Wow, totally surprised: X-T1 review comes out in about 2 months. And with no long lashing and reminding needed because of the once made, but hardly to be fulfilled promise.It seems DPR can do anything if they really like it, and makes them enough dough.
Many competent photographers have noted that Nikon peer cameras may indeed subjectively appear to lock in faster AF, but Pentax will most likely produce more keepers with a similar lens. Nikon and Canon, in their mutual race against each other, sacrifice accuracy for the sake of speed and first impression, and leave the rest to DoF to sort out. Because later on, it is easier to blame yourself for misses than a camera that has locked-in fast.
It is a purely psychological game Nikon and Canon are playing.
Pentax, on the other hand, plays differently.
Mind you, the test of the AF is *NOT* how fast camera *appears* to lock in, as some believe, but is it able to produce a sufficient number of usable photographs. Isn't that what should matter? So iIn that regard, Pentax AF does not lack at all.
So instead of asking why Pentax seems "to lag", ask yourself why are you being sold an illusion of speed that sacrifices real matters? If you don't believe this, try it yourself.
Valeriu 64: Congratulation Ricoh, and team Ricoh - Pentax for your succes.Pentax K-3 is the best APS-C DSRL at this moment .
God , bless you
Not quite brendon1000. Many competent photographers have noted that Nikon may indeed subjectively appear to lock in faster AF, but Pentax will produce more keepers. Nikon and Canon sacrifice accuracy for the sake of speed and leave the rest to DoF to sort out. Pentax, on the other hand, plays differently.
Mind you, the test of the AF is *NOT* how fast camera appears to lock in, but is it able to produce a sufficient number of usable photographs. In that regard, Pentax AF does not lack.
Zvonimir Tosic: The GR, then Pentax K-3, and now — early next week — a 645 Z. Ricoh indeed proves they are one of the most exciting, yet most understated camera manufacturer today.
Funnily, not a word about the 645Z on the DPR news page anywhere, despite the official teaser running for a week already on all Ricoh Imaging websites, and despite rumours that the 645Z may be the groundbreaking new camera that will redefine the meaning of the MF and image quality in general.
But, many other photography "news" are presented on DPR, including "possible announcement of a firmware update from Sony", or a "possible lens patent from Apple", or a "Mini M" from Leica (which was not mini M at all) ... are all readily presented for digestion and anticipation.
Better hurry up. 645 lenses in second-hand markets are already disappearing very quickly.
avicenanw: Perhaps next a K3 Mk II with improvements in movie mode, jpeg and WiFi implementation?
Firmware can fix all of that, even some improvements for the wireless FluCard feature set.
Ricoh has made Pentax K-3 a into a very capable and lasting camera, and unlike with other manufacturers, that may indicate that many features will be available via simple firmware upgrade in the future.Hardware is there, sockets and connectors are there, quality of manufacture and materials used is there, and everything suggests that K-3 needs no replacement in several years.
But all that also took time to develop, which many other company would not bother with. My guess is that K-3 was built to last, and that many new and exciting features may be available in the future.
The GR, then Pentax K-3, and now — early next week — a 645 Z. Ricoh indeed proves they are one of the most exciting, yet most understated camera manufacturer today.
RichRMA: Well, the half-plastic exercise in cost-cutting (relative to its predecessor) the D7100 gets 85 points, I presume it is the strength of the Nikon lens offering that gave the lesser camera the edge?
An altogether different category. DPR has put K5II and D7100 in the "Midrange DSLR cameras" category. But K-3 in the "Ssemi-pro DSLR category". Mind you, it is DPR's categorisation, and scores are comparable •only• inside same category.
suntek101: This seems to be a wonderful camera but I like to do low and high angle shooting and I have been waiting for Pentax to incorporate an articulated LCD screen into their next camera since the K10. Hopefully the "K1" will be released in a year or two and my wish will come true. Are you listening Ricoh/Pentax? Until then, I'll just dream of the K3 while making the most of my old K10!
I know the feeling; imagine how Robert Capa and all the photojournalists must have felt when dragging their noses through the mud to make photographs that changed the way we see and imagine our world.
Richard Murdey: "Disappointing JPEG color response"
A lot hinges on just *how* disappointing, but that seems to me like a pretty fundamental negative. If I'm paying $1000 for a dSLR it should produce pictures with pleasing color without too much fuss. If it can't that's quite a heavy burden to have to live with.
The review also says ... "Lots of control over JPEG output, including three styles of sharpening". Thus, you buy a camera to explore and use its full potential, or buy it determined not to use it?
Carsten Pauer 2: Flop Flop...
Don’t forget to flush the toilet …
RichRMA: A very good and fair review for THE BEST sub-FF camera around. Sorry Nikon, still think no "real" successor to the D300s is a travesty..
Actually it's a pure business common sense for Nikon. They are moving towards the FF altogether, and will not waste time and money developing another line of pro-DX bodies and lenses when they have pro-FX lenses aplenty!
Currently the K-3 is the only semi-pro crop camera left in that category. If you like crop sensor cameras, instead of complaining about Nikon try a K-3; you may even like it better and Pentax is fully committed to crop — they have the largest and best crop sensor lens range in the world.
For those complaining about scores, please note that K-3 is now the only contemporary crop sensor DSLR left in the Semi-professional Interchangeable Lens Camera category. That was the category reserved once for D300/s and 7D. The K-5II was enlisted in a Mid Range Interchangeable Lens Camera category, together with D7100 and 70D. Therefore scores between the D7100 or 70D and the K-3 are NOT comparable.
Transparency has nothing to do with it. This is an altogether different category issue from Nikon’s, with more severe consequences including health and safety (S&H) hazards. S&H issues must be handled this way — publicly — while Nikon’s on individual basis.
Denisio Fabuloso: Well it seems the Olympus OMD is the standout here. Nikon has better white balance and the OMD with it's 'piddling' 4/3 format wipes the floor with the competing opposition on most counts. Deserved it's many accolades I have no doubt. Before you get out your machetes... I am a long time Pentax owner of around 40 years. Credit where credit's due.
So you need to acknowledge you are an m4/3 user / cheerleader in a totally unrelated topic or subject or a comment line?
Image processing is good, but the lens does not excite. Leica's lens in X-Vario, or Ricoh's lens in the GR, are both miles ahead of this camera.But, I believe, if Canon wanted to implement a really good lens, the package would cost twice as much. It would be worthwhile, though. It would be good Canon comes out with a kick-@ss enthusiast camera, not another budget 'zoom': they have plenty of budget cameras already.
I see that many comments are disappearing.
Red5TX: I like the Q system. Used to own the original Q. But you'd better really want all four lenses. Pentax just dropped the price of the Q7 by $100. So you can buy the components of this kit separately for $1,299 -- only $100 more. If you want all four lenses then sure, this is a fine deal. If not, you're better off buying the lenses separately. (Rant: It's a shame that the 02 standard zoom is so mediocre. Be nice it Pentax would replace it with a lens that's worthy of the Q.)
I agree. If they want to keep the good name of the Q system and its future, then they must compensate and constantly upgrade, and best is with unique quality of the lenses. 02 is one that needs *immediate* attention and a quick replacement.
Do not dismiss that which you do not know.Best part is that this entire Q7 system — a camera and 7 lenses (incredibly good prime lens, excellent 70-210mm zoom equivalent, a fisheye lens, standard zoom, etc.) — weighs less than 1kg. Or with this bag, perhaps a bit more.*That* is why this miniature, yet incredibly capable system, was designed in the first place.
Actually I would not be surprised. Olympus dumping one more established system of their own to embrace a new one? Sounds familiar and consistent with company's charter so far.
Smokymtnhiker: What I don't understand is the high cost of lenses from Pentax. Considering the Pentax cameras have in body IS, lens construction should be less complicated and therefore less expensive, but they are in fact just as expensive if not more so than equivalent glass from Canikon with IS built into the lens.
Basically Pentax is building a great camera, but jacking up the cost of lenses. I suppose that's where they make most of their money, but in actuality it is costing them money. A 20-25% reduction in lens cost across the board would work wonders in attracting people to switch brands and they would make it all up and more so in volume.
Why would Pentax be a bargain brand? While Sigma shares same designs across different mounts to lower the cost, I think Pentax-made unique lenses and their prices are bargain for the quality they offer. However, if the prices were 10% lower, you would ask 20% less than that too. If they were 20% lower, you would asking less again.