[gatorguy]

We've had comments off and on claiming this or that about the Nikon D500 and the KIII, but a dearth of actual real-use info. I'll be the guinea-pig.

This will not be a quick brush-thru, I plan to update it regularly with my thoughts about the two. So here we go!

The D500 kit is a Nikkor 16-80 2.8E VR, a Nikkor 55-300 4.5-5.6G ED, and a Tamron 150-600 5.6-6.3 Di VC. Lexar XQD card in slot one. I've been using the camera daily for the past week.

Comparable lenses for my K3III will be the Pentax 16-50 PLM, Pentax 55-300 4.5-6.3 PLM, and Pentax 150-450 4.5-5.6.

First up for comparison is each with similar 55-300's. AF initially set to Group on the Nikon and Small Zone on the Pentax. This is the first time I'd had both lenses in hand to test the bodies with, my Pentax one on loan until two days ago, and one I've almost never used for any length of time anyway. So today they went to work shortly after sunrise, and until 9:00am this morning before the heat and humidity got too unpleasant.

First surprise: The D500 did much better in low light than I expected. The first Nikon shots were at 7am. Shooting AF-S manual with auto ISO 12800, where I had preset the limit, full open, and shutter speed 1/500. Images were detailed, clear, noisy as expected, but very recoverable. I honestly thought 12800 was going to be too high. The Pentax was preset only one stop higher at 25600, otherwise same settings using TAv. I was happy with both, and noise levels were very similar.
NOTE: I just remembered I keep the K3III underexposed by a 1/3 to a full stop much of the time. Looking, today was one of those times, exposure compensation a 1/3 stop under where I had left it. I simply forgot to change it for the early morning.

By 7:45 the sun was high enough with enough light to try some continuous shooting on some larger birds relatively close by. It was shortly thereafter I got surprise number two: The Pentax lens was absolutely solid, much faster to focus and "stickier" than the 150-450 I've been carrying for weeks. I did not expect that much difference. The Nikon did just as expected, quick focus and very good tracking. To be honest the Nikon tracked ever so slightly better than the K3III. +1 for the D500.

But then came surprise numbers 3 and 4:
I thought that I'd try tracking flying dragonflies with my Pentax, something I had no success with using the 150-450. Surprise, YES the K3III can track quick darting dragonsflies 15-30 feet out using the 55-300. I was now expecting similar success with the D500 which brings me to surprise #4: Not happening.

The Nikon would not lock focus on the same dragonflies captured successfully on the Pentax. The lens would rack in and out, but not once did it lock focus on one. That same failure happened with a plane flying in the distance, just a spec against the sky, and with a white crane far away flying above the tree line. The D500 / 55-300 combo seems to fail on small objects with low contrast against the sky. But the K3III had no problems at all, finding that same plane and the white crane, both probably even a bit smaller by then, without issue thru a half dozen shots. The K3III was way more likely (near certain) to lock focus on low contrast subjects, with the D500 more often failing than locating. That was not expected.

My guess is the more effective use of the better 307K pixel RGB sensor in the Pentax compared to the 180K in the D500 leads to a definitive improvement in recognizing the contrast differences and finding focus. Even tiny objects may be picked out more reliably. Still need to repeat and verify of course.

Tracking in general? The K3III / 55-300 combination was often quicker to locate and begin focusing on a fast flying bird, but it would sometimes take 2-3 frames to get clean-focus on them, which makes sense since I've set Release Priority. The D500 was sometimes (often) slower to find the subjects and even occasionally failed, but once acquired was better at initial focus lock from the first frame. Yes, it too is set for release priority. Honestly, both were great at tracking overall so I'm not complaining.

More to come later after I review all the images from this morning. If we have the same weather tomorrow morning I may not bother getting out to repeat the tests and see if the results are consistent, but if not Sunday I'll definitely be doing so before moving to a different lens pairing.

Early thoughts: The K3III is looking good, but lots of photos, more scenarios, and other lenses still to go.

If anyone has specific questions I'm happy to hear 'em, and will answer what I can. There's still a lot to figure out.


Oh, and one interesting observation just before I left for the day. In good light and the bird positioned right the K3III's zone-select AF very often went to the bird's eye. I don't know if I'd seen this before, but I have tweaked some settings in the past 2 weeks. Maybe it's that, perhaps it's been doing that and I haven't paid attention, or it's something better chalked up to happenstance. So another thing else to test for repeatability.

BTW, any Nikon user know the correct setting to have the rear display remain on for 30 seconds or whatever between shots?

---

Last edited by gatorguy; 08-01-2022 at 09:17 AM.

[StiffLegged]

I look forward to reading your findings; it's gotta be better than fanboy hot air or conjecture. Keep investigating!

[house]

Nice to finally see a comparison! (not counting the dpreview one as a comparison). The lack of serious reviews by people who have used lots of cameras makes it hard to know where pentax is tech wise even if it's not the type of photography I do.

Images were detailed, clear, noisy as expected, but very recoverable. I honestly thought 12800 was going to be too high. The Pentax was preset only one stop higher at 25600, otherwise same settings using TAv. I was happy with both, and noise levels were very similar.

Did you compare 1:1 pixels or at same magnification? It's 20 vs 26 mpx right? (admittedly not a huge difference but should be visible?)

[RICHARD L.]

My friend takes only "bird" photos with a Nikon D500 + 200-500 f/5.6 Nikon zoom. He has a Flickr site and I must admit his pictures are impressive. (Jocelyn Cantin Flickr). What do you think about this 200-500 mm zoom ?

Thank you

[UncleVanya]

Looking forward to hearing more. I shoot Sony and Pentax and find more in common than apart as far as final output.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Sounds interesting so far. Looking forward to your long term comparisons.

[gatorguy]

My friend takes only "bird" photos with a Nikon D500 + 200-500 f/5.6 Nikon zoom. He has a Flickr site and I must admit his pictures are impressive. (Jocelyn Cantin Flickr). What do you think about this 200-500 mm zoom ?

Thank you

I choose to go with the Tamron 150-600 rather than the Nikkor 200-500. Both lenses are praised by some while other owners express disappointment. It's a toss-up. As for impressive photos always take those for what they are. You're only seeing the best they got, not the several thousand not-so-impressive.

[gatorguy]

A couple of odds and ends:
The D500 is significantly bigger than the K3III, yet about the same weight. The Pentax grip is noticeably better than the Nikons, and in fact I didn't initially like the feel of the D500 at all. But I had a spare SpiderPro handstrap and using it improved things immensely. It's OK now.

Button customization makes the K3III a lot more convenient and user friendly. Yes the D500 has a couple of buttons for adding quick access to some additional controls, but nothing close to what the K3III offers.

Fast bursts (Ch-Constant High) on the D500 are impressive. I don't ever see a reason to do 40 bursts at a time tho. I'll typically do three or four, pause and reset focus/framing, then three or four more. Repeat as needed. 200 to fill the buffer on the D500 is more for bragging rights. But I'd certainly admit having the fast XQD card does give you that option of dozens at a time if for some reason you ever need a really long burst. I can see some photogs having issues with the smaller Pentax buffer.
Funny observation: I've shot alongside both the occasional Canon and Sony flagship user who for some weird reason thinks a twenty shot machine gun burst for a relatively stationary model is beneficial. Culling 1000+ images, many indistinguishable from another, is not my idea of a pleasant way to pass a Sunday afternoon.

Related to that it would be nice if there was an in-between CL and CH on the Nikon. Constant Low is just a little too slow for my liking, and Constant High is unnecessarily fast for BiF. I ended up with more photos to cull than wanted. I'll dive back into menus
and see if there's something there to lower the burst rate on CH.

[gatorguy]

Looking forward to hearing more. I shoot Sony and Pentax and find more in common than apart as far as final output.

I'm seeing much the same between the D500 and K3III so far. Obviously the Pentax has some features and customization the D500 lacks, but my initial feeling is both cameras are excellent for wildlife. Fast to lock focus and admirable tracking.

The 20MP compared to 26MP makes less difference than many might assume. But the difference in body size is notable, and might be reason to opt for the more compact K3III if space is at a premium, ie backpackers, day hikers, travelers.

[nixxo2002]

I did compare both cameras a year ago . Nikon D500 200-500 with K3 III 150-450 . Pentax drive mode is faster , but Nikon buffer much better . Tracking the big plus for Nikon for tracking objects flying or moving towards to you . AF more accurate and sticky .
i didn't find any big difference in low light situation . I shoot owls with ISO 6400-12000 they both works similar to me . big plus for Pentax for ES . Works great on moving subject , and i was really surprise how great it work in LV . I have great results even with 150-450 ES -LV shutter speed bellow 1/100 - 1/40 .
for dragon fly 150-450 it's not a best option . my best combo K3 III even KP with DA 300 F4 . great results with DA 300 . But everything change when I bought DFA 85 1/4 , DFA 50 1/4 SDM and 16-50 PLM . The AF work super compare to old Pentax lenses ( DA 300 , DA 50-135 , 150-450 , DA 200 ) . Camera AF start tracking object very accurate .
i sold my Nikon combo after .

[MarkJerling]

We've had comments off and on claiming this or that about the Nikon D500 and the KIII, but a dearth of actual real-use info. I'll be the guinea-pig.

This will not be a quick brush-thru, I plan to update it regularly with my thoughts about the two. So here we go!

The D500 kit is a Nikkor 16-80 2.8E VR, a Nikkor 55-300 4.5-5.6G ED, and a Tamron 150-600 5.6-6.3 Di VC. Lexar XQD card in slot one. I've been using the camera daily for the past week.

Comparable lenses for my K3III will be the Pentax 16-50 PLM, Pentax 55-300 4.5-6.3 PLM, and Pentax 150-450 4.5-5.6.

First up for comparison is each with similar 55-300's. AF initially set to Group on the Nikon and Small Zone on the Pentax. This is the first time I'd had both lenses in hand to test the bodies with, my Pentax one on loan until two days ago, and one I've almost never used for any length of time anyway. So today they went to work shortly after sunrise, and until 9:00am this morning before the heat and humidity got too unpleasant.

First surprise: The D500 did much better in low light than I expected. The first Nikon shots were at 7am. Shooting AF-S manual with auto ISO 12800, where I had preset the limit, full open, and shutter speed 1/500. Images were detailed, clear, noisy as expected, but very recoverable. I honestly thought 12800 was going to be too high. The Pentax was preset only one stop higher at 25600, otherwise same settings using TAv. I was happy with both, and noise levels were very similar.
NOTE: I just remembered I keep the K3III underexposed by a 1/3 to a full stop much of the time. Looking, today was one of those times, exposure compensation a 1/3 stop under where I had left it. I simply forgot to change it for the early morning.

By 7:45 the sun was high enough with enough light to try some continuous shooting on some larger birds relatively close by. It was shortly thereafter I got surprise number two: The Pentax lens was absolutely solid, much faster to focus and "stickier" than the 150-450 I've been carrying for weeks. I did not expect that much difference. The Nikon did just as expected, quick focus and very good tracking. To be honest the Nikon tracked ever so slightly better than the K3III. +1 for the D500.
to a full
But then came surprise numbers 3 and 4:
I thought that I'd try tracking dragonflies with my Pentax, something I had no success with using the 150-450. Surprise, YES the K3III can track darting dragonsflies 15-30 feet out using the 55-300. I was now expecting similar success with the D500 which brings me to surprise #4: Not happening.

The Nikon would not lock focus on the same dragonflies captured successfully on the Pentax. The lens would rack in and out, but not once did it lock focus on one. That same failure happened with a plane flying in the distance, just a spec against the sky, and with a white crane far away flying above the tree line. The D500 / 55-300 combo seems to fail on small objects with low contrast against the sky. But the K3III had no problems at all, finding that same plane and the white crane, both probably even a bit smaller by then, without issue thru a half dozen shots. The K3III was way more likely (near certain) to lock focus on low contrast subjects, with the D500 more often failing than locating. That was not expected.

My guess is the more effective use of the better 307K pixel RGB sensor in the Pentax compared to the 180K in the D500 leads to a definitive improvement in recognizing the contrast differences and finding focus. Even tiny objects may be picked out more reliably. Still need to repeat and verify of course.

Tracking in general? The K3III / 55-300 combination was often quicker to locate and begin focusing on a fast flying bird, but it would sometimes take 2-3 frames to get clean-focus on them, which makes sense since I've set Release Priority. The D500 was sometimes (often) slower to find the subjects and even occasionally failed, but once acquired was better at initial focus lock from the first frame. Yes, it too is set for release priority. Honestly, both were great at tracking overall so I'm not complaining.

More to come later after I review all the images from this morning. If we have the same weather tomorrow morning I may not bother getting out to repeat the tests and see if the results are consistent, but if not Sunday I'll definitely be doing so before moving to a different lens pairing.

Early thoughts: The K3III is looking good, but lots of photos, more scenarios, and other lenses still to go.

If anyone has specific questions I'm happy to hear 'em, and will answer what I can. There's still a lot to figure out.


Oh, and one interesting observation just before I left for the day. In good light and the bird positioned right the K3III's zone-select AF very often went to the bird's eye. I don't know if I'd seen this before, but I have tweaked some settings in the past 2 weeks. Maybe it's that, perhaps it's been doing that and I haven't paid attention, or it's something better chalked up to happenstance. So another thing else to test for repeatability.

BTW, any Nikon user know the correct setting to have the rear display remain on for 30 seconds or whatever between shots?

Wow! Nice work mate. Great comparison review.

[zapp]

The K3iii is great, matches, surpasses the D500 in many aspects. In the end, the D500 can be put behind some glass not at all available from Pentax. If the 150-450 is fine for you, Pentax does very very well.
For me the K3iii with 150-450 works, on D500 I would pick faster glass or PF lenses

[Kobie]

@Gatorguy Very nice preliminary observations!
Some unexpected findings for sure. I'm not sure if you can do this but I'm curious. Can the subject recognition be turned off on the Nikon? It would be interesting to see how both cameras do when using only the AF system with no Subject Recognition assistance.
The other nice thing about the D500 is that for low light/night, the rear buttons light up.
The K-3 III has improved quite alot through the firmware updates. They really changed the camera from when it was released. I personally don't think either camera is better than the other, they're pretty much even given the overall picture (no pun intended).

[UncleVanya]

I personally don't think either camera is better than the other, they're pretty much even given the overall picture (no pun intended).

That’s a hard pill to swallow given the relative cost differences. I hope the k3iii come out on top given the price of admission. Obviously the ability to use Pentax glass is a major factor in deciding which of these to buy.

[c.a.m]

@gatorguy, Thanks for doing this.

After you've played with the D500 for a while, I think that it would be interesting to hear your comparisons of the viewfinders from a user's perspective.

Looking forward to your posts.

- Craig