[Lloyd_Christmas]

Actually he did use it and it kind of saved him, how would that be an advantage mk III? Because you didn't use it every time? The advantage is having the capability for those that use it, there's no advantage not having it, except you didn't have to pay the extra amount it cost to manufacture over a fixed screen.

Just trying to be funny. Sorry....

[AfterPentax Mark II]

hmmm....who does your laundry?

My Launderette (whom I married 35 years ago) and my dryer work on that.

[ThorSanchez]

If I recall from some videos that they tried to also free some space to make room for your nose.

Of all the arguments that may be the most ridiculous. Nobody has ever told me I have a large nose, and no matter what I do it's firmly pressed up against the LCD screen of the K-3 III if I look into the viewfinder.

[repaap]

Of all the arguments that may be the most ridiculous. Nobody has ever told me I have a large nose, and no matter what I do it's firmly pressed up against the LCD screen of the K-3 III if I look into the viewfinder.

Well, it may be, but that is what they said. It is not much, but hey! I did not make it up.

Seems that you are not happy with K-3III, it is too bad. While there are many (Perhaps)who will not buy this camera because of what it is lacking(flippy), there are still many(Perhaps) who will buy it just because it is what it is(not moving, secure, and quite good actually as it is).

I wanted to buy this camera to see my self if it is any good in performance, as it was marketed. And it is. Is it perfect? No. But now I do actually believe that next flagship is going to be worth it too(K-1III). As well as I do think that K-3IV will have flippy.

Will I be more happy with that? Maybe, but seems that many in this thread will buy it if there will be flippy. Almost 80% seems that as big problem.

[ThorSanchez]

Well, it may be, but that is what they said. It is not much, but hey! I did not make it up.

Seems that you are not happy with K-3III, it is too bad. While there are many (Perhaps)who will not buy this camera because of what it is lacking(flippy), there are still many(Perhaps) who will buy it just because it is what it is(not moving, secure, and quite good actually as it is).

I wanted to buy this camera to see my self if it is any good in performance, as it was marketed. And it is. Is it perfect? No. But now I do actually believe that next flagship is going to be worth it too(K-1III). As well as I do think that K-3IV will have flippy.

Will I be more happy with that? Maybe, but seems that many in this thread will buy it if there will be flippy. Almost 80% seems that as big problem.

I'm very happy with it. It's the best camera I've ever owned, and it meets almost all of my requirements. I'm just a little annoyed that it doesn't have GPS like the K-3 II, and the flippy screen seems like it would be useful, and the nose thing is comical.

[repaap]

I'm very happy with it. It's the best camera I've ever owned, and it meets almost all of my requirements. I'm just a little annoyed that it doesn't have GPS like the K-3 II, and the flippy screen seems like it would be useful, and the nose thing is comical.

Alright! All is okay then! I’m looking forward of seeing what is that GPS less astrotracer going to be like. I’m not missing flippy, but I do also find that it could be useful. No comments on the nose, but I do appriciate slimmer form, really

[125px]

If I recall from some videos that they tried to also free some space to make room for your nose. This and many other things imply that they really aimed this camera for photographers who use OVF. Also the body it self is quite slim. It would be fatter with moveable screen.

It is still quite nice to have that with aps-c size body. Especially when you get to have the nice OVF too. Very intuitive fast snappy Pentax. I don’t know if there was anything like that before. There will be models with less OVF and more flippy, for sure.


Besides, someone said there is no GPS for Astro … well they did solve that. Very nice features too.

I think this is close to what I was getting at with my post. I don't post much but do enjoy the site and discussions.
From what I have seen of this discussion, there are those who just want to see Pentax succeed, and those who like a certain thing and also want to see Pentax succeed. I am in both groups but they are not mutually exclusive.
Looking forward to the Astro computational photography they have in store.
To me, the Zen of 'snappy Pentax' sums it up.

[jersey]

Well, I have it and I am happy with it. I bought it knowing well that it does not flippy and while I would be happier with it it is not a deal breaker. Still I understand why people who consider a flippy screen part (even if small) of their workflow are not willing to get it. In the end it is just a tool that has to fulfil owner requirements.

[UncleVanya]

Besides, someone said there is no GPS for Astro … well they did solve that. Very nice features too.

The gps quote I saw was about tagging photos with location. I thought the camera like many other brands allowed your phone to sync location?

[repaap]

The gps quote I saw was about tagging photos with location. I thought the camera like many other brands allowed your phone to sync location?

I think it is possible with this too, via phone. Have not tried, cuz I don’t tag..

[Pål Jensen]

The Nikon D6 and Canon 1DX MkIII are low-resolution sports-oriented FF bodies. These bodies are made for a specific purpose. It's a strawman to compare the K-3 III to them.

The usefulness of flip screen is unrelated to sensor resolution. The K-3III is just as targeted at a certain shooting style as the other cameras mentioned. What percentage of Nikon and Canon pro body users shoot sports? 1%?
The issue is blown out of all proportions. There's is no problem seeing the screen with camera on the ground or above your head. Seeing it straight on would be more convenient but that's all there is to it. With the camera on the ground you have to bend to hit the shutter release anyway. If the camera is remotely controlled you get the control and the screen on your phone.

[luftfluss]

The usefulness of flip screen is unrelated to sensor resolution. The K-3III is just as targeted at a certain shooting style as the other cameras mentioned. What percentage of Nikon and Canon pro body users shoot sports? 1%?
The issue is blown out of all proportions. There's is no problem seeing the screen with camera on the ground or above your head. Seeing it straight on would be more convenient but that's all there is to it. With the camera on the ground you have to bend to hit the shutter release anyway. If the camera is remotely controlled you get the control and the screen on your phone.

Actually, a large percentage of D6 and 1DX users shoot action - that's why they are low-resolution, hgh-FPS machines. The cameras are specifically made for - and marketed for - that usage model. They are also not bought by individuals as much as they are rented and purchased in number by media organizations.

Per videos and statements released by Ricoh, the K-3 III is a general-purpose body - far different from the D6 and 1DX.

[ThorSanchez]

The gps quote I saw was about tagging photos with location. I thought the camera like many other brands allowed your phone to sync location?

It does, but it's an extra step or three and depending on your phone it might not work very well. My Google Pixel 1 (Android) was extremely fiddly to get to get location sync to work. My new Pixel 6 seems to work somewhat better.

[UncleVanya]

It does, but it's an extra step or three and depending on your phone it might not work very well. My Google Pixel 1 (Android) was extremely fiddly to get to get location sync to work. My new Pixel 6 seems to work somewhat better.

I have a feature like it on Sony disabled as I would rather not tag by default.

[Lord Lucan]

I've worked in engineering design offices, and what happens is that someone, such as the company chairman or chief engineer, gets a bee in their bonnet about what a new design should or hould not have - often against the advice of middle management, the engineers and the marketing people. I think this must have happened at Ricoh/Pentax - someone senior did not see the need for a flippy screen and was d-mned why anyone else should need one either.

A movable screen built to the standard of the rest of the camera would have made it 1cm thicker

Nonsense. I did measurements on my K1 when we had last had this debate and reckoned it added about 4mm. FWIW I have often been in camera shops (when we had them) and overheard buyers considering camera choices. I never once saw one put a ruler to a camera. They did however fret over feature lists (whether they needed those features or not).

The issue is blown out of all proportions.

Not if it loses Pentax sales. A fixed screen has clearly been a deal breaker for a significant percentage of potential buyers. and Pentax can't afford that. Canon OTOH has a range big enough to cover all cases.

There's is no problem seeing the screen with camera on the ground or above your head.

It is a problem if the plane of the screen is above your head, as it often is when I'm taking photos on a table top looking down (eg of documents, old photos). The alternative is a stepladder, which I had to use with my fixed screen K10-D.

I don't see many images where it is apparent that they are shot that way. Besides, I wonder how these people managed in the film days......

How would you know how they are shot? As for film days, I had an LX fitted with a "waist-level" finder (which I used at eye level for that table top work).

I assume the real answer is that the tilting screen would have added $50-100 to the price and they didn't want to go any higher than $2000 US.

I expect that had a lot to do with it. The retrospective "apologies" that Pentax have come out with are mostly BS. Their arguments about the K3iii's excellent viewfinder wouId logically requre the deletion of the live view screen entirely, not just deletion of its flipping. I think they have been taken aback by the flak and hopefully they have learned a lesson. They can't compete with mirrorless thin-ness so they should not try; they are in a different market now.

Having a flippy screen versus fixed screen is absolutely nothing to do with :

1) using a viewfinder versus using the live screen to compose. (I use the VF when possible, and someone prefering LV won't be prevented by the screen not flipping).
2) using a mirrorless camera versus a DSLR.
3) using video versus taking stills.
4) your nose. (They could make the eyepiece position and/or eye relief anything they/you want anyway)