KP & K-3III comparison

FWIW, here are some heavy crops between KP and K-3III comparing resolution, standard and pixel shift. OOC jpeg's, all camera settings identical. Focus was on the bricks. I saw a comment somewhere that someone felt the color balance between these cameras was different. I think they are identical in that respect.


K-3III not PShift


KP not PShift


K-3III PShift


KP PShift

Finally, a full-size K-3III PShift jpeg with slight PP in ACR


K-3III PShift jpeg with slight PP in ACR

Yep, pretty darn close, thanks for posting.

Mike Arledge said:

Yep, pretty darn close, thanks for posting.

Click to expand...

I actually think that my KP missed focus slightly, purely by chance, but I took no further samples.
-------------------
"Elegance of operation" -- Pentax
"Heavy for its size" -- DPR

The K3 lll looks a lot sharper

Thanks for that dc - K3III is better.

This is mostly a comparison of JPG processing within the camera. I see no reason why K-3 III would be "sharper". Either the focus was not correct or it is "just" contrast and sharpness settings. K-3 III could be simply more "aggressive" at default settings.

Best would be to get the same scene, properly focused using live-view, and DNGs from both cameras. I don't expect you'll see any major difference there. Definitely not as dramatic as what you show here.

To me it looks like a difference that comes from different processing.

For sure at least my KP with my 35 mm lens can yield better (i.e. crisper/sharper) results! The KP's default sharpening setting is very aggressive, I use extra fine sharpening with the strength -1. However, even the K3/3 picture, while a little bit better, still is not great. Is your lens O.K? I assume you used the same on both cameras.

At the imaging-resorce they compare KP and K3/3 pictures. I can't see absolutely any difference, at least at the ISO 100 and ISO 800 settings. And that ISO 800 is most critical, as the KP only at that ISO applies the built-in NR. At the lower ISO settings the KP should have (some) advantage, as no NR. But I didn't find any. Please, check it, I might be blind

https://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

--
Regards,
Peter

I agree that I think the KP AF was not precise. These were tripod shots with both cameras set to pixel shift motion correct OFF -- which, BTW, I find interesting in the different ways the menus present that choice.
-------------------
"Elegance of operation" -- Pentax
"Heavy for its size" -- DPR

flektogon said:

Is your lens O.K?

Click to expand...

I've not had reason to suspect my 35 Ltd, but I might check that after seeing these. I do have an SMC 15mm Ltd. that distinctly outperforms my HD 15mm Ltd., so I know variation is possible.
-------------------
"Elegance of operation" -- Pentax
"Heavy for its size" -- DPR

flektogon said:

that ISO 800 is most critical, as the KP only at that ISO applies the built-in NR. At the lower ISO settings the KP should have (some) advantage, as no NR.

Click to expand...

FYI, there is non-defeatable noise reduction at ISO 640 and higher in the KP, and this NR is absent at ISO 500 and lower. What has not been tested, to my knowledge, is whether there is NR at ISO 560.