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.
...yes the K5II low light AF is insanely good
Keith Reeder: Zvonimir,
you've made that ALL up.
Yes, that's the one i'm thinking of......
gdfthr73: It Just drives me nuts. So many amazing full frame lenses for the K mount camera and no full frame K-mount camera exists. WTF
Brendon,Ultimately it comes down to your 'power to weight ratio' so to speak. What do want to lug around vs what IQ you really need. The reality is even many pro's are using lesser sized sensor systems now when FF is not really needed, like aps-c or 4/3. If your photographing for the average wedding or a small magazine article, the IQ of these smaller sensors is producing the quality of FF a few short years ago.....so how good do you need for most applications? Where really a K3, Xt-1 or OM-D would easily suffice.
LensBeginner: Cons:1. never shot jpg2. ditto3. that's a problem with lenses, not camera4. true. But it's a camera, not a videocamera5. true
...not many cons there, are there? ;-)
Pentax has the 560mm tele lens, also a 300mm plus a 1.4 x tele converter to go with them. Not to mention they come weather resistent for wildlife, where Canon and Nikon aps-c bodies generally do not. I'll concede on the FF upgrade, but crop is good choice for wildlife for weight, size and the crop factor plus small amount of difference in IQ unless your going to print large. Yes Canikon are much more availbale in some countries, here in Australia, no issue, in fact Pentax Aus are the Sigma distributor and awesome to deal with. Pentax are very much improving their sales network after years of neglect..Also for many, the upgrade path to MF and the impending 645Z will shake a few cages with 50mp, video and it handles like a DSLR....so upgrade path??? I'm hearing you, but I think what i'm getting at is it's more of a red herring than you and many others would think.For what its worth I couldn't care too much what i shot with, just don't like misinformation.
@Brendon1000.Yes it is a good camera, much like everything else on the market right now.Whilst I am not not aggressively challenging you, we need to look at what it is you and or most people want in a camera that makes the Ricoh/Pentax system so incomplete?A body with enough lenses to easily satisfy 99% of users, tripods can be purchased anywhere, along with lighting systems for studios, filters from Cokin, has very good astro tracer for astrological buffs, now with FLU card for studio use and perhaps wildlife, battery grips, flash system improving and my Metz branded one gives me great shots everytime, remote controls, almost every 3rd party item can be used for correct thread measurement on end of lenses...........so just asking, is this perceived system thing just another red herring like "lack of lenses" and poor AF ?? I am wondering what cannot be fitted and used to or with a Pentax DSLR that won't satisfy the most largest majority of users??
If it drive you so...nuts....then go buy a Canikonony.They may well do so soon, but why wade into a small market share area, when you do so well at 'crop sensor' which really is so close to FF anyway.Ricoh are currently posting profits and it must come down to doing things either properly, cost effectively, profitably or not at all.
It's become such a blown out of proportion issue, much like Pentax's perceived lack of lenses from other brand users fanboys and pimply faced salesman with no real knowledge, who choose to find any crumb of evidence to put down someone else, where in fact Pentax has the best APS-C range around and still a significant 3rd party manufacture usage.If people can't shoot decent results with ANY of the current crop of cameras from any brand, be able to AF and find mostly enough lenses to suit then they have issues.....
Whilst he doesn't produce evidence or a link to a test...and neither can I right now, I do recall a test between the original K5 and the D7000 a couple of years ago where this was the result, not by a huge margin..........in fast moving subjects I would find that hard to believe. However having the K5IIs, I can attest that I have so few failed AF and it can focus in Low light like you wouldn't believe. It would make an interesting test and there would be a margin of error for individual cameras and lenses and human factor, but I think the perceived and legendary and supposed poor AF is now a thing of the past, was never really a major issue and any current problems rest with a few of the lenses. How many milli seconds really makes any sort of difference to 99% of users??
Lucas_: Seems a great camera, at a good price! I thought the K-3 had a FF sensor, though. My bad!
In real life, not a hell of a lot of difference.
AlexRuiz: Because I like gadgets, I may just buy this camera. That way nobody can tell me how good or how bad it is. However I will wait until black Friday, as I expect the price to be about $600 at that time (perhaps a a refurb).
Last year I bought an Oly OMD EM-5 based on all the positive internet reviews, and found it to be grossly overhyped...so I sold it.
This year I bought the fuji X-T1 also based on internet noise. I find it only moderately overhyped. Overalll a great camera though. No complaints.
At the end of 2012 I also bought the D600...a camera that people cringe at due to the oil issues (which never happened to me). Interestingly, my all time best shots have been with the D600 and the 50 f1.4 and 35 f2.
My point? In real world practice (and considering what one shoots), features and specifications don't tell the full story.
....and the reality that virtually nobody could tell which camera and lens you've taken a picture with, say at laptop screen size or less at least. A bit of tweaking, RAW or Jpeg, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Fuji etc...........once you like how something work for you, who gives a continental. For someone looking at their next purchase, all this will be of value. Yes it's a nice cam, so am I sure that the Xt-1 would be too.
Despite the tardiness at bringing this review out.........A very fair and well presented effort.Agreement on lens AF speed, the 50-135 is a beautiful lens but a bit of a slug.There is so much option now and no truly bad cameras out there, just buy what suits your need.But a truly fine camera.
drummercam: "Cannot change drive mode, white balance, or AF mode remotely"
I find it hard to see all of these as "cons." In the special circumstances in which I'm likely to use remote camera control with my phone or a pad, I'm likely to set the basic parameters for the circumstances before I put the camera in place. Certainly, I won't want to switch to manual focus if I've placed the camera where I can't reach it to manually focus it. If I need to pre-focus manually, I will have done that before putting the camera in-place. The FLU card can't fry an egg, either, but that's not a mark against it.
Remote WB control also seems little needed. Drive mode, maybe I would want to switch that.
So in all three situations i've mentioned, you can go back to your camera and re-set those functions if you need, but a real photographer will know what drive mode, white balance and AF mode he will need as he sets the camera up. It means you can be 20 feet away from the camo'd K3 focused on a tree branch for that shy little wren......concentrate on making sure the image on your laptop is the desired effect and be able to move around your subject and talk to your model....etc etc. I see it as a specialised and very useful pro tool for those who don't own a Phase one or Hasselblad or expensive FF kit ???
Drummercam, you've been around long enough....I am getting the same thinking here. I gather this is primarily designed as a wireless tethering system for control of your camera for more specialist functions like studio, landscape or birding with set subjects with camera on tripod, wanting to ensure your getting the desired result by looking at things on a larger screen, rather than finishing your shoot and finding out you've stuffed up something later ???? As opposed to wifi, which I gather is more about getting that image straight out to cyberspace for quick viewing by facebook, instagram or the news desk of the paper??
select: this is useless, why don't you put a built in wifi? In this way you can transfer only files which are in the Flucard, but you can't browse and transfer those in the other standard SD card... and also the Flucard 16gb costs $100 or more... this is crazy...
I stand to be corrected 'select', but I think the FLU card is designed to be very different from a wiFi system. It's more about studio or landscape control in real time.
Well reviewed tidbit of info to keep us Pentax users calm(er) otherwise I hear flouride or Valium may work better......
Also, the 24mp K3 at $1200, a reasonable quality existing lens in your lineup, plus the FLU card at $100 and your existing tablet or laptop and apart from lighting, this makes a very very affordable high (pro-level) quality studio tool.
For me, transferring the RAW file immediately to the laptop or tablet is not essential. I just want to see on a decent sized screen, that I have the lighting and focus right, although the current inability to zoom the full size jpeg is a bit of a pain and nice to see a firmware fix?
Dare I say it, well done and looking forward to the full review...my pick 83-85% Gold, about par with the 70D for DPR scoring.
completelyrandomstuff: Here's something to make customers go 'wow':50-135mm F2.0 for APS-c cameras. It would be a worthy, and possibly lighter, alternative to full-frame 70-200 F2.8.
Which is almost exactly the lens I have, except f2.8.....Pentax makes them and very nice too. Fabulous portrait and wedding lens on the K5 or K3
Great questions and honest answers, giving valuable insight to the industry, regardless of who's product you shoot with. Nice work......
Forgetting any pre conceived ideas about what a camera 'should' look like, the design has merrill......oops or should I say merrit. functional and that grip looks ok and as previously mentioned, perhaps a decent battery with better shooting life?
jimrpdx: So that's why the K-3 review is taking so long - the shooter preparing a "shooters report" hasn't returned yet! :-)
Looks like Fuji has found its place - good for them.
I had some inside info that the yetti, was actually a double agent working on behalf of a consortium of other brands like Nikon, Canon and Sony who wanted their cameras reviewed first......and the yetti was offering holidays with Fuji cameras as well....who wouldnt take an offer like that?
Gehyra: I still have an old Fujifilm S2 pro, although now it is gathering dust; In its day I loved the Fujifilm colours; Many folks predicted the death of Fujifilm as a credible camera manufacturer, but I see them rising proudly from the ashes with a diversity of cameras that are functional objects of beauty. I presently own a D7000 but this XT-1 is seriously tempting- having grown up shooting with Pentax MX and Oly OM-1 cameras (cause I'm old) I see this dark beast, albeit a small, functional beast, this is an object of lust; the small size, the "familiar" controls- this thing makes me breath funny, in a sort of creepy way. I'll dream of this camera.. There are doubtlessly other capable cameras out there, but this nails the aesthetics and control layout in a compact body. I want one.
clearly you have some issues.............But I will accept that my first response was that its one damn fine looking camera, reminiscent of old Fujica's?A far better rendition of design than Oly's recent offerings, fine cameras they are im sure.