davidbindle: Maybe by filing on March 18th, Amazon thought it would become aware to the public on April 1st.I think I'm going to apply for a patent for a particular way to walk where the opposing arm and leg are in the forward position at the same time, therefore ensuring maximum use of energy whilst walking. If I see anyone using my walk that hasn't paid royalties... look out.
Monty Python did first. Sorry.
Josh Bailey: not the most attractive looking camera out there is it haha
Since most DSRLs look similar, I can't imagine what you find unattractive about the K-3.
peterpainter: Well, if I give up on having a car I might just be able to get this. Should I ...decisions, decisions....
You should change your user name from fencesitter to fellonmyhead. If you really want a MF, go and buy one for 40k.
gravelhopper: Interesting to see that dpr does not mention the K3's AF capability in low light. For every in-door available light photographer this is as cruicial as low noise at high ISO. When reviewing the K5 II this was mentioned: "As for light levels, I was able to compare the K-5 II with the Nikon D7100, and found I was able to focus with the K-5 II in lower light than with the Nikon. In exceptionally low light (a large blacked-out room lit with a single tungsten bulb) there was a clear point where the Nikon's AF system (rated down to -2EV) just gave up, never delivering a focus confirmation beep, and the K-5 II (rated down to -3EV) kept on making accurate decisions." Also something I do not understand: for both the K5 ii and the K3 the whole "performance" section is missing while it is being part of other reviews. Anyway, I hope the K5 ii low light capabilities are a base feature in all Pentax bodies now.
Indeed, @gravelhopper. I've been trying to find a worthy FF camera to move to. I currently own a K-5II and and K-5IIs. For the type of photography I do, i need -3EV AF sensitivity. None of the current FF are better than my cameras or if they match the Pentaxes (like the Canon 6d), they're heavily crippled.
Zvonimir Tosic: 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.
This is purely anecdotal. I shoot mostly ballet presentations. I have a friend who also shoots ballet. Whe sometimes cover the same events. His photos frequently look soft/missfocused. He shoots with the D600 a I shoot with the K-5II and K-5IIs. It may be that the theater lighting is lower than the D600 can handle, which is rarely an issue with my Pentaxes.
70D - 83%D7100 - 85%
Pentax K-3.....same score as 70D and inferior to D7100...
JustDavid, even worse. They discounted the AA simulator because Nikon has (NOW) a new patent for something similar, which didn't exist when the K-3 was introduced.
Clint Dunn: Funny how when someone lacks the imagination and skill for work like this it's labelled as PS trickery....but the various filters, PS, etc that everyone else uses is 'ok'.
I remember in the film days a buddy of mine thought I was cheating if I used a polarizer filter lol. Here's the deal people..unless you are shooting jpgs and posting/printing from that...well almost nothing is SOOC anymore. Here's a thought...learn some PS work to make the most of your images.
Even JPGs SOOC are processed with all the in-camera profiles that are available.
PerL: This is a beautifully made camera that sits much better in the hand than an EM-5, but it is not as capable for action shooting as its semi pro APS-C rivals. It is also not as good in IQ (compare the DxO Marks scores that is just out to a Nikon D7100).And the bottom line for me, the images. I don't like using APS-C kit lenses - not for the sharpness, but for the flat look with to much DOF. Why would I want a sensor size with even more DOF, no matter that the camera body is very nice. One has to decide - are you more interested in a camera body - or the images? That is why FF is the right answer for me personally. But I can see why many are attracted to this camera - just not me.
I'm at a point were I need more DOF. I mostly shoot ballet presentations and 4/3 is probably the limit of high ISO noise and DOF I need to do the job.
cam shooter: It is refreshing to see Pentax finally entered year 2013. A little late to the game, but they might now be able to competed with the d7100.
@cam shooterOh, I see. The only specs that matter are the few that the D7100 has that barely beats the K-3. Perfect logic from a nikon fanboy.
How's the small RAW buffer, smaller VF of the D7100 holding up for you?
Actually, I'm anxious to see what Nikon will do to compete with the K-3, as the K-3 seems to have surpassed it in almost every way.
I've gone to many places with only my K-5II and the DA 15mm. The most fun I've ever had shooting photos.
DFPanno: The conspiracy theory is that NASA hired Kubrick to film the Moon landing.
Part of his reward was access to these lenses.
Everything is possible in the mind of a conspiracist.
Anyone else cringed thinking about them starting a forest fire?
OneGuy: Put Pentax K-30 into the image quality comparison.
Sometimes I think Pentax K-30 doesn't make it to the comparo because it just might steal the show...
I wouldn't call the D7100 an electric toothbrush. It's more like a toaster.
Barney, could you fix the Comparison tool in the Conclusions page? Because it's showing too few cameras. For example, it doesn't list the Pentax K-5 nor the K-5II/s (I'm sure these haven't been reviewed, but at least the K-5 has).
The iPhone5 looks great. I'm a Galaxy S3 owner and I'm biased towards Android, but the landscape photo looks so much better from the iPhone than the rest. Every detail is better. The S4 has a weird defect, it seems. If you look at the left part of the horizontal thing from the crane, it looks almost blurred out. The iPhone renders it perfectly. Even the mountains in the background look great in the iPhone. The S4 seems to use too much NR even at base ISO, so the details are gone.
In the Portraits (sunlight) and flash photos, the iPhone seems to be overexposed.
If I wanted a camera-phone, I'd go with the iPhone. For everything else, I'd go with Samsung's features.
Retzius: Sadly, on the Leica forums, the most passionate discussions will be whether one should purchase it in black or silver...
trekkeruss: I want to know how much; the specs are pretty impressive.
899 USD with a 18-55mm DA-L, or 850 USD body only.
Too bad it doesn't come with a DA-L WR as a kit.
Talk about value! Great specs with a great price tag.