinson]

Welcome to the forum! I have a K3 and I love inexpensive lenses. I have a few questions for you?

1) Are you shooting the right shutter speed for the focal length? Check this video:

You Tube

You Tube

2) RAW images are fairly flat. Are you adjusting color saturation, contrast, and sharpness when you edit the images? Are you adjusting them too much?

3) Are you using a tripod or are you relying on shake reduction?

You Tube

You Tube

4) Are any of your lenses hazy and affected by balsam separation or fungus?

You Tube

You Tube

I had the same problems you are experiencing when I first bought my K-m years ago. After following some tips I took much better photos.

obin

[AIW]

To be honest those aren't the sharpest lenses, so they're probably holding you back a bit (with the exception of the M 50mm). It's better to have a good lens on a worse camera than a worse lens on a good camera. High-resolution cameras like the K-3 are particularly sensitive to good shooting technique and sharp lenses.

Actually, the Soligor 24mm has been much sharper than the m-50, lol.

Since you got the combo so cheap, do you think there might be something wrong with it? That's less than 50% of its current market value.

To be honest, I have no idea, what are the common problems that arise in the K-3, I had read that there was a recall for K3 camera's back when they were relatively new.

As for the pattern you're describing, it could just be the file loading. Sometimes, you'll be shown a low-resolution or low-quality thumbnail first.

Not sure, its kinda annoying, lol

Here you go This list includes genuine Pentax lenses only:

<= 80mm <= F3.5 Lenses | PentaxForums.com

I'd recommend the DA 16-85mm (not listed above unless you increase the search to 85mm) as a high-quality everyday lens. It could replace all your existing lenses for everyday shooting.

I am looking for the sharpest lenses that are available on the k-mount, if the 16-85 is a good lens, I'll definitely look into it!

Anyway, could you post an example of a photo you're not happy with? That might help us help you with your technique

Here you go

[AIW]

The 50-200 is not a very sharp lens. There are user reviews here on the forum that you should check out. If you can return it I would do that, and get a 16-85 instead. The prime lenses are ok, especially the pentax ones, but they will be hard to focus wide open and they might not be as sharp as modern lenses. Good cheap normal zooms are sigma 17-50, tamron 17-50, pentax 16-45. A good cheap prime to start with is 35 F2.4, or any of the DA limited lenses which are quite cheap on the used market. For a long zoom, I know people like the DA 55-300, but I found it not that sharp. On the other hand, I am quite happy with a sigma 50-150 F2.8, which can be a bit hard to find. Overall K-3 should be about as sharp as the D7100 and sharper than the canon 80D.

Thank you!

[AIW]

where did you get that K3 for 369$ ? one thing you should consider is the focus, did you calibrate your lens to focus correctly ? it's more about nailing focus than sharpness of the lens/camera as K3 is an award winning camera (best of the class). I'll paste here some of my photos shot with K3 and a dirty cheap lens (helios, takumar, coslinar) so you can check the sharpness

Haha, here where I live, brands like Pentax/Sony do not sell well, at all. People live happily in the elitist Canon/Nikon bubble the K3 was part of a stock ordered by the retailer back in 2013, and over the years, they were only able to sell about a 100 units, yes, ~100 units in 3 years, so in-order to get rid of the remaining stock, they sold each camera at a loss. They sold 50mm f1.4's for around $100 and the 18-135mm's for around the same price.

---------- Post added 11-01-16 at 04:14 AM ----------

Welcome to the forum! I have a K3 and I love inexpensive lenses. I have a few questions for you?

Thank you!

1) Are you shooting the right shutter speed for the focal length? Check this video:
Shutter speed vs focal length - YouTube

I always shoot in the Av Aperture priority mode, manual is still a bit tricky for me

2) RAW images are fairly flat. Are you adjusting color saturation, contrast, and sharpness when you edit the images? Are you adjusting them too much?

I shoot mostly JPEG's as I am new to photography, so post processing RAW's is something that I haven't looked into yet.

3) Are you using a tripod or are you relying on shake reduction?
4 Reasons Why You Should Travel with a Tripod: Exploring Photography with Mark Wallace: AdoramaTV - YouTube

I mostly shoot without a tripod and rely on the shake-reduction. I was told that SR softens the image at times, maybe that's the reason for the lack of sharpness?

4) Are any of your lenses hazy and affected by balsam separation or fungus?
Identifying Lens Haze and Understanding Why it's Bad - YouTube

The lenses are still in pretty nice condition, but I'll definitely check.

I had the same problems you are experiencing when I first bought my K-m years ago. After following some tips I took much better photos.

obin

Thanks!

[Murfy]

if you are shooting jpg, check the noise reduction settings. I think there is a high iso and a slow shutter speed one. If the settings are for more noise reduction, they will definitely look soft. If you use a tripod, shake reduction should be off, I don't know the technical aspects, but it does cause issues.
I had a heck of time when I first got my k3, it was so much more advanced than I was used to. After checking the noise reduction and other jpg settings, maybe calibrate the lens.

[AIW]

if you are shooting jpg, check the noise reduction settings. I think there is a high iso and a slow shutter speed one. If the settings are for more noise reduction, they will definitely look soft. If you use a tripod, shake reduction should be off, I don't know the technical aspects, but it does cause issues.
I had a heck of time when I first got my k3, it was so much more advanced than I was used to. After checking the noise reduction and other jpg settings, maybe calibrate the lens.

Thanks!

Will definitely look into the NR settings as I am pretty sure its on Auto right now. And how does one calibrate a lens?.

[Pixelhdr]

Here is my take based on the pictures you posted.

1st picture: very slow shutter speed, I assume it was taken hand held. A little bit of camera motion can significantly reduce sharpness. The low contrast scene is not helping either, giving the impression of low sharpness.

Night scenes: aperture (f/22) too small. While depth of field increases with decreasing aperture, diffraction also becomes worse with decreasing aperture. "Best" aperture is typically around f/8. The scenes have large dynamic range. It seems that you exposed for the shadow; the bright areas were over-exposed and hence impression of poor sharpness. You may want to experiment with different exposure time and then process the raw files to bring out the shadow details.

[othar]

I always shoot in the Av Aperture priority mode, manual is still a bit tricky for me

To achieve correct exposure the camera has to adjust the shutter speed for a given Aperture and ISO (or auto ISO range depending on your settings), therefore it is possible that your shutter speeds are too slow for your focal length (your first picture has a slow shutter speed for a 50mm lens for instance)
another problem of your cityscapes might be that your aperture is too warrow (f/22) and diffraction reduces sharpness.

[CarlJF]

1st picture: shutter speed is way too slow. Unless you have a perfectly still subject, never go below 1/(2 x focal length). And if people on the pictures are not still, don't hesitate to go 2-3 time faster than this. In your picture with the 50mm, this means 1/100 shutter speed or, even better since the guy is obviously not static, 1/200 to 1/300...


Night scenes: At f/22, the picture will beging to significantly suffers from diffraction. Unless absolutely needed, with most lens don't close more than about f/11 to get the best picture quality.


Last picture: I guess this was taken wide open, or at least this looks like it. It's probably just a case of a lens softness when used wide open. Solution is either to close it down 1-2 stop, get a better lens, or accept that this lens will not give you perfectly sharp results wide open... Also, even with stabilization, 1/3 sec. shutter speed is pushing it hard and some hand shake blur might be present. I would not expect 100% clear shots Under these conditions. Again, a slightly faster shutter speed would have helped.

[AIW]

Here is my take based on the pictures you posted.

1st picture: very slow shutter speed, I assume it was taken hand held. A little bit of camera motion can significantly reduce sharpness. The low contrast scene is not helping either, giving the impression of low sharpness.

Night scenes: aperture (f/22) too small. While depth of field increases with decreasing aperture, diffraction also becomes worse with decreasing aperture. "Best" aperture is typically around f/8. The scenes have large dynamic range. It seems that you exposed for the shadow; the bright areas were over-exposed and hence impression of poor sharpness. You may want to experiment with different exposure time and then process the raw files to bring out the shadow details.

lol, the first photo was actually taken on a tripod.

So, you're suggesting that I use f/8 for night-time landscape shots? Thanks for the advice though, appreciate it.

---------- Post added 11-01-16 at 06:40 AM ----------

To achieve correct exposure the camera has to adjust the shutter speed for a given Aperture and ISO (or auto ISO range depending on your settings), therefore it is possible that your shutter speeds are too slow for your focal lens (your first picture has a slow shutter speed for a 50mm lens for instance)
another problem of your cityscapes might be that your aperture is too warrow (f/22) and diffraction reduces sharpness.

In aperture priority, the shutter speed is automatically set by the camera, based on the aperture of the lens, right? In that case, 1/13th was selected by the camera itself. Mind you, the shot was taken wide-open at f/1.4.

---------- Post added 11-01-16 at 06:45 AM ----------

1st picture: shutter speed is way too slow. Unless you have a perfectly still subject, never go below 1/(2 x focal length). And if people on the pictures are not still, don't hesitate to go 2-3 time faster than this. In your picture with the 50mm, this means 1/100 shutter speed or, even better since the guy is obviously not static, 1/200 to 1/300...

But in the light conditions that I took that particular photo in, 1/100th shutter speed would've given me nothing but pitch black.

Night scenes: At f/22, the picture will beging to significantly suffers from diffraction. Unless absolutely needed, with most lens don't close more than about f/11 to get the best picture quality.

Understood.

Last picture: I guess this was taken wide open, or at least this looks like it. It's probably just a case of a lens softness when used wide open. Solution is either to close it down 1-2 stop, get a better lens, or accept that this lens will not give you perfectly sharp results wide open... Also, even with stabilization, 1/3 sec. shutter speed is pushing it hard and some hand shake blur might be present. I would not expect 100% clear shots Under these conditions. Again, a slightly faster shutter speed would have helped.

Actually, for this particular shot, the camera was resting on the same marble slab as the subject itself and moreover, I always use a 2 second-timer to reduce any chance of handshake whatsoever.

[freddyisaac]

Hi,

I would say that the pattern you are seeing is just the jpeg engine rendering in layers of detail. jpgs are based on discrete cosine transforms and as they are decoded they are added in layers to avoid large pauses prior to rendering. This happens a lot on my K7 - I thought it was just because the K7 engine was slow (albeit 14Mpixels) but I don't have a K3 to compare. My nikon D3200 does the same as it also has a 24Mp sensor.

Used to be a common term in imagine processing LOD (Level of Detail) used back for processing of muti-resolution images but as most of these things are hardware based and multi-core cpus have exploded in throughput the term seems to have died away a bit.

always willing to be wrong though.