[Kunzite]

He's gone off Pentax I see... let's hope forever!

He promised that just before starting his insistent Pentax-bashing campaign.
I don't understand why people are still promoting that channel here. We're Pentaxians. We're not members of some OurCamerasAreBetterThanPentax club.

[Lloyd_Christmas]

Oh joy, another bipolar review of the K-3 mark III....

[Rondec]

Adding "Insult to injury" seems to be the overall tone of the review's subjective assessment.

It's hard to fathom how these reviews treat the K-3 Mark III in relation to other cameras.

Within the past couple of days, Digital Camera World published a glowing review of their new darling, the Nikon Z fc: Nikon Z fc review: old-school style meets cutting-edge tech | Digital Camera World

According to DCW, while the Z fc has numerous positive aspects, it's notably inferior to the K-3 Mark III in key image-quality metrics of resolution, dynamic range, and signal-to-noise characteristics. It has serious compromises in ergonomics and handling, and noise issues start at ISO 3200. It uses a relatively low-resolution, old-design sensor. There is a shortage of DX Z-mount lenses. Conveniently, the review omits some important details, such as its maximum shutter speed of 1/4000s; single UHS-I card; 11 fps is for 12-bit RAW; and a relatively low battery capacity provides only 300 shots per charge. It's certainly hard to find the "cutting-edge tech" that the title proclaims.

Inconsistently, DCW criticizes the Pentax for specifications in which they praise the Z fc, which has equal or worse performance (e.g., burst rate; buffer capacity; high-ISO characteristics). Yet, the "recommended" Z fc is rated 4.5 stars and garners a conclusion that "the Nikon Z fc is a camera oozing with both style as well as substance." The ultimate platitude: "If you dig the retro aesthetic, it’s worth every penny," (despite its serious drawbacks?). Of course, the review doesn't dare to suggest explicitly that it's hard to see how the camera could attract anyone from outside the 'Nikon fold'.

Like we've seen in other reviews, the K-3 Mark III is penalized for its price, lack of moveable screen, and for being a DSLR. It's too bad that the cursory review didn't give more details on the user experience, apart from the numerical comparisons. Furthermore, like other reviews, it fails to provide a balanced analysis of the value propositions of the various camera systems, nor does it counter with a thoughtful analysis of what they think would be a 'reasonable' price point for the K-3 Mark III.

The DCW review highlights numerous strong points about the K-3 III. Unfortunately, the glib subjective comments detract and distract from an otherwise positive overview.


- Craig

I do think that many reviewers are in love with MILCs and give them more leeway than they do a new SLR. Behind nearly all the negativity of the K-3 III is the fact that it is an SLR (I happen to like that fact) and its price. If it was priced at 1100 dollars, I think they would go easier on it with the reviews.

Honestly, one of the biggest new features of the K-3 III is the better OVF. Do the reviewers care? Not so much, but that doesn't mean that photographers don't care.

[jersey]

When was the last time you saw someone with MILC using EVF? I do not remember, most people buy expensive MILC with EVF and use them in zombie mode. So the review do not care, they want good LV not good OVF.

[VSTAR]

Sometimes you just want a hard copy magazine to read, instead of the digital one. So every couple of months I go to a store that still sells photography mags. Unfortunately most are from the UK, each one copies the other, sometimes same article and photos in more than one mag. Read the October 2021 review and almost fell off…the chair. How many times can a reviewer keep mentioning the price and a lack of a tilting screen. Interesting, I don’t remember that being the sore point with other camera reviews also with a high price and no tilting screen. No photos to show the poor focussing, no mention of the firmware was ever updated, it’s like the review was written before the camera was even picked up. First review that actually states that the new pentaprism is a real letdown compared to an EVF. Yet the Nikon Zfc is a real winner according to them. So far in life my purchases of consumer products are not based on just one review. The end of 2021 really is crazy like the rest of the year…Covid raging here, Camera World negative review, and DP a positive review! Everything really is topsy-turvy.

[sebberry]

I don't mind reviewers pointing out that the camera doesn't have some form of tilt/swivel LCD. Personally I find the new pentaprism viewfinder to be absolutely gorgeous, but there are times where I'm simply able to capture an image from a more creative angle when I can use live view and simply cannot bend down to look through the viewfinder.

While it's true that the sun may wash out the LCD, the camera is equally as useless when one can't look through the viewfinder such as taking a shot from on the ground.

It's OK to be critical, especially in this price range.

[Lloyd_Christmas]

the camera is equally as useless when one can't look through the viewfinder such as taking a shot from on the ground.

In those cases you can use the smartphone app to see what the sensor is seeing.

[sebberry]

In those cases you can use the smartphone app to see what the sensor is seeing.

Right. Crawling around on the floor trying to get fun shots of the kid or dog and the answer is to juggle the camera in one hand and a phone in the other

Using two hands to hold the camera for a steadier shot is always preferable. Resorting to using the phone as a monitor takes away from the very 'shooting experience' Pentax was trying to improve with the big OVF.

[gatorguy]

Right. Crawling around on the floor trying to get fun shots of the kid or dog and the answer is to juggle the camera in one hand and a phone in the other

Using two hands to hold the camera for a steadier shot is always preferable. Resorting to using the phone as a monitor takes away from the very 'shooting experience' Pentax was trying to improve with the big OVF.

Great points, and totally understood. The K3III may not be for you.

If that's your use case then the K1 or better yet the K-70 (lighter) is a better choice of Pentax camera. Some of us have two bodies or more, and not always Pentax or even DSLR, for using under different scenarios. For my on-the-floor dog pics I resorted to my K-70 with flippy screen with good results, but it's not something I'd do very often anyway. For me a flippy screen adds no value for the most part, and when I do want to have one along, say for hiking and macros, I'll have one with me carrying a DFA100 in addition to the K-3III or K-1 depending. Even then that flippy screen is rarely needed, perhaps half a dozen situations a year at best.

[normhead]

Using two hands to hold the camera for a steadier shot is always preferable. Resorting to using the phone as a monitor takes away from the very 'shooting experience' Pentax was trying to improve with the big OVF.

I experimented with the wifi control years ago. For some things it's pretty cool. I put the camera on my monopod, and pushed it under the picnic table where there was a small toad. I used my iPad to focus and release the shutter. IN terms of general use though, I never got much beyond proof of consent.

[sebberry]

Great points, and totally understood. The K3III may not be for you.

If that's your use case then the K1 or better yet the K-70 (lighter) is a better choice of Pentax camera. Some of us have two bodies or more, and not always Pentax or even DSLR, for using under different scenarios. For my on-the-floor dog pics I resorted to my K-70 with flippy screen with good results, but it's not something I'd do very often anyway. For me a flippy screen adds no value for the most part, and when I do want to have one along, say for hiking and macros, I'll have one with me carrying a DFA100 in addition to the K-3III or K-1 depending. Even then that flippy screen is rarely needed, perhaps half a dozen situations a year at best.

The beautiful thing about photography is that those who take part all have their own things they find interesting to capture. The camera is simply a tool, or set of tools, which which to do that.

Coming from a K5, the K3-3 was the natural upgrade path, not the K1 or a K70. Had I wanted to re-buy lenses for a different format, I would have jumped to Sony mirrorless.

At the end of the day, the tilty-flippy screen simply makes the creative process more accessible to more people, and doesn't take anything away from those who don't want it.

[c.a.m]

the tilty-flippy screen simply makes the creative process more accessible to more people, and doesn't take anything away from those who don't want it.

I would agree that a movable screen offers certain benefits, and appreciate that some folks would favour it over a fixed one. I could have used a flippy screen on several occasions, but managed to take some low shots with my K-3 Mark III without too much discomfort.

However, having a fixed screen, I think the K-3 Mark III accommodates the enhanced viewfinder optics, which offers excellent eye relief for us eyeglass wearers. I also appreciate the large 3.2-inch monitor and the little bit of extra clearance for my nose. All in a compact package.

- Craig

[sebberry]

I don't think the two are necessarily mutually exclusive.

[jersey]

I would love my K-3 Mk III to have tilted screen. I have hotshoe mounted phone holder but I do not take it with me each time and tilt screen makes for easier and more accurate framing for certain situations.

It is not really needed for action photography that this camera is tuned fir but would be nice to have. Very nice.

Is was not really getting all the fuss with lack of it until I lost few shots cause I did not took phone holder and look at angle and try hot the right place for focus did not really worked that well.