The K-3 line will continue!

**Pål Jensen** · 05-01-2018, 04:56 AM

Too much pixelpeeping....

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 05-01-2018 at 12:20 PM.

**lsimpkins** · 05-01-2018, 05:54 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Chris Mak

An option might be, for Pentax to make the image processing user selectable.

Chris

That's an option I would certainly be in favor of.

Chris Mak · 05-01-2018, 06:29 AM - **2 Likes**

Here is an example of an image "look and feel" that I could not reproduce with the KP. The KP images could look very nice, but for me something was missing, the images looked too "graphic", too "smooth" and sometimes a bit plasticky in appearance compared to the very natural look (to my eyes at least) of the K3. There is some sharpening, but still modest, and very little artifacts

As far as I am concerend, there is certainly potential in the new Pentax approach: images have far less noise at higher iso values retain have far better color at iso 1600 and up. But the thing is, I mostly shoot the DA560 at iso 100-400/800, so for me the look at these lower iso settings is far more important.

Chris

Chris Mak · 05-01-2018, 07:05 AM - **1 Like**

Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. Although incomparable (the KP rendering cán look very beautiful), nonetheless these show something of what is to my eyes the more natural rendering of the K3 opposed to the slightly artificial and "plasticky" look of the KP. The difference in look between these two images, is what I see in many KP images: bokeh is less natural, the sharpness is there, but the impression remains that there is not the fine rendering of the K3 that makes images look very realistic.
Again, the KP has a lot of strong points versus the K3, and it may well be an issue to my eyes and not to others, but I find that my simply DA560 performs better and more natural on the K3. First shot is the K3.

Chris

Last edited by Chris Mak; 05-14-2018 at 04:43 PM.

reh321 · 05-01-2018, 07:12 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Chris Mak

Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. Although incomparable (the KP rendering cán look very beautiful), nonetheless these show something of what is to my eyes the more natural rendering of the K3 opposed to the slightly artificial and "plasticky" look of the KP. The difference in look between these two images, is what I see in many KP images: bokeh is less natural, the sharpness is there, but the impression remains that there is not the fine rendering of the K3 that makes images look very realistic.
Again, the KP has a lot of strong points versus the K3, and it may well be an issue to my eyes and not to others, but I find that my simply DA560 performs better and more natural on the K3. First shot is the K3.

Chris

To my eye, KP look like film renditions.
I'm great with that.

Chris Mak · 05-01-2018, 07:38 AM

Originally posted by reh321

To my eye, KP look like film renditions.
I'm great with that.

For general shooting, I might even agree...

photoptimist · 05-01-2018, 08:11 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Chris Mak

Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. Although incomparable (the KP rendering cán look very beautiful), nonetheless these show something of what is to my eyes the more natural rendering of the K3 opposed to the slightly artificial and "plasticky" look of the KP. The difference in look between these two images, is what I see in many KP images: bokeh is less natural, the sharpness is there, but the impression remains that there is not the fine rendering of the K3 that makes images look very realistic.
Again, the KP has a lot of strong points versus the K3, and it may well be an issue to my eyes and not to others, but I find that my simply DA560 performs better and more natural on the K3. First shot is the K3.

Chris

Nice shots!

To my eye, the differences in the images are entirely caused by the huge in differences in lighting and weather conditions. In both shots, the bird's bill is nicely colorful so both cameras are handling color well and in the same way. But everything in the rest of the second scene looks much drier and dustier. It doesn't help that the first image has mostly vertical reeds (which tend to reveal the color of the vegetation) and the second image has horizontal reeds reflecting the sky and thus without color.

It's too bad you have no shots of the identical scene under identical lighting.

gazonk · 05-01-2018, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by biz-engineer

On a 13 inch display, 2K or 4K , it's hard to tell. You must have really really good eyes then. For me, color matrix and finishing of the display matter more than the resolution. Currently I have top end HD display and it looks very very good. It is the color matrix , digital to analog conversion, back-lighting, surface coating layers, make a lot of difference. There are HD display with the same finishing as retina, it is impossible to tell the difference between $K and HD.

Well, I didn't know you were talking about a 13" laptop, in fact I wasn't even aware that those were available with 4K yet. Agree with your other points!

aleks · 05-01-2018, 11:23 AM

hm, should we wait for K-3III ?

**BigMackCam** · 05-01-2018, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by Chris Mak

Here is an example of an image "look and feel" that I could not reproduce with the KP.

Originally posted by Chris Mak

Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. Although incomparable (the KP rendering cán look very beautiful), nonetheless these show something of what is to my eyes the more natural rendering of the K3 opposed to the slightly artificial and "plasticky" look of the KP.

Originally posted by photoptimist

To my eye, the differences in the images are entirely caused by the huge in differences in lighting and weather conditions. In both shots, the bird's bill is nicely colorful so both cameras are handling color well and in the same way. But everything in the rest of the second scene looks much drier and dustier.

Firstly, I'll agree - very nice shots

Honestly, I really like the rendering from both cameras here. I agree with @photoptimist that the lighting is a huge contributor to the overall look, but I suspect you're seeing something at 50 - 100% reproduction levels that we can't see with the images fitted to our monitors.

In any case, I'm probably not a good assessor of the IQ here. I frequently shoot older 6 & 10MP Pentax / Samsung-rebranded cameras plus 24MP Sony A & E-mount (with all of Sony's "wonderful" processing) alongside my K-5, K-3 and K-3II. I see differences in all of the RAW files - detail, noise reduction, sharpening etc. - but nothing that really affects what I do. I understand why that wouldn't be the case for everyone, though

biz-engineer · 05-02-2018, 01:16 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Chris Mak

Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP.

The bokeh on the KP pciture is a lot better, the subject stands out a lot. More grain from the K3. Nice pictures anyway.

Doundounba · 05-03-2018, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by Chris Mak

I will most likely be using the K3II for as long as I keep my DA560. ... The KP images have far less noise, "thicker" color, and at times tend to look almost as paintings, very pretty, but slightly artificial. The K3 in contrast has objectionable noise from iso 800 upwards, but produces very natural looking images with great clarity and detail between iso 100-800.
I don't care so much for silky smooth, very pretty and colorful looking images. I do care about natural images with great clarity and detail.

Thanks for sharing your firsthand experience. As mostly a flash macro shooter, maximum detail in the ISO200-400 range is also what I'm after. This makes it more likely that I would choose a K-3ii over a KP should my K-3 bite the dust before the K-3iii shows up...

Originally posted by Chris Mak

Looking forward at the coming K3 successor, I can only hope that somehow Pentax addresses the need for very fine detail rendering at low iso values for birders and wildlife shooters.

Same here. Perhaps the firmware could have a setting for the rise in the "aggressiveness" of noise reduction as ISO increases that would be similar to the setting for the auto ISO rise curve (slow/normal/fast), or, alternatively, a user-decided threshold ISO value below which to not apply NR at all...

**ellicottva** · 05-05-2018, 12:09 PM - **1 Like**

The K3ii with an articulating screen would be awesome!

Dieseler · 05-06-2018, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by Chris Mak

Looking forward at the coming K3 successor, I can only hope that somehow Pentax addresses the need for very fine detail rendering at low iso values for birders and wildlife shooters. A K3 successor with upgraded hardware but the same IQ of the KP would not be interesting to me personally.

Thanks for your observations Chris.
I am also looking forward to the K3II successor as a possible upgrade from my K5IIs (mainly in AF, IQ is fine), but the potential loss of detail is a concern.

xmeda · 05-07-2018, 03:09 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by ellicottva

The K3ii with an articulating screen would be awesome!

and
reliable fast AF both phase detect and contrast detect
4K video with SR stabilization selectable
10fps+ & big buffer for at least 40 RAW
at least small pop-up wireless flash commander
dot matrix top display
keep front+back IR

Money are ready.. but camera nowhere near.

05-01-2018, 06:29 AM - 2 Likes	#498
Chris Mak Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 639	Here is an example of an image "look and feel" that I could not reproduce with the KP. The KP images could look very nice, but for me something was missing, the images looked too "graphic", too "smooth" and sometimes a bit plasticky in appearance compared to the very natural look (to my eyes at least) of the K3. There is some sharpening, but still modest, and very little artifacts As far as I am concerend, there is certainly potential in the new Pentax approach: images have far less noise at higher iso values retain have far better color at iso 1600 and up. But the thing is, I mostly shoot the DA560 at iso 100-400/800, so for me the look at these lower iso settings is far more important. Chris Last edited by Chris Mak; 05-14-2018 at 04:42 PM.

05-01-2018, 07:12 AM - 1 Like	#500
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,177	Originally posted by Chris Mak Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. Although incomparable (the KP rendering cán look very beautiful), nonetheless these show something of what is to my eyes the more natural rendering of the K3 opposed to the slightly artificial and "plasticky" look of the KP. The difference in look between these two images, is what I see in many KP images: bokeh is less natural, the sharpness is there, but the impression remains that there is not the fine rendering of the K3 that makes images look very realistic. Again, the KP has a lot of strong points versus the K3, and it may well be an issue to my eyes and not to others, but I find that my simply DA560 performs better and more natural on the K3. First shot is the K3. Chris To my eye, KP look like film renditions. I'm great with that. Last edited by reh321; 05-01-2018 at 07:17 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
You command line, I command line, we all command line for Linux. (^o^ ) <3	The Squirrel Mafia	General Talk	74	10-27-2018 06:20 AM
Will Ricoh continue with APS	Bophoto	Pentax DSLR Discussion	179	01-04-2017 08:13 PM
Ricoh appears to confirm that Q will continue	Mikesul	Pentax Q	37	10-07-2016 01:03 PM
Pentaxians, are we willing to be called Ricoh, assuming they continue the K mount?	Clinton	Pentax News and Rumors	34	07-06-2011 02:52 PM
Continue to like DA 50-200	hinman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	08-13-2007 10:19 AM

05-01-2018, 04:56 AM	#496
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Too much pixelpeeping.... Last edited by Pål Jensen; 05-01-2018 at 12:20 PM.

05-01-2018, 05:54 AM - 1 Like	#497
lsimpkins Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: SE Pennsylvania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 537	Originally posted by Chris Mak An option might be, for Pentax to make the image processing user selectable. Chris That's an option I would certainly be in favor of.

05-01-2018, 07:05 AM - 1 Like	#499
Chris Mak Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 639	Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. Although incomparable (the KP rendering cán look very beautiful), nonetheless these show something of what is to my eyes the more natural rendering of the K3 opposed to the slightly artificial and "plasticky" look of the KP. The difference in look between these two images, is what I see in many KP images: bokeh is less natural, the sharpness is there, but the impression remains that there is not the fine rendering of the K3 that makes images look very realistic. Again, the KP has a lot of strong points versus the K3, and it may well be an issue to my eyes and not to others, but I find that my simply DA560 performs better and more natural on the K3. First shot is the K3. Chris Last edited by Chris Mak; 05-14-2018 at 04:43 PM.

05-01-2018, 07:38 AM	#501
Chris Mak Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2013 Photos: Albums Posts: 639	Originally posted by reh321 To my eye, KP look like film renditions. I'm great with that. For general shooting, I might even agree...

05-01-2018, 08:11 AM - 1 Like	#502
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,122	Originally posted by Chris Mak Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. Although incomparable (the KP rendering cán look very beautiful), nonetheless these show something of what is to my eyes the more natural rendering of the K3 opposed to the slightly artificial and "plasticky" look of the KP. The difference in look between these two images, is what I see in many KP images: bokeh is less natural, the sharpness is there, but the impression remains that there is not the fine rendering of the K3 that makes images look very realistic. Again, the KP has a lot of strong points versus the K3, and it may well be an issue to my eyes and not to others, but I find that my simply DA560 performs better and more natural on the K3. First shot is the K3. Chris Nice shots! To my eye, the differences in the images are entirely caused by the huge in differences in lighting and weather conditions. In both shots, the bird's bill is nicely colorful so both cameras are handling color well and in the same way. But everything in the rest of the second scene looks much drier and dustier. It doesn't help that the first image has mostly vertical reeds (which tend to reveal the color of the vegetation) and the second image has horizontal reeds reflecting the sky and thus without color. It's too bad you have no shots of the identical scene under identical lighting.

05-01-2018, 09:41 AM	#503
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by biz-engineer On a 13 inch display, 2K or 4K , it's hard to tell. You must have really really good eyes then. For me, color matrix and finishing of the display matter more than the resolution. Currently I have top end HD display and it looks very very good. It is the color matrix , digital to analog conversion, back-lighting, surface coating layers, make a lot of difference. There are HD display with the same finishing as retina, it is impossible to tell the difference between $K and HD. Well, I didn't know you were talking about a 13" laptop, in fact I wasn't even aware that those were available with 4K yet. Agree with your other points!

05-01-2018, 11:23 AM	#504
aleks New Member Join Date: May 2018 Posts: 7	hm, should we wait for K-3III ?

05-01-2018, 12:33 PM	#505
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,670	Originally posted by Chris Mak Here is an example of an image "look and feel" that I could not reproduce with the KP. Originally posted by Chris Mak Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. Although incomparable (the KP rendering cán look very beautiful), nonetheless these show something of what is to my eyes the more natural rendering of the K3 opposed to the slightly artificial and "plasticky" look of the KP. Originally posted by photoptimist To my eye, the differences in the images are entirely caused by the huge in differences in lighting and weather conditions. In both shots, the bird's bill is nicely colorful so both cameras are handling color well and in the same way. But everything in the rest of the second scene looks much drier and dustier. Firstly, I'll agree - very nice shots Honestly, I really like the rendering from both cameras here. I agree with @photoptimist that the lighting is a huge contributor to the overall look, but I suspect you're seeing something at 50 - 100% reproduction levels that we can't see with the images fitted to our monitors. In any case, I'm probably not a good assessor of the IQ here. I frequently shoot older 6 & 10MP Pentax / Samsung-rebranded cameras plus 24MP Sony A & E-mount (with all of Sony's "wonderful" processing) alongside my K-5, K-3 and K-3II. I see differences in all of the RAW files - detail, noise reduction, sharpening etc. - but nothing that really affects what I do. I understand why that wouldn't be the case for everyone, though

05-02-2018, 01:16 PM - 1 Like	#506
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	Originally posted by Chris Mak Here two images of a blue heron from the K3 and from the KP. The bokeh on the KP pciture is a lot better, the subject stands out a lot. More grain from the K3. Nice pictures anyway.

05-03-2018, 08:35 AM	#507
Doundounba Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Montréal QC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,351	Originally posted by Chris Mak I will most likely be using the K3II for as long as I keep my DA560. ... The KP images have far less noise, "thicker" color, and at times tend to look almost as paintings, very pretty, but slightly artificial. The K3 in contrast has objectionable noise from iso 800 upwards, but produces very natural looking images with great clarity and detail between iso 100-800. I don't care so much for silky smooth, very pretty and colorful looking images. I do care about natural images with great clarity and detail. Thanks for sharing your firsthand experience. As mostly a flash macro shooter, maximum detail in the ISO200-400 range is also what I'm after. This makes it more likely that I would choose a K-3ii over a KP should my K-3 bite the dust before the K-3iii shows up... Originally posted by Chris Mak Looking forward at the coming K3 successor, I can only hope that somehow Pentax addresses the need for very fine detail rendering at low iso values for birders and wildlife shooters. Same here. Perhaps the firmware could have a setting for the rise in the "aggressiveness" of noise reduction as ISO increases that would be similar to the setting for the auto ISO rise curve (slow/normal/fast), or, alternatively, a user-decided threshold ISO value below which to not apply NR at all...

05-05-2018, 12:09 PM - 1 Like	#508
ellicottva Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Ellicott City, MD Posts: 76	The K3ii with an articulating screen would be awesome!

05-06-2018, 08:20 AM	#509
Dieseler Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Western Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 351	Originally posted by Chris Mak Looking forward at the coming K3 successor, I can only hope that somehow Pentax addresses the need for very fine detail rendering at low iso values for birders and wildlife shooters. A K3 successor with upgraded hardware but the same IQ of the KP would not be interesting to me personally. Thanks for your observations Chris. I am also looking forward to the K3II successor as a possible upgrade from my K5IIs (mainly in AF, IQ is fine), but the potential loss of detail is a concern.

05-07-2018, 03:09 AM - 2 Likes	#510
xmeda Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Brno Posts: 295	Originally posted by ellicottva The K3ii with an articulating screen would be awesome! and reliable fast AF both phase detect and contrast detect 4K video with SR stabilization selectable 10fps+ & big buffer for at least 40 RAW at least small pop-up wireless flash commander dot matrix top display keep front+back IR Money are ready.. but camera nowhere near.