[5teve]

HI All

Ive been a pentax user since the K20 and progressed to the original K3 - I have a tamron 28-75 2.8 and a Tamron 70-200 2.8. I loved these lenses on the K20, but since getting the K3 - I just cannot get good shots. I can either get sharp up close ones and oof distance shots or with adjustment, vise versa. This is for both lenses, so my conclusion (as well as speaking to the pentax distributor) is that the tamrons or speciifcially my tamrons just do not play nicely with my K3. Its that bad that I've almost stopped using the camera, as i get a keeper rate of probably 25-40% and i'm not fussy on keepers.

So now I find myself at a crossroads... I know the camera market is depressed and the pentax range is minimal on bodies.. so I figure I have some options..

1, Buy new lenses and hope the K3 works with them - I'd be looking at Pentax 28-70 2.8 and either the 70-200 F2.8 or the 70-210 F4 - Still in the region of 3-4k AUD - I'd need to send the K3 in for service too..
2, Buy a whole new kit with above lenses and new K3 III - I'm looking at some serious money here in Aus.. Sell what I have either in parts or as a whole - I have the k20 still too..
3, Change Eco system.. probably head to Fuji or the like. I can get an XT4 with lens for less than a Pentax lens.. it fairly compelling, but I love Pentax, I love the size and feel (I use a grip too - I like the larger feel)

My main subjects would be my 5 year old (very fast) when we travel and go places (every weekend) and My K3 doesnt do a good job with current lenses - but may be better with the newer lenses. I know the K3 III is a big upgrade from the K3.. but still not sure if staying with Pentax is the right decision.. I dont change cameras often (as you can tell) I tend to buy the best I can afford at the time, and wait until something significantly better arrives many years later. Unfotunately although the camera is technically better the k20 - k3 move was not the best thing I have done.. but I feel this is a lens compatibility issue not camera...

What would your valued thoughts be? Yes I know its likely to be biased.. being a pentax forum.. but I also know a lot of people on here are very honest with their opinions!

Steve

[tduell]

... but since getting the K3 - I just cannot get good shots. I can either get sharp up close ones and oof distance shots or with adjustment, vise versa.

What do you mean by "with adjustments"?
A bit more detail might help.

Cheers,
Terry

[RobA_Oz]

Without knowing a lot more about the issues you're having with the K-3 and the Tamron lenses, my first suggestion would be to get hold of a Pentax 28-105, which admittedly is a full-frame lens, but which seems to play nicely with the K-3 and it isn’t expensive. I can’t comment on the Tamrons themselves, because I don’t have either of them, but I do have the 28-105 and it’s very good in its own right, but a bargain (in my opinion) at the price. The field of view is more limited than your wider Tamron, though, and that may be a consideration, so perhaps a Pentax 18-135 might be a good option.

The K-3iii, of course, is a very big step up from the K-3 in many ways (and I have both), so that would be the ultimate upgrade for you, but it comes at a price (although not hugely different to the X-T4) and with a 5-year-old it sounds like you’re a bit cautious about such an outlay.

I should also say that the Pentax (nee Tamron) 70-210/4 (again, a full frame lens) also plays nicely with the K-3 (and the K-3iii), but it isn’t that cheap unless you compare it with the Pentax 70-200/2.8.

[biz-engineer]

This is for both lenses, so my conclusion (as well as speaking to the pentax distributor) is that the tamrons or speciifcially my tamrons just do not play nicely with my K3.

The other way around. If you have issues with both Tamron lenses with one camera body, that's more likely your K3 body having an auto-focus offset due to distance between the mount and the AF module inside the camera, infinity focus is not perfectly achieved. The other thing is the K3 has smaller pixels, you can't expect the same perception of sharpness when zooming 100% on your display compared to the K20, and you'll see the same effect with a Fuji camera model having a sensor with similar pixel pitch (~24 or 26Mpixels).

My main subjects would be my 5 year old (very fast) when we travel and go places (every weekend)

If you don't do video, you could buy used Fuji models , e.g X-T3 , save money.

[5teve]

What do you mean by "with adjustments"?
A bit more detail might help.

Cheers,
Terry

Sorry Terry - I mean with AF adjustment being made in the menu.. I can adjust for close or far, but cannot get a setting for all ranges..

Steve

[iheiramo]

I suggest something outside your box. Get one of the 50/1.7 primes or DA50/1.8. Second hand they can be found very cheaply and offer very good IQ.

K3 & F50/1.7:

[microlight]

Hi Steve. I had similar experiences to you when I went from an *istDS to a K-5, and then from the K-5 to my current K-3II. I couldn’t figure out why my photos were initially no better; indeed they were often worse. I then read in threads in this forum about the effects of increasing mega-pixelage on image sharpness, in that it was necessary to change my technique since the higher-resolution cameras were less forgiving. There was also the ability to fine-tune the focus on the newer cameras.

I had a 16-45/f4 as standard lens on the *istDS (I still have that combination, now unused), and couldn’t understand why the K-5 wasn’t doing better with it. After all, moving from 6 to 16MP was a big increase in resolution - about the same as from your K20 to the K-3. Following research here, I did two things; modified my shooting style to consciously use faster shutter speeds, and fine-tuned the focus on the lenses I used. The result was like lifting a curtain; so much so that I changed the 16-45 for the 20-40 Limited for the K-5. It was an improvement - but not as much as I’d hoped for.

So when I went from the 16MP K-5 to the 24MP K-3II, I went through the same process again, and the 20-40 … got better. The point I’m trying to make is that changing hardware in and of itself didn’t necessarily improve things; for me it was more learning how to get the best out of them.

Your mileage may vary. I don’t try to photograph active five-year-olds, which I think would be a challenge for any system. All I can suggest might be to think about your technique first, rather than spending shedloads of cash and potentially not seeing the difference that you hope for. 😉

[5teve]

Without knowing a lot more about the issues you're having with the K-3 and the Tamron lenses, my first suggestion would be to get hold of a Pentax 28-105, which admittedly is a full-frame lens, but which seems to play nicely with the K-3 and it isn’t expensive. I can’t comment on the Tamrons themselves, because I don’t have either of them, but I do have the 28-105 and it’s very good in its own right, but a bargain (in my opinion) at the price. The field of view is more limited than your wider Tamron, though, and that may be a consideration, so perhaps a Pentax 18-135 might be a good option.

The K-3iii, of course, is a very big step up from the K-3 in many ways (and I have both), so that would be the ultimate upgrade for you, but it comes at a price (although not hugely different to the X-T4) and with a 5-year-old it sounds like you’re a bit cautious about such an outlay.

I should also say that the Pentax (nee Tamron) 70-210/4 (again, a full frame lens) also plays nicely with the K-3 (and the K-3iii), but it isn’t that cheap unless you compare it with the Pentax 70-200/2.8.

Thanks Rob

The issues with the tamrons are inconsistent focus throughout the zoom range, with both lenses. I can apply lens focus adjustments to help, but i lose focus (front or back focuses) at the long or short end depending on where I adjust it (obviously adjusting to a chart - not something I can do out when shooting) I have a pentax 16-45 that behaves as it should and thats what made us come to the conclusion of an incompatible lens.. CRK and a local camera shop have had a look and even checked the lens.. and concluded the same. Both tamron lenses are around 11 years old... and been used pretty hard. They worked great on my old K20..

Yes understood that the step up is big between the mk1 and the mk3 as is the price difference. 2900 for body and grip and then if i want new lenses too.. another 3k odd.. if I want big glass. I'll take a look at the other lenses.. but like to have the ability for shallow DOF and speed with the f2.8.. but more I want to start using the camera again.. not my phone. I bought topaz labs suite too to try and help. It does recover some but its not a magic bullet. I ideally want to drop into the local camera shop and hook my camera onto a new lens or 2 and see how it performs. Still remembering the camera is over 7 years old now....Main issue is nobody has stock any more.. so its hard to do... Reading the reviews on the 70-210 made me interested.. one stop difference, 1/2 the weight and cost too.. (compared to the 2.8) in comparison the fuji is 2.5k with 2 lenses (yes - starter lenses) or 1.8k body only..

My final concern is about dropping this much money into a system that I know isnt going to die, but development is not happening and I can see Pentax going niche.. increasing pricing further, relying on its awesome glass and useablility not to mention image rendering etc. Do I want to spend money now knowing that the next 'upgrade' I wont be able to justify the cost of a new body.. or lens etc? Probably me just being cautious... but something I was wondering.

As I have been told the best camera is the one in your hand that does the job you want.. I love pentax (and any non mainstream manufacturer) but the current camera is just mainly resigned to its bag.. as i get too frustrated processing the images to find most are not useable. A battle between heart and mind eh?

Steve

---------- Post added 06-10-2022 at 07:48 AM ----------

Hi Steve. I had similar experiences to you when I went from an *istDS to a K-5, and then from the K-5 to my current K-3II. I couldn’t figure out why my photos were initially no better; indeed they were often worse. I then read in threads in this forum about the effects of increasing mega-pixelage on image sharpness, in that it was necessary to change my technique since the higher-resolution cameras were less forgiving. There was also the ability to fine-tune the focus on the newer cameras.

I had a 16-45/f4 as standard lens on the *istDS (I still have that combination, now unused), and couldn’t understand why the K-5 wasn’t doing better with it. After all, moving from 6 to 16MP was a big increase in resolution - about the same as from your K20 to the K-3. Following research here, I did two things; modified my shooting style to consciously use faster shutter speeds, and fine-tuned the focus on the lenses I used. The result was like lifting a curtain; so much so that I changed the 16-45 for the 20-40 Limited for the K-5. It was an improvement - but not as much as I’d hoped for.

So when I went from the 16MP K-5 to the 24MP K-3II, I went through the same process again, and the 20-40 … got better. The point I’m trying to make is that changing hardware in and of itself didn’t necessarily improve things; for me it was more learning how to get the best out of them.

Your mileage may vary. I don’t try to photograph active five-year-olds, which I think would be a challenge for any system. All I can suggest might be to think about your technique first, rather than spending shedloads of cash and potentially not seeing the difference that you hope for. 😉

Thanks Microlight.. our particular 5 year old is nigh on impossible for any system - when I say he is fast.. he really is. He doesnt stop moving from 6:30am to 7pm then he switches off.. so much so I say he i binary - he is either on of off. One good case for high res video

I understand what you are saying and accept older gear just doesnt work as well or at all with newer (and why should pentax ensure compatibility with old 3rd party lenses?) I'm not a pro, barely an amateur.. but like to use good equipment. I have no doubt my technique could be improved.. but with the following issues.. I have to have some new hardware along the way..

I have been through the adjustments with charts and different methods (even sending the camera and lens in for checking) and no matter what happens - fine adjustment works for some of the zoom range but then sends the rest of the zoom range into front or back focus. This is why i'm tempted to try new lenses.. that are designed around the newer higher res camera's.. i just have that doubt hanging over my head about throwing more money at the system. I also cannot try any lenses easily as nobody where I live stocks them.. so I go cheaper second hand and hope for the best or order in, pay the $$'s and may still have a dud camera!

Steve

[biz-engineer]

have a pentax 16-45 that behaves as it should and thats what made us come to the conclusion of an incompatible lens.. CRK and a local camera shop have had a look and even checked the lens.. and concluded the same. Both tamron lenses are around 11 years old... and been used pretty hard. They worked great on my old K20.

Now that you say it , it makes sense. The focus mechanism of the Tamrons isn't precise enough anymore for the 24Mpixels of you K3. The higher the camera resolution, the more precise the focus needs to be.

In the past, I've also had focus problems with my DA 40 ltd, DA 21 ltd and DA 17-70 on the K3. Over the years, the quick-shift mechanism became a bit lose, and if I'd photograph distant subjects (but not at infinity), the subjects wouldn't be focused properly, in a random fashion, sometimes the focus would be Ok, but most of the time it wouldn't. The camera would do it's focus lock thing back and forth but the lens focus gear wouldn't be able to move the glass element at the exact wanted position.

[5teve]

The other way around. If you have issues with both Tamron lenses with one camera body, that's more likely your K3 body having an auto-focus offset due to distance between the mount and the AF module inside the camera, infinity focus is not perfectly achieved. The other thing is the K3 has smaller pixels, you can't expect the same perception of sharpness when zooming 100% on your display compared to the K20, and you'll see the same effect with a Fuji camera model having a sensor with similar pixel pitch (~24 or 26Mpixels).


If you don't do video, you could buy used Fuji models , e.g X-T3 , save money.

I'd like the ability to do video.. the K3 isnt good at it It may be the only format that catches the fast little thing

The point you make about the body being out.. would that be fixed by the AF fine adjustment or is that just something not fixeable?

I learned fairly early on that the sharpness was very different to the K20.. but significant focus performance is the key bugbear.. its just very variable front and back focus.. all dependant on zoom position and distance to subject. But it cannot be adjusted for. Maybe its the focus sensors? or could be the lens.. its a hard one to determine without lots of other known good lenses!

Steve

[biz-engineer]

i get too frustrated processing the images to find most are not useable. A battle between heart and mind eh?

I've had images not focused, unusable for viewing / printing at decent size. My decision was easy, I sent the lenses for repair and sold them, with the money I bought the Pentax K-1 and new lenses (DFA with in lens motors), and never looked back.

[5teve]

Now that you say it , it makes sense. The focus mechanism of the Tamrons isn't precise enough anymore for the 24Mpixels of you K3. The higher the camera resolution, the more precise the focus needs to be.

In the past, I've also had focus problems with my DA 40 ltd, DA 21 ltd and DA 17-70 on the K3. Over the years, the quick-shift mechanism became a bit lose, and if I'd photograph distant subjects (but not at infinity), the subjects wouldn't be focused properly, in a random fashion, sometimes the focus would be Ok, but most of the time it wouldn't. The camera would do it's focus lock thing back and forth but the lens focus gear wouldn't be able to move the glass element at the exact wanted position.

Yeah that makes perfect sense.. and more than likely what is going on here.. by that Im gonna need an sdm type lens (not screw drive) which leads to me to a decent suite of lenses (bear in mind I prefer short and long zoom ranges - cause i never know what i'm walking into) If I can find some to try.. i'd happily keep the K3 - but i'm also back to the cost side.. the good lenses (faster aperture) in Aus are not cheap, but I could go used.. if I can find them. I'm basically down to the 16-50 2.8, 70-210 F4, 70-200 2.8, 24-70 2.8

I've had images not focused, unusable for viewing / printing at decent size. My decision was easy, I sent the lenses for repair and sold them, with the money I bought the Pentax K-1 and new lenses (DFA with in lens motors), and never looked back.

Had the lenses in - nothing changed all check out ok.. I reckon your first point is probably why.. but yes these no doubt will get sold and funds used to by a litre of fuel or something

Steve

[biz-engineer]

The point you make about the body being out.. would that be fixed by the AF fine adjustment or is that just something not fixeable?

If the focus issues aren't repeatable, e.g you focus five times on the same subject and get different focus every time, it can't fixed by AF adjustment.

[microlight]

Hi Steve. Yes, absolutely new hardware is nice, which is exactly the reason that I’ve upgraded bodies and lenses over the years; my point was about learning to get the best out of them rather than dropping large sums and hoping that it does the job. Being amateur or professional for me doesn’t come into it. I’ve been amateur for more than forty years, but amateur doesn’t necessarily mean less good, in the same way that professional doesn’t necessarily mean less bad (my daughter’s professional wedding photos being a good example!).

I hear what you say about fine focus-tuning of zooms, so I adjust my practice to cope. I found that I mostly tend to use my 55-300PLM at around 250-300mm so I tune it there. For shorter tele and close-up I use the 100Macro. The 20-40 has a short zoom range so the tuning remains constant across the range.

Hopefully the comments in this thread will help you out - we’re generally a positive bunch! 😀

Edit - Biz makes a great point about old lenses wearing!

[Rondec]

I'm guessing the issue is the lenses. If you are shooting with a K-3, why not get a cheap 18-135 or a little more expensive 16-85 and see how you like it? Those lenses have slower apertures than your current lenses, but my guess is that they will play more nicely with your camera's autofocus system.

That's what I would try before flipping your camera body.