Review K3 mark lll?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Alex Sarbu Forum Pro • Posts: 12,797
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

John_A_G wrote:

doceyes wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

In principle, a trained reviewer that tests several brands should be the most objective reviewer. In practice, it might not be so. Sometimes.

Unfortunately, I don't think that that's even true in principle. The only way a non-user can be equally objective about any camera is to be equally unfamiliar with anything else. Otherwise, they're subject to the same expectation/(un)familiarity biases as anyone else.

The cliché critique of the K-3iii at this point is "a worthy upgrade, but not worth changing brands for." The question is, do they say that consistently about every other brand? But what recent high end camera is it not true of? The core issue for a reviewer today is that all top SLRs and MILCs will deliver outstanding results,

Comparative specs matter most in an environment of significant and rapid evolution and a growing market, where users need to know who's in the lead, and have no or little existing investment. Neither is true today of ILC cameras. So fitness to use and user has really become the only thing that matters.

Bob5050….very well written. Thanks.

Reminds me of a Consumer Reports magazine a friend showed me…Sept 2021 issue. In the car review was the 2021 new Corvette. What useful information was in the review….nothing. What was the driving experience, mpg, etc….nothing. But they rated it worse than a budget SUV. In the negatives were the comments that it is too low to the ground so it is difficult to get in and out of the car. And other comments such as there are blind spots to the left and right and behind the car. Then I read reviews by actual car people and customers…no comparison. Same with camera reviews. They will all have a bias or the person is not well informed or experienced with the use of ie a DSLR with an optical prism viewfinder. If the next review is similar to the new photos DPR posted then I would not expect much. But that would not make my decision about the purchase.

so, if the reviewer is well versed with an optical viewfinder and still doesn't see that as a big benefit over EVF, is that person a legit reviewer?

It's not enough to be "well versed" with a particular technology. To be a good reviewer, you have to understand the product, what it is, what's its role, who is it for (and no, I don't mean "it's a Pentax so it's only for Pentaxians".

In your particular example, being "well versed" might only lead to the reviewer praising the OVF's size but otherwise considering it a disadvantage because it's a mirrorless world or other such nonsense.

There were some K-3iii "reviews" like that, although I don't remember if they bothered to praise the OVF's size or not.


-- hide signature --

"When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say." - George R.R. Martin, A Clash of Kings

 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Ricoh GR III Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-1 II Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +8 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MOD Mako2011
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow