[rogerstg]

Having said all that, touch focus in live view works amazingly well.

I recently started using touch focus shoot. Along with the wide angle monitor view, it's easy to photograph people unaware, especially when using the electronic shutter.

[Pål Jensen]

Yes, it should have a moveable screen.
I don't buy the excuse that the body would have been thicker or that the screen is somehow vulnerable; or that it would have taken longer to develop.
Pentax had three types of moveable screen in production and could have used any of those..

You don't buy facts? How do you add a flexible screen to the K-3III without making the camera thicker? And how do you make flexible screen that is just as solid as a fixed one? I'm sure Pentax would like to know....

[Serkevan]

You don't buy facts? How do you add a flexible screen to the K-3III without making the camera thicker? And how do you make flexible screen that is just as solid as a fixed one? I'm sure Pentax would like to know....

Same way the KP is thinner than the K-5.
Worst case scenario, the camera will be about 2 mm or so thicker (which is the thickness of the screen's cradle - and 2 mm of steel would be fairly tough).

And the screen will crack on impact anyway, regardless of it being movable or not - the cradle is tougher than the screen's glass. The only mechanism with problematic flimsiness is the K-70 one. A tiltable screen is much tougher.

[jersey]

Not really works that way, there is a lot of stuff inside of camera and Pentax already tried to make it as thin and compact as possible. So unless you add really high costs to new screen design and materials using existing features would most likely be impossible without adding space. I doubt Pentax would have omitted this feature if it was easy and/or cheap to do and I doubt adding +500$ to the price with some super thin, cosmic technology tilt screen would add to sales numbers. I think 2500$ K-3 Mk III would have minimal sales numbers and would be a straight road to the grave for Pentax.

Still I think that making camera thicker would be more acceptable and give more sells then not having it this screen. I would not mind 2 or 3 mm more in thickness but having tilt screen.

[DonV]

You don't buy facts? How do you add a flexible screen to the K-3III without making the camera thicker? And how do you make flexible screen that is just as solid as a fixed one? I'm sure Pentax would like to know....

Well, first you don't just "add" a screen to an existing camera, you design it with a moveable screen from the beginning.
A flexible or moveable screen is not "solid" by definition.

Pentax "knows" how to make a moveable screen, in three different ways; they did it on the K1, KP, K70, KS2.

[Serkevan]

Still I think that making camera thicker would be more acceptable and give more sells then not having it this screen. I would not mind 2 or 3 mm more in thickness but having tilt screen.

Yup. Precisely this. I respect the statement the engineers wanted to make - I just don't agree with it.

[Pål Jensen]

Same way the KP is thinner than the K-5..

He wanted a K-3III with flip screen. Not the KP.

---------- Post added 03-25-22 at 06:49 PM ----------

Well, first you don't just "add" a screen to an existing camera, you design it with a moveable screen from the beginning.
A flexible or moveable screen is not "solid" by definition.

Pentax "knows" how to make a moveable screen, in three different ways; they did it on the K1, KP, K70, KS2.

But there is no space for a movable screen on the K-3III. Hence the camera needs to be larger if it was to be designed to accommodate a flexible screen. The camera is a wonder of miniaturization. The K-3III is a far more advanced camera than the KP, and can't be made as small. A K-3III with a flexible screen built to the same standard as the rest of the camera would have been nearly the size of the K-1 and cost more. People ask for a free lunch. There isn't any.
The camera is targeted at those who want a great optical finder and appreciate an advanced camera built like as tank and smaller than an FF Pentax camera. If you're not in the target group, buy something else...

---

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 03-25-2022 at 11:13 AM.

[DonV]

He wanted a K-3III with flip screen. Not the KP.

---------- Post added 03-25-22 at 06:49 PM ----------



But there is no space for a movable screen on the K-3III. Hence the camera needs to be larger if it was to be designed to accommodate a flexible screen. The camera is a wonder of miniaturization. The K-3III is a far more advanced camera than the KP, and can't be made as small. A K-3III with a flexible screen built to the same standard as the rest of the camera would have been nearly the size of the K-1 and cost more. People ask for a free lunch. There isn't any.
The camera is targeted at those who want a great optical finder and appreciate an advanced camera built like as tank and smaller than an FF Pentax camera. If you're not in the target group, buy something else...

Thanks for the "free" advice, I did not realize you were a camera designer/engineer!
I have 4 KPs and one K3iii, so thank you very much; I have "voted" with my pocketbook.

I've known there is no free lunch for quite some time now.

[rogerstg]

As much as I would have liked the K3iii to include a tilt screen, I don't think I would have been willing to pay much more than I paid. In the end, I've been pleasantly surprised that the larger, wide viewing screen and touch/focus/shoot have mitigated much of my need for a flip screen.

[bukypetr]

To Whom It May Concern,

That's a pity there isn't an option to set a shutter and an aperture values for a whole 1 EV stop on K-3 III.

In studio it’s comfortable to have 1/2 and 1/3 EV stops compensation. However when I shoot action photos and I need to be as quick as possible, I miss the possibility to set Tv and Av by 1 EV at once, which I got used to using older Pentax models *and* other brands' cameras.

I would be very pleased, if there comes this option via future firmware update for K-3 III.

Thank you.


Best regards,
Petr Boucek

[reh321]

I have feedback, actually a complaint, about the Pentax k3iii

This would be as near to perfect that a Pentax k3iii could have been, if only they would have included an articulating screen !
Macro photography is my favorite type of photography, and at age 51 it's harder and harder for me to get down on the ground and crawl around to get, lets say, a good picture of a flower or bee on a flower, etc...

I would love to read some of your comments/feedback about my feedback (complaint) about the exclusion.

I made this complaint to another user, here, about loving macro photography and complaining about the lack of an articulating screen on the k3iii body...

The person I was private messaging, told me that it wasn't just macro photography, but that he does a lot of landscape photography and an articulating screen is good for that also!

We both tossed around the idea that they left it off because it makes the camera even more rock solid (more tank like in construction), that it makes for better water sealing, and/or it was simply a price saving measure.

So, let's hear your own personal comments/feedback on my complaint here. You

Regards,

Michael

I’m surprised that you aren’t also unhappy at the number of MP - I would think that would also be important to someone who is focused on macro photography - also to someone who is most interested in landscape photography.

You can ask and ask - but Pentax doesn’t manufacture a camera perfect for every use.

The K-1 has a slowish burst speed and data chain.

The K-3 doesn’t have a moveable screen nor a lot of MP.

The KF lacks a lot of MP and a fast processor.

We were told about these characteristics at ‘launch’ {my comments are still moderated because of comments I made when the KF was launched}. The K-1 seems to be most suited for what you actually do.

[Rondec]

I think most of this has been hashed out.

I will say that for landscapes, it isn't a huge deal. You can see the rear screen of the camera from a lot of angles and the touch screen makes it so that you can easily adjust auto focus point when in live view. If I am shooting from a tripod (which I normally am when shooting landscape or macro), then I usually have to crouch down a little bit anyway when lowering the tripod and getting it set up. The place where a flippy screen makes the most difference is overhead work, but you aren't going to be shooting many landscapes that way.

These are all tripod shots with the K-3 III

[bobbotron]

I have the k3iii, use the screen occasionally, it’s great as is.

[Larrymc]

I have the k3iii, use the screen occasionally, it’s great as is.

I second your opinion and I use the screen with the Mk III on my tripod and occasionally use it hand held in live view. Here is one hand held using Live View and focus via touch screen.


Pond Side Autumn Colors and Late Afternoon Reflections! by Larry Mc, on Flickr

[mikesbike]

One does not usually miss what one has never had. There have been quite a number of K-3 II owners who have skipped the KP and were waiting for a newer version of their K-3 II mostly because of its larger right-hand grip, 2-card slots, and larger battery, which of course also means larger camera than the KP. The upgrades they wanted were better low light/higher ISO and better AF performance. These people got what they wanted, don't miss what they never had, and are happy with the K-3 III as is, of course. I know, because I still have and like my long-time K-5 IIs, and only appreciated what the KP offers after getting one. I suspect, as the K-3 III is by far the most expensive Pentax APS-C DSLR ever, this lack was due in good part to the cost of the new BSI sensor. Adding a movable screen would have increased cost even more. Then there are some K-3 and K-3 II owners who liked the KP's advancements but skipped it anyway for those same reasons, hoping the next model would come with the entire package. They have been disappointed. To them I say, if your shooting is not in the realm of what the K-3 III is mainly designed for- that is faster AF with better tracking and burst-rate for shooting action, then do your photography in general a favor and instead get a K-1 II to go with your K-3 II. This will cover all your bases very well, giving you much that is new, and with a higher degree of improved imaging quality, and a different photographic perspective. The K-3 II is still very fine for lighter carrying and for more telephoto usage. For those having bought a K-3 III but still disappointed that it lacks a moveable screen, do get that and much more additionally by getting a K-1 II to go with your fine K-3 III!!

I know these things from my own experience, because though totally delighted with acquiring the KP, its handling, features, IQ and performance, I finally got the K-1 II (and with the fine DFA 28-105mm DC WR) due to the great price deals, in order to use some fine FF lenses from my 35mm film shooting days, and got much, much more than expected!!