[Class A]

Yeah, it felt the same to me - as in "Pentax ARE still making great DSLRs, the Nikon D850 wasn't the last one".

That's how I read it as well.

The point is that the implication that the K-3 III might be the last great DSLR or, more generally, that it would be adequate to expect that last DSLR ever to be released any time soon, is just unwarranted and implies the notion that "DSLRs should no longer be considered as a long-term alternative". Unless he has first hand information from Canon, Nikon, and Ricoh to that effect, he should not be invoking the idea that none of them have long-term plans for DSLR production.

[c.a.m]

Yeah, it felt the same to me - as in "Pentax ARE still making great DSLRs, the Nikon D850 wasn't the last one".

Agreed.

"Maybe we've not yet seen the last great DSLR, after all."

I think it's a positive nod to the potential for the K-3 Mark III to be judged as a "great" DSLR, perhaps supplanting the Nikon D850, which was mentioned earlier in the article as possibly the "pinnicle" of DSLR design. This is perhaps the strongest endorsement in the article for the new Pentax, but note that the K-3 III is not explicitly promoted as an exceptional camera without qualification, regardless of type (DSLR or mirrorless).

To me, the concluding four paragraphs cover a subjective mix of potential user segments, price, sensor format, lens compatibility, and even the future of Ricoh Imaging.

While the price argument seems to be directed mainly towards current Pentax users, it requires a more thorough analysis of the overall value propositions of various options. But, as we've seen in other discussions here at Pentax Forums, there is no 'right' answer regarding price.

The case for existing Pentax users to exploit their life-long collection of K-mount lenses is certainly reasonable. Sadly, though, there is no suggestion that current non-Pentax users could also be interested in the new Pentax, or that it presents a potential alternative for those folks.

It's mainly a positive piece on the surface, but with a few areas that could have benefited from tighter editing. The author implicitly makes a strong distinction between DSLRs and mirrorless.

- Craig

[texandrews]

Class A's post above with the table is a stark example of that which cannot be justified in any way. And so, beating my poor old dead horse, so dead it's a fossil from the miocene, that such an egregiously biased comparison could have been avoided with a final editorial review by a group of forums moderators.

That they refuse to take such steps points to the sort of pig-headed arrogance that gave the world things like the Maginot Line.

[luftfluss]

The D850 and K-1 II reviews were a year apart. During that time, an increase in the number of higher-end MILCs (Sony, Nikon) likely made the 36+ MP class lighter on average than when the K-1 II was released (2018), compared with when the D850 was released (2017).

I'll also note that DPR referred to the Olympus E-M1X (2019) as "almost comically large"...

...and DPR wrote the Panasonic DC-S1 (2019) was "Heavy" (under their concluding list of Cons), "bulky", "very big and heavy", "it is a big, heavy camera", "It's big and heavy, which may prompt you to leave it at home", "its significant bulk means that I'm just not as likely to bring it along for more fun or casual photographic experiences compared to something that takes up less space in my bag or puts less weight on my shoulder.", "(build quality and controls)...weren't valuable enough to me to justify the camera's size and weight.", "...is worth your consideration if you don't mind its size and weight".

And the preceding is not even a complete list of all the mentions DPR made of the S1's avoirdupois - in just one article.

* I'll note that in their review of the Nikon D500 - the camera folks here most compare with the new K-3 III - DPR in their 2016 review stated that it was "big, heavy... you may be less likely to carry it around with you all the time".

[Kunzite]

Call it for what it is, DPR is owned by Amazon, they are primarily there to push technology with high & fast turnover and take a slice off affiliation sales links. Ricoh / Pentax don't fit in that segment of the market but they are damned of they do and damned if they don't and any publicity can be useful.

I don't think the ownership play any role in this.
There are clear differences between their editors. One, for example, would write "WaterFAILS" - another (Simon Joinson) stepped in, apologized and pulled the article down.
And I guess no one is a Pentaxian, knowing and appreciating the brand like we do (?). Mike Tomkins now collaborates with DPR, but I'm not sure if that would help.

[biz-engineer]

The preliminary review of the Pentax K3 mark III on dpreview , so far, is very positive. I don't know what's all the fuzzz out here in this thread.

[ffking]

The

To be honest, I think you're over-thinking a comment that was intended to be a positive way to round off an article. I understand how it might be seen as betraying a deeper mindset that sees DSLRs as finished, but I read it as a sort of life in the old dog yet type of comment, maybe even a realisation that DSLRs might actually have a future despite all the mirrorless ballyhoo. The point is, I think my first sentence is probably closest to the truth.

[Wasp]

The preliminary review of the Pentax K3 mark III on dpreview , so far, is very positive. I don't know what's all the fuzzz out here in this thread.

I agree. It seems like there is a bit too much being read between the lines...

[Class A]

To be honest, I think you're over-thinking a comment that was intended to be a positive way to round off an article.

As I wrote earlier, I agree that the comment is an endorsement of the potential of the K-3 III.

We are in agreement that in that regard the comment is a positive one.

However, the invocation of a "death of the DSLR" theme is unwarranted. It is a narrative that has no place in a preview like that, unless there were hard proof and it would be adequate to warn potential customers that they'd be investing into a dying species. This aspect of the comment is relevant, i.e., I don't think I'm "overthinking" this, because you cannot tell your readers that a product category is obsolete and at the same time claim you are neutral or even positive regarding a recommendation of a product in that category. If it were true that the K-3 III could be a last hurrah, how advisable would it be to buy one (except for a small group)?

I accept that the author may be convinced that DSLRs are done for -- but intentionally or not, he is painting the K-3 III into an obsoleteness corner. If it was not intentional and the comment was purely meant to be a positive one, as you suggest, then the comment is yet another example of the lack of care that is often found in their Pentax pieces (to which they admitted, BTW).

[Rondec]

I agree. It seems like there is a bit too much being read between the lines...

Maybe. This is a hands on piece and not a real review, so I don't read too much into it either way.

I guess my "concern" if I had one, would be that DP Review is in the head space that SLRs are dinosaurs. Each new one may be the last one they ever review. We'll see what verbiage they use when the actual review comes out, but I am pretty sure they will hammer home a few items (1) The K-3 III is big. Somehow small is the wave of the future -- to me ergonomics are better with big lenses with at least a decent sized camera, but that isn't their perspective. (2) This is only for people who already own a lot of Pentax gear. Who are we fooling? Anyone smart is going to go with MILCs anyway. (3) A high level of focus on video performance. This is an area where SLRs don't typically measure up. The K-3 III will be better but it probably isn't going to be at an MILC level. I'm guessing they won't like the accelerator, lack of flippy screen, and won't mention the viewfinder a whole lot.

For those of us who have a focus on still photography and like optical viewfinders, Pentax is quickly becoming one of the few brands that has long term commitment to those things, but they aren't things that DP Review values.

[house]

However, the invocation of a "death of the DSLR" theme is unwarranted.

There are probably hundreds of articles, videos and blog posts proclaiming the death of the DSLR. Its a default part of the conversation these days. Referencing this meme in the article ties it in with the wider conversation.

There are some exceptionally fragile responses above. The reading between the lines is also beyond any measure of reasonability plus a naivety about the level commercial writing is at.

[totsmuyco]

DPR will first shoot it down that it's not mirrorless. Then they'll say it's not as good as a Nikon DSLR. But truth is they're shooting it down because it's a Pentax.

I don't believe anything they say. That's just me I guess.

[mecrox]

There are probably hundreds of articles, videos and blog posts proclaiming the death of the DSLR. Its a default part of the conversation these days. Referencing this meme in the article ties it in with the wider conversation.

There are some exceptionally fragile responses above. The reading between the lines is also beyond any measure of reasonability plus a naivety about the level commercial writing is at.

There are two different issues here. First is the number of DSLRs and lenses out there and in use. The second is where industry investment is going looking to the future.

It is clear that a simply huge number of DSLRs and lenses are out there and in use. They will be available, even if increasingly second hand, for many years to come, although the indications seem to be that mirrorless cameras are increasingly the ones that are bought new although not the only ones. Mirrorless cameras are only just starting to get to grips with the heights of sports and action of the Canon 1DX kind. It will take a while before the big three camera companies have sorted that one out and no doubt even longer before the professional photography corps make significant changes.

It is also clear that industry investment is going towards what we call mirrorless cameras. I think this is more generally Augmented Reality. An EVF is augmented reality, really, and so are an increasing number of software programs that will transform an original image by for example changing the sky, removing things, putting other things in, and so forth. The resulting image may bear little resemblance to what the photographer actually saw. Still, I would guess that 'mirrorless' and software come together into a new Augmented Reality paradigm especially when seen in its widest sense to include smartphones. This challenges our whole idea of what a photograph and photography are, especially when we consider software than can create lifelike, photo-real portraits or landscapes using CGi and not involving an original photograph at all. At that stage, will a camera even be necessary?

The question is whether this is the way the next generation want to go. They are raised on Augmented Reality - think of all the apps of the TikTok kind - so probably this is where they will go, and industry investment will go with them. However, just as there are some photographers who think a 5"x4" film camera is very heaven, so there will also be photographers for whom staying with the straightforward, basic approach offered by a DSLR matters and is what they prefer. Perhaps there won't be many of them in years to come, but they will be there. In any case, perhaps there don't need to be many of them for a small boutique company like Pentax to find a niche. It's obvious after all that the K3 Mark III is a very good camera and no doubt a new K1 in due course with its innovations will be very good too. And film photography, for example, hasn't disappeared and in fact is steadily becoming more popular.

Most internet articles I've read don't consider these matters very deeply. They are after an easy the-one-vs-the-other comparison because that makes for easy clicks. But shifts like this are never as straightforward and never as complete as the internet boosters would have you think. But start saying that and the clicks go down, so we don't read about it very often.

[Serkevan]

If anything, EVFs are Crippled Reality. I see more DR than the small screens, and certainly higher definition.

[luftfluss]

If anything, EVFs are Crippled Reality. I see more DR than the small screens, and certainly higher definition.

It's unfortunate for Pentax that with the demise of many B&M photo shops it is difficult for most folks to experience the difference between OVF and EVF when camera-shopping.