PetaPixel K-3 Mark III Review

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
John_A_G Veteran Member • Posts: 8,126
Re: PetaPixel K-3 Mark III Review

Paul_R_H wrote:

drummercam wrote:

The public opinion has enough info already. Certainly, Pentaxian have seen enough "reviews" and enough of the camera itself to know the K-3III story. I'm not waiting with bated breath for DPR or anyone else to test anything I've not already done myself and gathered from others. Any reviews now are just going to spin what's already known

Hmmm, I don't really agree. There has been no review (that I've seen) which compares the C-AF of the K3-iii with that of common rivals, or a known standard.

And C-AF is my reason to upgrade or not - the image quality of my K3 ii is fine for me.

I know most people here dislike the DPR bicycle test, but I suspect that might be because Pentax bodies do badly at it. It's one of the few attempts by any major reviewing site to standardise an AF test.

Hi Paul.  This is always one of the toughest areas to test.  It's tough for several reasons:

1. So few reviewers are true action photographers.  Just look at the review in this thread - his "surfing" picture is a iny person just laying on the surfboard.  Although, it's worth noting the reviewer is only testing with the lens provided.  They need experience so they can understand how to configure a camera for action - and try different settings.

2. Given that action photography relies on les as well a reviewer needs a fast-focusing action lens to do their testing with.  If Pentax won't provide, you're now down to existing Pentax users providing a review.

3. Then there's the problem of comparing to another system.  So, now you need a Pentax shooter who knows how to shoot action, has a fast focusing lens and has experience with other systems.

4. Repeatability.  This is why DPR did their bicycle test - it was at least some concept of repeatability.

When I was shooting sports for pay, this is what made gear reviews by all the websites worthless.  They didn't have anyone IMO qualified to assess the performance of the gear in a sports environment.  In reality, I relied upon action sports photographers using the gear in real-world situations.  I keep mentioning sports because that's what I used my gear for, but also because sports photography is a much better testing arena for a review than wildlife.  Unlike wildlife, you can guarantee a sporting event will be there and offer you a couple hours of photographic opportunity.  You could spend all day and get very limited BIF opportunity.  I can tell you based on the "action" images posted by the reviewer I wouldn't pay attention to any conclusions about C-AF (again, part of that is the lens provided for testing).

So, I can certainly appreciate your desire to see a good, solid and fair review of how C-AF stacks up to the competition.  I'm just not sure you're going to get it.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow