New PENTAX - K-3

<p>From 16.3 straight to 24 (aah) Mp's, skipping the 20 or so... Not a full frame, with quite a few interesting, useful<br>

tech specs. Finally something to look forward to (again). Current pre-order price a stiff $ 1300,00. That'll come down.<br>

Always does.</p>

<p>Pentax K3 hands-on preview:</p>

<h2>http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/pentax-k3/pentax-k3A.HTM</h2>

<p>Good article on Steve Huff:<br>

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2013/10/07/the-new-pentax-k-3-it-means-business/</p>

here is a great comparison link...

 

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-k-3-verses-pentax-k-5-iis-dslr-comparison-23042

 

i'm not jazzed about the weight, but dual SD slots and the overall boost of features is amazing.

 

I will also take the opportunity to say to those who said Ricoh was buying Pentax to shut it down, quit it. I'm tired of it. If

this is shutting down a brand, then lets do it. This is by far the biggest spec leap for a Pentax camera I have seen. Yet, it

appears the ergonomics are identical.

 

This camera really seems to put ulltra high end features and specs into what is still a very light, compact and robust body.

 

While the IQ of the K-5 was the first upgrade, IMO, over the K10D, the specs of this camera, and I truly hope the IQ as well,

make this a must upgrade camera for the first time in a while. Obviously, images and reviews will determine if the spec

sheet is more than #s on paper, but this definitely should quiet all the doomsdayer's.

 

Well, it won't, because until we see a full frame camera, there will always be doomsdayer's

Dear Santa, my name is Stevie

and I've been a very good boy

this year...

 

Selectable anti-alias filtering?

Crazy!

<p>Pentax products seem to have a hard time catching up with technology trends. They need faster development cycles so that what sounded good at some point can get released at a time when it still sounds good.</p>

<p>Purchase of this beauty, after finally convincing my spouse that K5iis was the ends of the earth, would sure lead to my demise. I agree with Steve though; there are some instances I feel I need both my K7 and K5iis and this camera could deal with both situations with this feature.</p>

<p>And I double Justin's rant. Never thought I'd say this but '<em>Je t'aime Richo!' </em></p>

<p>I do not view the Pentax way of product deveopment as having a "hard time" keeping up. I approve of their slowness because when they do arrive at a certain point, they have done their homework and come up with a superior product in offering a better-built design, unique in being compact yet of higher quality at a reasonable price, with innovative advanced features targetting still photography. Like Nikon, Pentax has been less concerned about keeping up with the latest in higher MP's and appealing to that mentality, and more concerned in presenting a quality product.</p>

<p>For instance, where niether Pentax nor Nikon were hitting the 18MP category common with Canon, Pentax was offering superior user control of factors such as noise suppresion and DR in the 10MP K200D and 14.6MP K20D as well as superior build with weather sealing at unbelievable prices. In tests, these cameras were able to outperformed the competition in delivering images at higher ISO with good noise reduction while preserving better detail. Were there shortcomings? Sure, but less MP's, a tad less speedy AF (but perhaps more accuracy), less than the best video or live view performance, were not factors that outweighed the above advantages for many still photographers like myself. Even while owning and mostly using my K-5, I continue to enjoy using these two models and still think the results I produce with them to be very fine.</p>

<p>I feel the same as Justin, however, that the K-5 is truly a visible step up in IQ over even the excellence of the K10D, K200D and K20D. That does not relegate these former models to obsolete crapdom. They can and do still produce damn good quality photos.</p>

<p>I welcome the latest arrival. Perhaps in true Pentaxian fashion, they have taken their time, and building upon the latest already existing technology, have given it better form and performance with continued uniqueness in features. I have been thinking for a while that perhaps the MP race has lost practical value in terms of visible advantage for most uses. I mean, as measured by machine testing, as the K-5 delivers a shade under 2600 lines when you already have over 16 MP are we going to see a resolution advantage from a 24 MP model that delivers a bit over 2800 lines? An increase of 200 or 300 lines may have been descernable when coming from a 6MP model. I was expecting a 24MP model to deliver at least 1,000 lines increase over the K-5.</p>

<p>So I have not been one of those who have been disappointed as they wait for the next yearly model's higher MP's. Tests have also revealed that those 24MP models have not done as well with noise at higher ISO settings as the K-5. And the higher file sizes cause everything you do with each file to run slower, and tax storage. So where is the advantage?</p>

<p>I do nonetheless look forward to seeing how Pentax may have refined this technology- maybe even equalling the fine high ISO of the K-5. A switchable AA filter is of great interest, along with other feature upgrades. And at last maybe a silver/black version that does not disappear after a month or sold just to Asians or Germans... that would be appealing.</p>

<p>I am with Justin on the weight increase- about 4 oz? And why does Pentax insist upon going backwards to go forwards? Why a K-3 instead of a K-6? I hope if or when a full frame series is introduced a refreshingly sensible policy will ensue- like it will be the "F" series (Full Frame) F-1, next F-2, then F-3, etc!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Great news making the forum here a bit more active as well :-)<br>

Did you read anything about the flash sync speed of the K-3?</p>

 

<p>Great news making the forum here a bit more active as well :-)<br>

Did you read anything about the flash sync speed of the K-3?</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Did you read anything about the flash sync speed of the K-3?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Sadly, still at 1/180. That's probably the most obvious "con" with the K-3 on paper. Otherwise looks like a solid offering in the two-dimensional world.</p>

<p>ME</p>

<p>I don't think the weight change is quite that big -- only 40g, or 1.4oz. <br>

4mm taller, 3mm thicker...but you get a second card slot and better viewfinder in return -- seems fair.<br /><br />It looks like quite a few ergonomic improvements:</p>

<ul>

<li>mode dial can be locked/unlocked with a lever</li>

<li>metering mode with button + e-dial (the stubby little lever under the mode dial on the K-7 through K-5 was a bit hard to operate with human fingers)</li>

<li>AF mode button near AF/MF switch (somewhat like D7100)</li>

<li>Separate AF point mode button rather than tiny lever (this seems an improvement, probably brought on by more options due to more AF points)</li>

<li>Movie mode now has dedicated lever rather than position on e-dial</li>

<li>Live view button moved out of way next to viewfinder and AF enable/disable moved closer to upper corner, away from green button -- the three functions are now separated farther so you won't mix up the three by feel.</li>

<li>better diopter setting dial</li>

</ul>

<p>Also:</p>

<ul>

<li>improved 0.95x rather than 0.92x viewfinder magnification</li>

<li>Tethering via special $99 16GB wi-fi SDHC card</li>

<li>Best-in-class 8.3 fps continuous shooting/buffer (?)</li>

<li>Segmented white balance -- could be interesting, <em>*might*</em> be capable of applying different WB to different regions of image?</li>

<li>Hi-res 86K-pixek RGB metering (up from 77-segment in K-7 through K-5)</li>

<li>User-selectable sensor-vibration-based anti-aliasing</li>

<li>Various movie/video mode improvements</li>

</ul>

<p>I haven't seen confirmation yet on focus peaking though would be surprised if it's not there.</p>

<p>Looks to me like it may end up being worth the wait (and probably the weight too). Too bad they couldn't eek out 1/250 x-sync, though I admit most of the time I like the slick, quiet shutter of the K-7 thru K-5.</p>

<p>Also, I don't think anybody mentioned that Pentax also announced a DA 55-300 4/5.8 with WR and HD coatings. Personally I think they should have SDM'ed this lens though I know a lot of people are still very suspicious of Pentax's SDM reputation. Either way, making an excellent lens (one of their best sellers) even better.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I approve of their slowness because when they do arrive at a certain point, they have done their homework and come up with a superior product in offering a better-built design, unique in being compact yet of higher quality at a reasonable price, with innovative advanced features targetting still photography.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>When they arrive at some point the competition is already ahead. The camera bodies are one thing, but Pentax is now touting their stable of APS-C lenses while still having gaping holes in their lineup. Meanwhile, in the time Ricoh took to bring this K-3 and a few other incremental products to the market, Fuji has produced several camera bodies and a full stable of lenses - none of which can be called inferior to what Pentax is putting out. Compact systems of high quality at reasonable prices are no longer unique to Pentax. The market changed a lot since the K10D, but Pentax products are still released as if they were operating in a bubble. Where is a K-mount lens roadmap that can get someone excited about this system? What is Pentax's answer for MILC technology - or are they planning to become the Leica of SLRs? Whatever, time will tell and teach those that cannot anticipate. </p>

<p>Andrew, the comparison Justin provides states a K-3 weight of 800 grams vs 680 for the K-5.</p>

<p>Yes, I guess Pentax is in a bubble and behind the times since the new model is "only" 23MP instead of forging ahead with 30MP. With a new MILF too and a whole slew of dedicated lenses, then some people might be happy for a few months. But I would not be contemplating the possibility of buying such products myself. The other brands were likewise behind when they took so much time to arrive with those compact high-quality models, which Pentax was already making for a while. One is still hard pressed to find another brand with a model as compact yet well-built as the K-5 with WR as good and cold temp performance as good, great low light performance, and having SR built in, while offering user controls of NR and other unique features, and all that in its price range. Pop Photo's recent review of the new Pentax K-50 found it to be an extraordinarily well-featured, well-built model with WR, unique for its class, and an extraordinary value as well.</p>

<p>I am quite content with the IQ I am getting from my Pentax stable of bodies. I have never been a rangefinder type of person, preferring the SLR type viewing. For those preferring an aps-c MILF, Fuji apparently makes a very good one. I consider my little K-r with a pancake near as compact in practical use as an aps-c MILF, yet I can throw on a 200mm f/2.8 or a 300mmf/4 if I need to. Great versatility with TTL viewing, and great low light performance. I have lenses up the kazoo, more than I actually need, but am still contemplating getting the DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited (while still keepinng my fine, fast FA 43mm f/1.9) because it is sooo small, with fine optical performance even wide open, on any body with any AA filter.</p>

<p>I believe the switchable AA filter of the new K-3 to be an industry-leading feature at this point. I hope this new model is as good for low light performance as the excellent K-5 has been. Forthcoming dpreview and other testing will be of great interest. I also hope that the silver/black version is not merely another disappearing limited edition farce.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>One is still hard pressed to find another brand with a model as compact yet well-built as the K-5 with WR as good and cold temp performance as good, great low light performance, and having SR built in, while offering user controls of NR and other unique features, and all that in its price range.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You can make a camera system look better on paper than in real life, but the problem is that even on paper the Pentax proposition has eroded and it is not as easy to argue as it used to be. I used to have a post on my blog recommending Pentax for the features you enumerated plus a few more lens related reasons - I went over it a couple of years ago and I realized that all of those reasons had been eroded by new products from Panasonic, Olympus, Samsung, Sony, and Fuji - I ended up removing that post because I couldn't find any way of updating it in a positive way. These days I can get all those features you enumerated in an E-M1 and what the paper calculation won't tell you is just how much more fun one of those cameras is in use than a DSLR.<br>

<br>

The sad reality is that the Pentax system is so promising that Zeiss and Voigtlander have decided to focus their efforts elsewhere - on NEX and MFT, respectively. No matter how you twist it, that is not a sign of platform health. I'll congratulate Ricoh when they will do something that makes other companies want to invest in their platform. Fuji already got Zeiss support for a less than 2 year old system - it's not full support, it's crumbs from the NEX table so far, but it's still better than the nothing that Pentax gets.</p>

I was wondering the same thing. flash sync (mechanical) has been sub par

since the PZ-1P. Why can't we get a 1/250 (minimum) or preferably 1/500.

 

as far as product cycles, if they are replacing bad products, I get it, but

almost every pentax DSLR had produced great images and been capable of

grabbing the shots. They aren't producing $4000+ cameras so I'm not sure

what people are expecting in faster product cycles. what we will get is

disgruntled buyers who move on because batteries and grips and

accessories change every 6 months.

<blockquote>

<p>I'm not sure what people are expecting in faster product cycles</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I was talking about development time, not about body release cycles. Ricoh has released more Pentax bodies than they released lenses so far. It's the lack of lens development that I deplore. Look at these releases: 35/2.4 in 2010, 50/1.8 in 2012. These lenses should have been around since 2005. 8 years to release two inexpensive prime lenses? Compared to the pace at which lenses get added to MILC systems, this is pathetic. MFT and NEX had similar lenses available for them within a couple of years after they were introduced.<br>

<br>

Pentax is trying to sell their system as being the most complete APS-C system on the market. John Malcolm's words:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>With the announcement of the (*) our new long zoom 55-300mm lens, Ricoh Imaging now offers twice as many APS-C optimized lenses as some of our competitors<br /></p>

</blockquote>

<p>(*) Typo is from the quote I picked from dpreview.<br>

<br>

But once you look closer at their lens lineup:</p>

<ul>

<li>DA Limited lenses used to be cool because they were small - but now you can get lenses just as small or smaller and yet faster on other systems with shorter mount registration distance</li>

<li>Gaps still exist - no 24mm, no 28mm.</li>

<li>Some of their DA lenses seem to actually cover a FF image circle, which means that they're not really optimized for APS-C</li>

</ul>

<p>For a new customer looking at investing in an APS-C sytem, Fuji or NEX look far more appealing. And that's why they sell more than Pentax, even though they're very young systems.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>These lenses should have been around since 2005. 8 years to release two inexpensive prime lenses? Compared to the pace at which lenses get added to MILC systems, this is pathetic. MFT and NEX had similar lenses available for them within a couple of years after they were introduced.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Are you seriously comparing lens development quantities between a tiny manufacturer of a relatively mature APS-C platform product (Pentax) with what has been happening with multiple large competitors in a newer product market? That argument manages to be both disingenuous and irrelevant at the same time. Congratulations.</p>

<p>Of course a new platform is going to attract new vendors, each of which is trying to claim their grubstake by releasing new lenses and bodies. So what?<br>

ME</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Like many shooters with a Nikon focus I've been waiting for the D400 since I first picked up a D300s and was blown away by the build and ergonomics. Nikon, be worried. I think it's highly likely I will own this beauty soon. And a 35/2.8 to go with it :-)<br>

p.s. As to this only having 24MP, I'd have far preferred this to have had 16MP and larger photo sites. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'd have far preferred this to have had 16MP and larger photo sites.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Why? Fewer, larger photosites provide <em>no </em>benefit - certainly not in terms of noise.</p>

<p>Really? I'll need to tell all the companies which have been making those pointless<em> Full Frame</em> bodies that they've been wasting their time</p>

<p>The K-3 hits the goldilocks spot for me. Improved AF always welcome, a couple of mm here and there keep the ergonomics that I have grown to love with the K-5 series. 8.3 fps point at improved processing speeds internally, and dual cards give me another few options. I am not overly pushed about the sensor Mp difference besides hoping that it equals the 16Mp Sony for DR and high ISO output. The argument for FF will always exist for some but we had a gear orientated meeting earlier this week at my photo club, and there was some serious kit on show, Canon 5D III, Nikon Dx3, Nikon D7200 but the camera that got handled and asked about most was my K-5 :-) Admittedly it also had the most lens on show beside it, all the FA Limiteds, DA's 15 & 35, a CZ 2/50 Planar-Makro and a Voigtlander APO 90 but the over riding expression I got from the other members as soon as they picked it up was wow, this feels nice in hand and it is soooo quiet. How come no one knows about these? </p>

<p>I have a D5100 and in the last year, after loads and loads of searching for an upgrade which is actually sensible, I've come to the conclusion I should have bought a K5. But, what can you do? Pentax didn't even register during my research. After all the problems on the Nikon front and the constant demands (which I am certain Nikon is aware of) for the D400 for the last two years at least, I am very glad I haven't invested heavily in Nikon glass.</p>

<p>Robbie, it's good to hear about those experienced photographers recognizing those special qualites of the K-5. Of course they don't yet know the half of it until they have the chance to handle its control features in actual shooting situations. </p>

<p>Like the Pentax Hyper Program and Hyper Manual systems, for instance. How in P mode one can instantly switch to Aperture Priority or Shutter riority temporarily without having to change first to Tv or Av mode- just by selecting the desired shutter speed or aperture which will stay where you set it as long as the camera remains on. How in M mode one can very quickly take spot meter readings around a scene just by hitting a green button. Or in M mode if wanting to chane aperture or shutter speed, but keep the same exposure value, just hit the AE-Lock button and upon selecting a new aperture the shutter speed will automatically change accordingly, same for selecting a new shutter speed where the aperture will follow suit.</p>

<p>A top Pentax DSLR model is an extremely efficient photo shooting machine for control by the photographer in making adjustments and changes on the fly.</p>