[beholder3]

Why do you think you know what job they have?

I do find your little tries to defend dptabloid's incompetency amusing, but the question is: Why would you do that?
Does it hurt you so much to see valid criticism being directed at the influencers of your choice?

Calm down. dptabloid is not a religion. They screwed up, they have to find a way to show they can improve - fast.

They completely failed at doing their job - providing comparable images. Something pretty much everybode else has no issues with.

And yes, this huge failure on their side now leads to follow-up discussions whether such degree of incompetency is just random or if there is bad intent due to the persons doing it being fanboys and haters.
And there are very good reasons to assume the latter.

No reason to put up the tinfoil hat and claim a big conspiracy among Pentax owners who just react to poor performance by dptabloid staff.

All this wouldn't have started if some average professional and photography skills would have been present.

The burden of proof for anything that comes now is 100% on dptabloid's side.

No evil monster forced them to make their underperformance public and then point the finger at other parties.

[Class A]

The test scene reveals very small issues and many Pentaxians are blind to obvious flaws.

I think the affected images look disproportionally bad for whatever reason. The actual issue is small (and to be clear should ideally not be there in the first place) but the images make it look like a big problem. Even the sharper looking images look a bit wonky in some places and that may change if the K-3 III receives dedicated support from Adobe.

Personally it don't think it makes sense to alter the testing setup to cater for flaws in individual cameras.

That is a defensible viewpoint but then the D780 should not receive special treatment either.

Going outside what can form a normal photography workflow would imho be very bad for a review site.

The question is what the studio scene comparison tool is meant to convey.

One view is that it should reflect a normal shooting experience, in which case the D780 (and potentially other cameras) should not receive special treatment.

Another view is that the purpose of this particular test is to evaluate the strength of Bayer-AA filters, the colour filter array choices, the manufacturers default JPEG processing, potential raw processing, etc. In this case, it would be justifiable to compensate for the fact that for some cameras shutter-shock occurs in a range that affects the test. Note that if DPReview used a bit higher levels of illumination, we wouldn't be seeing the issue. In some sense, they are currently testing for shutter-shock but in a very incomplete way.

Not to mention the fact that a tool like this should use the same lens model across brands to the extent possible. Imaging Ressource used the Sigma 70/2.8 macro in many mounts to avoid the issue that the test otherwise becomes a lens test as well as a camera test. DPReview are not even using the same focal length consistently, which changes the lighting on some of the objects due to the different distances. This test has many flaws and there is an argument to be made that it does not need more variables than it already has.

[Class A]

But if you dare question DPR in anyway, you get banned or moderated comment to comment just like me

That is simply not true.

I challenge DPReview on a regular basis on their site and have never been banned.
Some of my forum posts have been deleted by the "Mako2011" moderator (who is apparently a supporter of baking in image processing into raw files) but this moderator is not representing DPReview.

I believe we are doing ourselves a disservice if we lash out at DPReview in ways that are not justifiable.
Valid criticism can fall on deaf ears if the recipient believes it is just more of the same unjustifiable attacks that they heard many times before from angry fans.

Note that this is not just my view. Others have recommend to Pentaxians to not exaggerate as the latter ultimately will prove to be a disservice to themselves and the brand they want to support.

[texandrews]

He or she and I strongly disagree about the new accelerator unit (although I agree the ideal would be a way to turn it off or on---I'm just not sure that is entirely possible...), but about the way DPR handles things in their tests we are in complete agreement.

And BTW, Pentax is not the only manufacturer that has suffered these vagaries--at one time so did OLy and Sony. It's just that Pentax is the problem now. And there's plenty of evidence that they are not/have not been neutral in their handling of Pentax.


The defense of DPR I would mount here, however, is that Pentax was responsible for getting multiple copies of cameras and lenses to DPR (and anyone else reviewing the products)---that's entirely Pentax's fault. And Honestly, Pentax should have made it clear that no test results could be published by anyone using Lightroom/ACR until the new profiles were accommodated, or else held back the cameras for review until they were.

[slartibartfast01]

He or she and I strongly disagree about the new accelerator unit (although I agree the ideal would be a way to turn it off or on---I'm just not sure that is entirely possible...), but about the way DPR handles things in their tests we are in complete agreement.

And BTW, Pentax is not the only manufacturer that has suffered these vagaries--at one time so did OLy and Sony. It's just that Pentax is the problem now. And there's plenty of evidence that they are not/have not been neutral in their handling of Pentax.


The defense of DPR I would mount here, however, is that Pentax was responsible for getting multiple copies of cameras and lenses to DPR (and anyone else reviewing the products)---that's entirely Pentax's fault. And Honestly, Pentax should have made it clear that no test results could be published by anyone using Lightroom/ACR until the new profiles were accommodated, or else held back the cameras for review until they were.

Are the test cameras obtained directly from Pentax?

[Kunzite]

"Mako2011" moderator (who is apparently a supporter of baking in image processing into raw files)

Nonsense. Not long ago he argued at length, supporting Bill Claff's claim of "very strong denoising" on the K-3iii and how that necessarily means detail loss - and no direct measuring/observation of detail loss is needed.
But, he might've done that just to take a position contrary to mine.

I do agree we should not exaggerate and make claims we cannot support. Richard Butler is not Mako2011. Rather than using a "very flimsy tripod on a floating floor", DPR used a weighted down tripod and a macro rail (still can be problematic if the stars align, but it's not intentionally trying to provoke the issue).

[Class A]

The defense of DPR I would mount here, however, is that Pentax was responsible for getting multiple copies of cameras and lenses to DPR (and anyone else reviewing the products)---that's entirely Pentax's fault.

I agree that any camera (or lens for that matter) sent to DPReview should have been double-check in all ways conceivable. It is possible, though, that the K-3 III copy DPReview have does not show abnormal behaviour; I'm sure we'll learn about that in the future.

It is also possible that DPReview gets their gear from distributors rather than from Ricoh Japan directly. In that case, I would not be surprised at all if any of the gear they received at any point in time had issues. Some distributors manage multiple brands and just don't care enough about Pentax to make sure that everything they send out to reviewers is in good shape.

Ricoh could be more proactive, regardless, in my view. They could ensure one way or another that equipment sent to DPReview is free of faults and it would have been very nice to see Chris and Jordan present the K-3 III with an FA 43/1.9 Limited or the DA 20-40/2.8-4 instead of or in addition to the rather large zooms they had to use. In my view that would have helped to present Pentax as an interesting choice for people looking for a small but very capable kit. Chris and Jordan did not have access to a 55-300 PLM either, a lens that might have helped with the AF-C performance. I think it would have been a great investment by Ricoh to send them this equipment, instead of them apparently having to borrow some equipment that their old store had at hand.

[gatorguy]

That is simply not true.

I challenge DPReview on a regular basis on their site and have never been banned.
Some of my forum posts have been deleted by the "Mako2011" moderator (who is apparently a supporter of baking in image processing into raw files) but this moderator is not representing DPReview.

I believe we are doing ourselves a disservice if we lash out at DPReview in ways that are not justifiable.
Valid criticism can fall on deaf ears if the recipient believes it is just more of the same unjustifiable attacks that they heard many times before from angry fans.

Note that this is not just my view. Others have recommend to Pentaxians to not exaggerate as the latter ultimately will prove to be a disservice to themselves and the brand they want to support.

I agree with you. Some Pentax fans are presenting the brand in a bad light by arguing irrationally, dishonestly, or with directed personal accusations. You Class A do an admirable job of recognizing the arguments put forth by some not-Pentax fans at DPR and if disputing them doing so with considerate, confident, and cogent points. At the same time, you typically demonstrate a willingness to openly acknowledge it when the other person's comments have some validity even if we might not like it. Kudos sir.

Simply dismissing everything an opponent says is an invitation for them to disrespect us in the same manner. That's not what any of us really want.

[texandrews]

Are the test cameras obtained directly from Pentax?

Let's just say if I were head of Pentax, based on our market position and the rough ride we've gotten, I'd be making certain that multiple copies of cameras and lenses were gotteing into the hands of those reviewing them. It's really not that much money involved.

[house]

Posts above are talking as if it can't be shutter shock and it can't affect most K-3III cameras. Desperately grasping at any possibility besides the most likely and acting as if this far fetched possibility is fact and proceeding to make up over the top accusations of dpreview failure.

The issue is not settled and it could be one of many issues and it could affect all or one K-3III cameras. Pretending to know and acting as if it isn't shutter shock affecting all cameras is absurd.

I have no interest in defending dpreview, I'm not very impressed by what they do or the form their media takes. They offer *very* little but the studio scene is a nice tool. The strange entitled demands and overly high expectations on display here I have to react to. Because I don't particularly rate dpreview I don't expect them to reach scientific levels of accuracy and people doing so need to come back down to earth and realize what we are dealing with.

[Pål Jensen]

How many shutter makers are there? Copal, Seiko? Same shutter goes into lots of different camera models.

Anyway. Testing a camera on a flimsy platform is meaningless for general conclusions. Cameras may have equal shutter vibration level but vary in frequency and, hence, will interact with the rest of the inadequate systems in an unpredictable manner depending on characteristics of that system (like resonances etc) and the interaction of this system with the camera body's properties. Consequently, the result is a hit and miss affair. Some matches will be good. Others bad.

[texandrews]

Posts above are talking as if it can't be shutter shock and it can't affect most K-3III cameras.

That is not the case. Photogrpahic evidence has been supplied now by multiple people that should at least give observers a reason to pause in their judgements

Desperately grasping at any possibility

No. That is not going on.

besides the most likely and acting as if this far fetched possibility is fact and proceeding to make up over the top accusations of dpreview failure.

Most of the counterarguments above are hardly far fetched. It is far fetched that there's a conspiracy. But DPR has had a rather shaky record with Pentax.

The issue is not settled and it could be one of many issues and it could affect all or one K-3III cameras.

This is a true statement, and if you left it at that we'd have no argument.

Pretending to know and acting as if it isn't shutter shock affecting all cameras is absurd.

I see no one pretending to know definitively, except maybe you in being convinced that this is shutter shock---which maybe it is, maybe it isn't---and nothing besides the unfortunate conspiracy theories is absurd here---there I will agree with you. It makes no sense for DPR to waste their time trying to sabotage Pentax---they would be courting legal problems

I have no interest in defending dpreview, I'm not very impressed by what they do or the form their media takes. They offer *very* little but the studio scene is a nice tool. The strange entitled demands and overly high expectations on display here I have to react to.

First of all, I'm not understanding what is entitled about the vast majority of comments that are disagreeing with you---unless of course that alone counts as entitled for you. You are here casting aspersions on the participants in this thread, and I advise you to stop. And you never have to react to anything here.

Because I don't particularly rate dpreview I don't expect them to reach scientific levels of accuracy and people doing so need to come back down to earth and realize what we are dealing with.

I think that what you will find is that people are reacting---correctly in my estimation, given DPR's record, and not just with Pentax---because DPR is de facto the 800 pound gorilla of camera review sites. You don't see threads here going on and on about some blogger-vlogger in his basement. I think people like Class A are very much down to earth. I think it is rude to suggest as you are doing that they are not.

[texandrews]

A complaint was received this morning. 2 mods thought the thread should be closed, I asked that we wait until this evening, and another mod joined with me. Now I am wavering, however. Let's see how the next few hours go. Let's also all agree to be able to disagree w/o suggesting deficiencies in the other participants' reasoning powers. Also, let's please agree at least for argument's sake that DPR itself is not out to "get" Pentax for some malign reason. That's not to say there aren't problems....

[Mikesul]

Please close it. Too many of the posts are just embarrassing.

[LensBeginner]

I was looking at the pictures yesterday... I find the blur to be quite uniform... in case of shutter shock aren't we expecting to see more vertical blur (i.e. on the horizontal lines), if the shutter curtains move vertically? it was like this on the K-7.

Re. thread closure... I'll leave it to the mods. It has been derailing a bit, but if kept on track maybe it can be of some worth.