[monochrome]

Yes, unless there is a "hole" in the feature set that fails to address a common use case for the target market, there is no path for advancement. I can think of at least one feature that would be valued and it is not best in class AF tracking and speed. Who might guess what that might be?


Steve

Vid Eo.

[photoptimist]

Vid Eo.

Is that them thar moving pictures? Next thing you know you'll want the talkies!


Actually, adding video to a still camera is like adding a camera to a mobile phone -- sure the device can now perform another function but not as well as a device dedicated to that function.

[BillO]

What "real advances"? What can't you accomplish with the K3II?

I shoot mainly nature and dirt bike competition. I also have a k3II and don't see it as possessing any real advances over the K3 for what I shoot. What "real advances" am I looking for?


1) Quieter (much) operation both AF and shutter. This is especially for nature. Sometimes I end up at the same place as 3 or 4 other guys (and that's the generic 'guys' not the sexist 'guys') shooting Nikon and Canon and you can hardly hear them focus or shot, then I start up my Pentax, the racket begins and silent reverie is broken. Everybody looks at me. One time a couple of years ago I drove to a provincial park, hiked in several kilometers in the dark so I could set up as the sun was just beginning to rise in order to shoot some beaver. I wait for nearly an hour then the beaver shows up to bolster it's dam. I wait for a nice shot, press the shutter release and ...CLACK! - then the beaver immediately dives for cover and is gone. Hours of driving, hiking and setting up and all I get is one shot. I focused manually so I didn't scare it off before I could get even one shot. I also used a 600/f4 with a 1.4L converter to get as much distance as possible. I was going to go out tomorrow to a new dam I have located, but now remembering that last disaster, I don't think I'll bother. Pentax users are not supposed to photograph beavers I guess.


2) Better focus tracking. Yeah, you might think SAFOX MCXXIV is really slick, but try tracking on a speeding dirt bike or a flying bird coming straight on with Pentax K3 or K3II. I'll guarantee you will not get a single in-focus shot. The guy next to you with a Canon will just about get them all. Been there, seen that. Plus you won't even hear the Canon, but the jerky whining grinding noise from your Pentax AF interspersed with random shutter explosions just might frighten the dirt bike rider. It will certainly have the bird veering off.



3) Sensor dynamic range. The right position for a shot does not always give the best light. It might end up being a bit contrasty and it sure nice to have the dynamic range to be able to do something about it later.


4) AF in video mode. This one is obvious. Personally I don't think Richo's Pentax folk give a gnat's fart about video.


Now don't get me wrong, there is a lot I do like about these cameras, but the above 4 things are a constant disappointment in the kind of shooting I do.


Man - you really have no idea how loud a Pentax is when you and a beaver are the only things up and about deep in the woods at 5:15am. It sounds more like heavy construction equipment that a camera.




These guy's don't mind though:

[monochrome]

You need a KP.

[Sandy Hancock]

You need a KP.

And a DFA 150-450

[luftfluss]

I shoot mainly nature and dirt bike competition. I also have a k3II and don't see it as possessing any real advances over the K3 for what I shoot. What "real advances" am I looking for?


1) Quieter (much) operation both AF and shutter. This is especially for nature. Sometimes I end up at the same place as 3 or 4 other guys (and that's the generic 'guys' not the sexist 'guys') shooting Nikon and Canon and you can hardly hear them focus or shot, then I start up my Pentax, the racket begins and silent reverie is broken. Everybody looks at me. One time a couple of years ago I drove to a provincial park, hiked in several kilometers in the dark so I could set up as the sun was just beginning to rise in order to shoot some beaver. I wait for nearly an hour then the beaver shows up to bolster it's dam. I wait for a nice shot, press the shutter release and ...CLACK! - then the beaver immediately dives for cover and is gone. Hours of driving, hiking and setting up and all I get is one shot. I focused manually so I didn't scare it off before I could get even one shot. I also used a 600/f4 with a 1.4L converter to get as much distance as possible. I was going to go out tomorrow to a new dam I have located, but now remembering that last disaster, I don't think I'll bother. Pentax users are not supposed to photograph beavers I guess.


2) Better focus tracking. Yeah, you might think SAFOX MCXXIV is really slick, but try tracking on a speeding dirt bike or a flying bird coming straight on with Pentax K3 or K3II. I'll guarantee you will not get a single in-focus shot. The guy next to you with a Canon will just about get them all. Been there, seen that. Plus you won't even hear the Canon, but the jerky whining grinding noise from your Pentax AF interspersed with random shutter explosions just might frighten the dirt bike rider. It will certainly have the bird veering off.



3) Sensor dynamic range. The right position for a shot does not always give the best light. It might end up being a bit contrasty and it sure nice to have the dynamic range to be able to do something about it later.


4) AF in video mode. This one is obvious. Personally I don't think Richo's Pentax folk give a gnat's fart about video.


Now don't get me wrong, there is a lot I do like about these cameras, but the above 4 things are a constant disappointment in the kind of shooting I do.


Man - you really have no idea how loud a Pentax is when you and a beaver are the only things up and about deep in the woods at 5:15am. It sounds more like heavy construction equipment that a camera.




These guy's don't mind though:

Love the chipmunk photo.

To respond to your points:

1. The K-5/K-3 are noted for having quiet shutters for their class. Perhaps the Canikon photogs are shooting higher-end FF models with quieter shutters. I've rarely chased a critter away with my K-3 II's shutter sound, although some of them do notice it. I shoot in short bursts of 4-5 usually, so perhaps if I went on longer the critters would flee.

2. I shoot legacy long tele, so can't comment on AF.

3. I generally underexpose and bring up the shadows than necessary, because highlights are more easily blown and less recoverable. A little careful PP work with noise reduction software and judicious sharpening can do wonders (well, almost).

4. A Canon shooter, a Sony shooter, and a Pentax shooter were walking down the street with God.

"God," asked the Canonite, "will Canon sensors ever have class-leading dynamic range?"
"Yes," answered the Lord, "but not in your lifetime."

After a few moments, the Sony shooter suddenly asked, "Lord, will there ever be a time when everybody likes Sony?"
"Yes," said He, "but not in your lifetime."

Finally, the Pentaxian summoned up the courage to ask, "God, will Pentax ever have really good video?"
"Yes!" the Lord answered after a moment, "but not in MY lifetime!"




Blacksox the Fox ain't scared of no stinkin' shutter...

[monochrome]

And a DFA 150-450

Heh. Nice new Blue UID.

[Sandy Hancock]

Heh. Nice new Blue UID.

It's a heavy burden, but I'll try to bear it with good grace

[Sandy Hancock]

....or next time

[mikesbike]

Great pics here!

I've done lot of action shooting with my Pentax gear. I've not done much burst shooting. Timing, constant AF activation and quickness on the trigger have been essential for me.

Very tricky and fine capture of that dancer coming forward in mid-air, and with good clarity for such a shot! I'm sure he wasn't in that position for long! The shot of the fast-moving dog is also remarkable.

I just did a shutter noise test for kicks between my K-S2, KP, and K-5 and K-5 IIs. I conducted my testing inside with windows closed, in a dead-silent insulated environment. I shot a peaceful outside scene through a closed window. Wind outside was very low, with no detectable noise. The silence was more so than likely possible in outdoor circumstances. One could easily hear a pin drop.

The K-S2 was noticeably the loudest, though I consider its shutter/mirror noise very passable for an entry-level model (and otherwise its design way above E.L. standards). Quieter, in fact, than the old MF Pentax models I used years ago. But when shooting in a quiet environment, one could describe the noise as a "clack". The KP was noticeably quieter than the K-S2. I consider it a quiet camera. The two K-5's, however were both identical in being extremely quiet- more like a whispered pzzip! All were used shooting the same scene from the same position through the same window, at 1/250 sec. Noise was understandably somewhat increased when using slow shutter speeds. I recently used a K-5 for shooting a baptism of a friend's son. I disabled the AF confirmation "beep". Noise from the camera was virtually undetectable, and no one, even those sitting near me, seemed aware that a camera was fired.

I have not used a K-3 or K-3 II to compare.

I would assume a FF model to be more prone to increased noise due to the shutter and mirror being larger. That said, I remember my Pentax MZ-S (the last Pentax professional film model) as having a quiet shutter/mirror, though its been perhaps 3 years since I've used mine.

[aslyfox]

And a DFA 150-450

and this lens, that lens and don't forget the other lens

" there's always [ room for more equipment ] "

one of the best things about Pentax, IMHO, is the ability to get good legacy equipment at reasonable [ " [ reasonable ] is in the eye of the beholder " ] prices

[mikesbike]

Interesting that you nailed those excellent shots with SDM lenses, which have a rep for being slower than average. However, I've also been very happy with my DA* 50-135mm SDM's AF performance, especially on my k-5 IIs and on the KP. I do find the AF of my DA* 200mm f/2.8 to be a tad slower than the DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 when both are used on either of those bodies. It tends to use more battery juice too.

The eventually forthcoming K-3 II replacement should be a really fine upgrade, as there have been useful refinements since their introduction, and who knows what more will be improved? I will not be among the first to go for one, but it should be very interesting. Even though I love my KP, I am still so satisfied with the results I get from my lightly-used K-5 IIs, and its handling, weight and design, I have no reason yet to lust after a replacement.

[BillO]

I shoot a lot, mostly dance. Always rear af and mostly AF-C and single center point and never use burst. SR and everything I can turn off is off because shutter speed is high enough I don't need it. I do need the shutter to go with no delays. Group shot, I turn SR on and AF-S. Same with portraits except when I can be on tripod which I prefer and SR is off.

The dog and dancer were done with SDM lenses, 50-135 and 17-70 respectively. Its simply a matter of constant tracking and selection. It ain't rocket surgery. Plenty of examples on my websites and blogs.

The squirrel was done on tripod with a Sigma 100-300 and I think a Kenko 1.5 TC through a sliding glass door. It was Carolina hot and Iwas on the coolside. They are very skittish.

K20's were loud. K5, K5iis and K3IIs are quiet but they do get a little louder after 100k or so actuactions

A mirrorless would be quieter. I'll be due for new bodies in year or so, we'll see what the next iteration of th K3 II is.
I'd be okay with a couple of low mileage K3IIs too.

Most of my effort is planning lighting and adding to that gear is my priority. Spent almost 1K last year on backgrounds.

I like your work. Nice shooting. The dog picture is 1 in a 1000 - me thinks.

The dancer is a set - up shot. I would pre-focus for that, and as you did provide enough light so I could use an aperture to give me plenty of depth of field and still retain a high shutter speed. That one is more timing than it is tracking and can be repeated if missed. I'm not taking anything away from the great picture though. It's truly awesome work.

As for an habituated back yard red squirrel, I'm sorry. You cannot compare that to real wildlife. I'm particularly blessed with red squirrels and chipmunks where I am, and compared to a truly wild beaver, they are not skittish at all. Even when you are in plain sight - like the shots below, they will gladly stick around and pose for you ad nauseam. If you're ever up in central Ontario, PM me and I'll take you on a little safari to shoot something that dosen't lounge around on your back deck railing.

[luftfluss]

As for an habituated back yard red squirrel, I'm sorry. You cannot compare that to real wildlife. I'm particularly blessed with red squirrels and chipmunks where I am, and compared to a truly wild beaver, they are not skittish at all. Even when you are in plain sight - like the shots below, they will gladly stick around and pose for you ad nauseam. If you're ever up in central Ontario, PM me and I'll take you on a little safari to shoot something that dosen't lounge around on your back deck railing.

I was thinking yesterday about wildlife that is not habituated to humans but is to human noise, like machinery. Which is probably why the wildlife around me is not as disturbed by the shutter sound as critters in a more unspoilt area.

An eye for an eye...

[sutherland]

I would hold out for the K-3II successor if you intend on staying with Pentax. The K-1/K-1II is not a suitable replacement as it lacks the FPS, Buffer, and Pixel Pitch that made the K-3II suitable for Sports/Action/Wildlife. Certainly, you can make any system work, but if you are seeking a performance oriented camera, the K-3II (and its successor) would be the right tool for the job.

I recently upgraded my D500 to a D850 (which has a MUCH louder shutter) A shutter can startle a species, but so can your sudden presence (trust me, you think you are being stealthy...you're not). All of my successful shots came from waiting and watching, not stalking and surprising. Pick a spot, give it 10 to 15 minutes and life/activity begins to resume around you.

Tracking is definitely not something I have ever relied upon in the field. It might work for subjects that move in a predictive path with little obstruction, but with active wildlife, I have found fast Focus Acquisition and Back Button Focusing to be features that contribute to greater success.

55-300 PLM, D FA 150-450, and DA 300 (even though it's getting a little old) are snappy enough. For the 150-450, you can reduce travel and speed up focus acquisition by engaging the limiter and focus presets (setting one of the four buttons to a set distance).

The D FA 150-450 is a fantastic, feature rich lens that would be perfect for any compatible body.