Jump to content

New Pentax K3 beats Nikon FF image quality?


malcom_knight

Recommended Posts

<p>Is it possible that the crop sensor Pentax K3 is equal in quality to the FF Nikons? These comparisons seem to indicate it! These are great! <br>

Here's an article that Pentax users can be proud of: http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=5438&news=pentax+K-3+Nikon+D600+head+to+head+comparison+Pentax+wins</p>

<p>If you check http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/pentax-k3/pentax-k3A7.HTM It appears that the Pentax holds its own against the D800E too! Slight edge maybe to the D800, but check out high ISO shots. The quality seems to be the same at high iso. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I've looked at the looked at the link...and you can see it in the shadow of the silver pine (ISO 6400), that the K3 has more noise. I mean, if I can differentiate this on a small screen (laptop)....then apparently there is more gulf balls floating. Also, I noticed that couple of the images were not in focus (credibility issue). </p>

<p>Anyway, no point of beating at one's chest....pick the rig that you prefer and enjoy taking images. Just make sure you're informed properly. Some peeps rent eq to verify various claims....and tests.</p>

<p>Les</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Ironically, there have been similar comparisons between the Nikon D800 and the Pentax 645D, with the smaller sensor running neck and neck with its higher priced competitor.</p>

<p>It's not surprising given the innovations in sensor technology in recent years. All smaller format sensors like the 4/3rds and APS-C have much better noise levels and dynamic range at high ISO.</p>

<p>I think it might all come down to DoF and megapixel requirements (physics, after all, can't be beaten), with 'full-frame' and bigger sensors being used for studio portraits or advertising and APS-C and 4/3rds for everything else.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>-dogmatics like Ricoh - it going to be more and more about ,they all ready push segment to over top ,better to have some thing to mount at least to compare 35 focal . I may not a big fan of FF or 4/3 , but when you put 9-18 on Oly 4/3 sound like technology start some were . </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I think it might all come down to DoF and megapixel requirements</p>

</blockquote>

<p>+1<br>

People tend to think that a 1 stop difference is very noticeable based on their experience with older sensors whose performance dropped drastically, but modern sensors have linear performance wrt ISO.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>These guys just don't get the point of full-frame do they? DX is <strong>never</strong> going to equal FF WRT control over depth of field and availability of ultra-wideangle lenses. Same as full-frame wouldn't be the first choice for any subject needing magnification together with a deep depth of field above all else.</p>

<p>Just grab your Pentax, Canon, Nikon, Panasonic or whatever weapon-of-choice you prefer and take some darned pictures. If they're good pictures, nobody will care a jot what name was on the front of the camera - or lens for that matter.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Just for the record, I'm favorably disposed to the K3 being a fantastic camera, which it may turn out to be in the DX realm.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>It's potentially <em>spectacular </em>(assuming it lives up to its specs - and I imagine it will) - and I hope it lights a fire under Canon and Nikon to get their 7D Mk II and D400 out at last.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...