My K-3 Mark III review.

**Kobie** · 10-08-2021, 04:07 PM - **13 Likes**

I tried to be as absolutely objective and open as possible which made this much harder to do than I first thought. But it's out there now.

Youtu.be

**Spodeworld** · 10-08-2021, 06:54 PM - **2 Likes**

Good review. I haven’t pulled the trigger yet because I’m one of those folks who was waiting for them to come out with a camera like this but I was also soooo looking forward to it having a movable lcd for how I like to use it. But at this price, I’m still on the fence as a result of it not having one.

**UncleVanya** · 10-08-2021, 09:14 PM - **1 Like**

Nice review. I’m one of “those users” that was disappointed by the lack of a tilt screen and the so so buffer. I ended up buying a KP on the blowout sales and love it, but this camera is a beast and I still wonder if one is in my future.

dmjjr · 10-08-2021, 09:22 PM - **2 Likes**

Still not convinced this is worth dropping 2K on a body. Can rent one for a week for about $120/with option to purchase. Will have to knock my socks off for me to buy. Currently have the K3II & K52S for comparison

**Cerebum** · 10-09-2021, 12:17 AM - **2 Likes**

Tremendous review, I watched it last night. Totally honest as always. I have a KP and a K3, both of which I love. When the K3iii came out I said that I could see no reason to move up from the KP and I still hold with that. The image quality of the KP, when it is sporting a DA limited, is stellar and once you get use to the ergonomics, it is a delight to use. To be honest I haven't flipped my screen in a while but I do miss having the option when I use my K3. The K3iii for me would be a luxury. I know it is a wonderful thing but the price tag (4x the cost of my KP) means it will be beyond my reach, probably forever.

repaap · 10-09-2021, 12:45 AM - **4 Likes**

I did buy K-3III when it did come out. Not regretting it one bit. Eye/face/human and animal recognition is very good and way above anything in Pentax land, but it is not that far off from mirrorless.

Best part being that it is not a mirrorless camera. I use screen to look if my settings are good. I fo rarely rely on the screen, because itnails the shots and I can clearly see what is going on.

I did upgrade my blackmagic pocket 4K to Panasonic S5(+kit lens) which was 2000€, new in discount. I use it mainly for video. And there it is much better than K-3III. But it is slow and cumbersome(yes, it is not rated for it’s speed and usability to be the best experience for photos, which it is also not). That aid for MF is neat, but I really do need all the help I can get especially when it is not bright daylight.

Why I did bring that up. Mirrorless. Because withthis big screen K-3III has, I can see clearly, it does focus well even in dark! And it is very responsive. A joy to use, unlike Panasonic, which will give very nice video, but you really have to work for it and rotating screen is not enough, You’ll need external monitor too…(same goes for K-3III with video).

It is remarkable camera snd to me it was worth 2000€ and it will peopably be around 1800€ in few months?(christmas and all coming up) and that is even better value.

That said, if that extra performance with AF and FPS and also quite good 4K mean much, then by all means do not put your money there

garywakeling · 10-09-2021, 12:47 AM - **3 Likes**

Thanks for the review, I found it interesting. I agree with you that it is the sum of all the improvements taken as a whole that makes this camera a long awaited upgrade to the K3. Each individual improvement may be small but they are all better. I have just started shooting with the new 16-50 plm lens,I like to add the grips on to all my cameras and with the size of the new lens, the difference between the K3III and K1 in terms of size and weight seem negligible to me. My thoughts as to how I will use the camera are geared to using it as a quick autofocus long lens sports/wildlife camera. With the ability to effectively give me a 1.5x teleconverter for all my full frame lenses as well as the improved autofocus and buffer it works well with my current equipment. It also allows me to trim down to the classic 15 21 43 70 mm APS-C lenses for a compact outfit when size and weight is at a premium. The biggest drawcard to an old time photographer like me is that it is a DSLR, I have tried mirrorless cameras and I appreciate the technology available with them, I just cannot get used to holding the camera away from my face to look at the screen. If I want to look through a viewfinder the DSLR experience just works best for me rather than mirrorless viewfinders. With little interest in video I cannot comment on if the new camera's video is of any use, I have always preferred still photos. Is it good value? I believe so, my K3 is still going strong after 6 years, so if this upgrade can go for a similar lifespan $350 per year seems quite reasonable to me.
Thanks for being the messenger, no need to be shot when you present a pretty balanced view on the new camera.

biz-engineer · 10-09-2021, 01:04 AM - **1 Like**

I like the start of the review about the price. Is it worth the money? I'd answer that question a bit differently..

Is it worth the money?

- Yes if you shoot 200 000 pictures, the cost per picture is very competitive with film

- No if you shoot 2000 pictures, compared to film cameras, no digital camera is competitive

Here is the paradox, digital cameras can endure hundreds of thousand of exposures, which is very high number for the average hobby photographer looking at quality results, still a very high number of exposures for a professional photographer.

Film , on the other side of the spectrum , you mostly pay for each additional exposure you make, so, price wise, it's much more adapted to any type of photography and photographer.

Deciding whether the K3 III is worth the money based on competition (digital) is a consumer approach to evaluating a price, not so much from purely a photography perspective. You could evaluate the price the same way for a fridge, or a new toy

**Rondec** · 10-09-2021, 02:54 AM - **3 Likes**

Originally posted by biz-engineer

I like the start of the review about the price. Is it worth the money? I'd answer that question a bit differently..

Is it worth the money?

- Yes if you shoot 200 000 pictures, the cost per picture is very competitive with film

- No if you shoot 2000 pictures, compared to film cameras, no digital camera is competitive

Here is the paradox, digital cameras can endure hundreds of thousand of exposures, which is very high number for the average hobby photographer looking at quality results, still a very high number of exposures for a professional photographer.

Film , on the other side of the spectrum , you mostly pay for each additional exposure you make, so, price wise, it's much more adapted to any type of photography and photographer.

Deciding whether the K3 III is worth the money based on competition (digital) is a consumer approach to evaluating a price, not so much from purely a photography perspective. You could evaluate the price the same way for a fridge, or a new toy

I look it at a little bit differently. If photography is a hobby (most of us aren't pros) that gives you enjoyment and you like shooting new gear then value isn't the most important thing. The question is how much do you want to spend on your hobby each year (or can afford to spend on it).

Many hobbies are expensive -- it doesn't really matter what the hobby is -- hunting, golfing, skiing, fishing -- they all have different levels of gear and different levels of money that you can drop on trips associated with the hobby. Photography actually is on the low end compared to some of them.

I've already seen some used K-3 III cameras show up for 1600 dollars and at that price, I think it is pretty reasonable. I'm waiting for the K-1 III, but if it is delayed enough I might end up looking at replacing my (ancient) K-3 with one of these.

cxdoo · 10-09-2021, 03:09 AM - **3 Likes**

It's really hard to give a definite recommendation to general audience. Pretty much any modern camera is really good at what it does.
What's 2k USD/EUR to you? Which components of "photography experience" matter to you? Where are you coming from, in terms of bodies and lenses? What bothers you with what you have?

So we can only talk specific circumstances and personal preferences.
First time I printed some 50cmx70cm photos taken with K5II was this year after I got K3III. To me they look amazing. I could probably go 4x the size and they'd still look amazing (I'd just need a bigger house and more walls to accommodate that). So I found out I don't really care about megapixels or even sensor advances that much. Realized stuff I have is more than capable to deliver whatever I could try. Yes, I struggled with AF and low light and, true, K3III improved that a lot, but did I really need it? Not really. Still have a lot of great photos.

Earlier this year I was thinking of getting A7III to see what FF and ML is about. Now I'm glad I didn't and am more inclined to spend that money on lenses. Went to store to see it - didn't like the looks at all. Didn't like Nikon Z either. K3III sits next to me as I type this and it looks perfect. Is that shallow? I don't know, probably.
But I enjoy using it.
Of course, YMMV.

**Cerebum** · 10-09-2021, 05:15 AM - **2 Likes**

I am still one camera behind. I want a K1

anyone know where I can get a money tree?

**aslyfox** · 10-09-2021, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by Cerebum

I am still one camera behind. I want a K1

anyone know where I can get a money tree?

A money tree

Think of the work

Picking up the leaves

Hold on I want one too

gatorguy · 10-09-2021, 06:10 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by cxdoo

It's really hard to give a definite recommendation to general audience. Pretty much any modern camera is really good at what it does.

Earlier this year I was thinking of getting A7III to see what FF and ML is about. Now I'm glad I didn't and am more inclined to spend that money on lenses.

Money is better spent on great glass than a new camera. If you can afford both then lucky you. IMO it's wasteful spending to buy a great but expensive camera and then having to use mediocre lenses because you blew your entire budget with no extra room for great glass to go with it.

The photos from even my lowly entry-level K-70's shine with premium lenses mounted.

**Cerebum** · 10-09-2021, 06:37 AM

Originally posted by gatorguy

Money is better spent on great glass than a new camera. If you can afford both then lucky you. IMO it's wasteful spending to buy a great but expensive camera and then having to use mediocre lenses because you blew your entire budget with no extra room for great glass to go with it.

The photos from even my lowly entry-level K-70's shine with premium lenses mounted.

I totally agree. I know I bought pre owned but my KP and a full set of DA Limited, including the 20-40 only cost me a bit more than a K3iii body and the results are incredible

**UncleVanya** · 10-09-2021, 07:00 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by gatorguy

Money is better spent on great glass than a new camera. If you can afford both then lucky you. IMO it's wasteful spending to buy a great but expensive camera and then having to use mediocre lenses because you blew your entire budget with no extra room for great glass to go with it.

The photos from even my lowly entry-level K-70's shine with premium lenses mounted.

Originally posted by Cerebum

I totally agree. I know I bought pre owned but my KP and a full set of DA Limited, including the 20-40 only cost me a bit more than a K3iii body and the results are incredible

Honestly that depends - what if you already own the good glass? What if the frame rate and autofocus is the difference between a few almost perfect shots and award winning shots? I can't fault people for buying this camera if they need or want it - it's their money - but I (like both of you) couldn't justify it on top of what I already had - I couldn't even "justify" the KP over my aging K-3 - but I bought one when it was on sale and I am glad I did.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-70 upgrade - K-1 Mark II or K-3 mark III?	Emirena	Pentax DSLR Discussion	35	11-28-2021 09:40 PM
K3 mark III (not mark II !)& Sigma 50-500 (later version) - any experience or issues?	jeallen01	Pentax K-3 III	7	08-14-2021 01:51 AM
PetaPixel K-3 Mark III Review	Kobie	Pentax K-3 III	44	08-09-2021 02:44 PM
K-3 Mark III and GR III topping one Japanese sales chart	JPT	Photographic Industry and Professionals	27	07-31-2021 07:22 AM
Petapixel K-3 Mark III Review	bladerunner6	Pentax News and Rumors	2	07-26-2021 11:35 AM

10-08-2021, 06:54 PM - 2 Likes	#2
Spodeworld Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: New Joisey Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,370	Good review. I haven’t pulled the trigger yet because I’m one of those folks who was waiting for them to come out with a camera like this but I was also soooo looking forward to it having a movable lcd for how I like to use it. But at this price, I’m still on the fence as a result of it not having one.

10-08-2021, 09:14 PM - 1 Like	#3
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,404	Nice review. I’m one of “those users” that was disappointed by the lack of a tilt screen and the so so buffer. I ended up buying a KP on the blowout sales and love it, but this camera is a beast and I still wonder if one is in my future.

10-08-2021, 09:22 PM - 2 Likes	#4
dmjjr Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Arizona Posts: 230	Still not convinced this is worth dropping 2K on a body. Can rent one for a week for about $120/with option to purchase. Will have to knock my socks off for me to buy. Currently have the K3II & K52S for comparison

10-09-2021, 12:17 AM - 2 Likes	#5
Cerebum Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Lancaster Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,828	Tremendous review, I watched it last night. Totally honest as always. I have a KP and a K3, both of which I love. When the K3iii came out I said that I could see no reason to move up from the KP and I still hold with that. The image quality of the KP, when it is sporting a DA limited, is stellar and once you get use to the ergonomics, it is a delight to use. To be honest I haven't flipped my screen in a while but I do miss having the option when I use my K3. The K3iii for me would be a luxury. I know it is a wonderful thing but the price tag (4x the cost of my KP) means it will be beyond my reach, probably forever.

10-09-2021, 12:45 AM - 4 Likes	#6
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	I did buy K-3III when it did come out. Not regretting it one bit. Eye/face/human and animal recognition is very good and way above anything in Pentax land, but it is not that far off from mirrorless. Best part being that it is not a mirrorless camera. I use screen to look if my settings are good. I fo rarely rely on the screen, because itnails the shots and I can clearly see what is going on. I did upgrade my blackmagic pocket 4K to Panasonic S5(+kit lens) which was 2000€, new in discount. I use it mainly for video. And there it is much better than K-3III. But it is slow and cumbersome(yes, it is not rated for it’s speed and usability to be the best experience for photos, which it is also not). That aid for MF is neat, but I really do need all the help I can get especially when it is not bright daylight. Why I did bring that up. Mirrorless. Because withthis big screen K-3III has, I can see clearly, it does focus well even in dark! And it is very responsive. A joy to use, unlike Panasonic, which will give very nice video, but you really have to work for it and rotating screen is not enough, You’ll need external monitor too…(same goes for K-3III with video). It is remarkable camera snd to me it was worth 2000€ and it will peopably be around 1800€ in few months?(christmas and all coming up) and that is even better value. That said, if that extra performance with AF and FPS and also quite good 4K mean much, then by all means do not put your money there

10-09-2021, 12:47 AM - 3 Likes	#7
garywakeling Moderator Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,759	Thanks for the review, I found it interesting. I agree with you that it is the sum of all the improvements taken as a whole that makes this camera a long awaited upgrade to the K3. Each individual improvement may be small but they are all better. I have just started shooting with the new 16-50 plm lens,I like to add the grips on to all my cameras and with the size of the new lens, the difference between the K3III and K1 in terms of size and weight seem negligible to me. My thoughts as to how I will use the camera are geared to using it as a quick autofocus long lens sports/wildlife camera. With the ability to effectively give me a 1.5x teleconverter for all my full frame lenses as well as the improved autofocus and buffer it works well with my current equipment. It also allows me to trim down to the classic 15 21 43 70 mm APS-C lenses for a compact outfit when size and weight is at a premium. The biggest drawcard to an old time photographer like me is that it is a DSLR, I have tried mirrorless cameras and I appreciate the technology available with them, I just cannot get used to holding the camera away from my face to look at the screen. If I want to look through a viewfinder the DSLR experience just works best for me rather than mirrorless viewfinders. With little interest in video I cannot comment on if the new camera's video is of any use, I have always preferred still photos. Is it good value? I believe so, my K3 is still going strong after 6 years, so if this upgrade can go for a similar lifespan $350 per year seems quite reasonable to me. Thanks for being the messenger, no need to be shot when you present a pretty balanced view on the new camera.

10-09-2021, 01:04 AM - 1 Like	#8
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,232	I like the start of the review about the price. Is it worth the money? I'd answer that question a bit differently.. Is it worth the money? - Yes if you shoot 200 000 pictures, the cost per picture is very competitive with film - No if you shoot 2000 pictures, compared to film cameras, no digital camera is competitive Here is the paradox, digital cameras can endure hundreds of thousand of exposures, which is very high number for the average hobby photographer looking at quality results, still a very high number of exposures for a professional photographer. Film , on the other side of the spectrum , you mostly pay for each additional exposure you make, so, price wise, it's much more adapted to any type of photography and photographer. Deciding whether the K3 III is worth the money based on competition (digital) is a consumer approach to evaluating a price, not so much from purely a photography perspective. You could evaluate the price the same way for a fridge, or a new toy

10-09-2021, 02:54 AM - 3 Likes	#9
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by biz-engineer I like the start of the review about the price. Is it worth the money? I'd answer that question a bit differently.. Is it worth the money? - Yes if you shoot 200 000 pictures, the cost per picture is very competitive with film - No if you shoot 2000 pictures, compared to film cameras, no digital camera is competitive Here is the paradox, digital cameras can endure hundreds of thousand of exposures, which is very high number for the average hobby photographer looking at quality results, still a very high number of exposures for a professional photographer. Film , on the other side of the spectrum , you mostly pay for each additional exposure you make, so, price wise, it's much more adapted to any type of photography and photographer. Deciding whether the K3 III is worth the money based on competition (digital) is a consumer approach to evaluating a price, not so much from purely a photography perspective. You could evaluate the price the same way for a fridge, or a new toy I look it at a little bit differently. If photography is a hobby (most of us aren't pros) that gives you enjoyment and you like shooting new gear then value isn't the most important thing. The question is how much do you want to spend on your hobby each year (or can afford to spend on it). Many hobbies are expensive -- it doesn't really matter what the hobby is -- hunting, golfing, skiing, fishing -- they all have different levels of gear and different levels of money that you can drop on trips associated with the hobby. Photography actually is on the low end compared to some of them. I've already seen some used K-3 III cameras show up for 1600 dollars and at that price, I think it is pretty reasonable. I'm waiting for the K-1 III, but if it is delayed enough I might end up looking at replacing my (ancient) K-3 with one of these.

10-09-2021, 03:09 AM - 3 Likes	#10
cxdoo Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Limassol, Cyprus Posts: 1,150	It's really hard to give a definite recommendation to general audience. Pretty much any modern camera is really good at what it does. What's 2k USD/EUR to you? Which components of "photography experience" matter to you? Where are you coming from, in terms of bodies and lenses? What bothers you with what you have? So we can only talk specific circumstances and personal preferences. First time I printed some 50cmx70cm photos taken with K5II was this year after I got K3III. To me they look amazing. I could probably go 4x the size and they'd still look amazing (I'd just need a bigger house and more walls to accommodate that). So I found out I don't really care about megapixels or even sensor advances that much. Realized stuff I have is more than capable to deliver whatever I could try. Yes, I struggled with AF and low light and, true, K3III improved that a lot, but did I really need it? Not really. Still have a lot of great photos. Earlier this year I was thinking of getting A7III to see what FF and ML is about. Now I'm glad I didn't and am more inclined to spend that money on lenses. Went to store to see it - didn't like the looks at all. Didn't like Nikon Z either. K3III sits next to me as I type this and it looks perfect. Is that shallow? I don't know, probably. But I enjoy using it. Of course, YMMV.

10-09-2021, 05:15 AM - 2 Likes	#11
Cerebum Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Lancaster Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,828	I am still one camera behind. I want a K1 anyone know where I can get a money tree?

10-09-2021, 05:49 AM	#12
aslyfox Seeker of Knowledge Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: Topeka, Kansas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 24,581	Originally posted by Cerebum I am still one camera behind. I want a K1 anyone know where I can get a money tree? A money tree Think of the work Picking up the leaves Hold on I want one too

10-09-2021, 06:10 AM - 1 Like	#13
gatorguy Moderator Join Date: Feb 2015 Location: Central Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,092	Originally posted by cxdoo It's really hard to give a definite recommendation to general audience. Pretty much any modern camera is really good at what it does. Earlier this year I was thinking of getting A7III to see what FF and ML is about. Now I'm glad I didn't and am more inclined to spend that money on lenses. Money is better spent on great glass than a new camera. If you can afford both then lucky you. IMO it's wasteful spending to buy a great but expensive camera and then having to use mediocre lenses because you blew your entire budget with no extra room for great glass to go with it. The photos from even my lowly entry-level K-70's shine with premium lenses mounted.

10-09-2021, 06:37 AM	#14
Cerebum Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Lancaster Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,828	Originally posted by gatorguy Money is better spent on great glass than a new camera. If you can afford both then lucky you. IMO it's wasteful spending to buy a great but expensive camera and then having to use mediocre lenses because you blew your entire budget with no extra room for great glass to go with it. The photos from even my lowly entry-level K-70's shine with premium lenses mounted. I totally agree. I know I bought pre owned but my KP and a full set of DA Limited, including the 20-40 only cost me a bit more than a K3iii body and the results are incredible

10-09-2021, 07:00 AM - 1 Like	#15
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,404	Originally posted by gatorguy Money is better spent on great glass than a new camera. If you can afford both then lucky you. IMO it's wasteful spending to buy a great but expensive camera and then having to use mediocre lenses because you blew your entire budget with no extra room for great glass to go with it. The photos from even my lowly entry-level K-70's shine with premium lenses mounted. Originally posted by Cerebum I totally agree. I know I bought pre owned but my KP and a full set of DA Limited, including the 20-40 only cost me a bit more than a K3iii body and the results are incredible Honestly that depends - what if you already own the good glass? What if the frame rate and autofocus is the difference between a few almost perfect shots and award winning shots? I can't fault people for buying this camera if they need or want it - it's their money - but I (like both of you) couldn't justify it on top of what I already had - I couldn't even "justify" the KP over my aging K-3 - but I bought one when it was on sale and I am glad I did.