Review K3 mark lll?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
John_A_G Veteran Member • Posts: 8,163
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

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?

I think it's perfectly valid to suggest the reviewer has to have a history of competence with the products they're reviewing.  It's why when I was making money shooting sports about a decade ago I didn't care at all what DPR said about the cameras - they didn't have professional sports photographers/PJs reviewing them.  I values the opinions of the working pros more.

But, the part about the viewfinder baffles me here.  I was pretty sure most of the DPR review staff had extensive experience with DSLRs.  Maybe I'm mistaken and they now employ people whose sole experience is with mirrorless.

bob5050 Senior Member • Posts: 2,770
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

John_A_G wrote:

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?

Possibly, but probably not as interesting as someone who does see it as a benefit, or understands it as a benefit for some portion of users without calling them out as dinosaurs.

Pentax starts their explanation of the five principles this way:

"When you take a picture with a single lens reflex (SLR) camera, the light passes through the lens, and in turn the optical viewfinder. You view the image directly with your eyes, and feel it with your heart. This is the unique experience you get when using an SLR."

A reviewer doesn't have to personally agree with that as an inherent superiority of SLR design, but s/he has to understand that there are those that do. Similarly, he or she has to acknowledge that, with an EVF, WYSIWYG also means WYSINWROT (what you see is not what's really out there).

I don't care as much for whether an individual reviewer falls on one side of that trade-off or the other, so long as they do understand that it IS a trade-off, not a simple old=bad, new=good progression. A balanced organization would have people on both sides.

But, the part about the viewfinder baffles me here. I was pretty sure most of the DPR review staff had extensive experience with DSLRs. Maybe I'm mistaken and they now employ people whose sole experience is with mirrorless.

I'm sure they pretty much all used SLRs at some point in the past. But we might want to raise the issue of selection bias: you don't dedicate your career to playing with all the latest gear unless you have a latent suspicion that newer must = better. IOW, a bias against raising the question "But what ae we losing, and are the gains sufficient to make that loss worthwhile?"

-- hide signature --

bob5050
All pictures I post here are SOOC, downsized 50% unless specifically identified otherwise.

 bob5050's gear list:bob5050's gear list
Fujifilm XP130 Pentax K-3 Pentax K-3 Mark III Pentax smc DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR Pentax smc DA 50mm F1.8 +6 more
Roland Karlsson Forum Pro • Posts: 29,684
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

bob5050 wrote:

John_A_G wrote:

But, the part about the viewfinder baffles me here. I was pretty sure most of the DPR review staff had extensive experience with DSLRs. Maybe I'm mistaken and they now employ people whose sole experience is with mirrorless.

I'm sure they pretty much all used SLRs at some point in the past. But we might want to raise the issue of selection bias: you don't dedicate your career to playing with all the latest gear unless you have a latent suspicion that newer must = better. IOW, a bias against raising the question "But what ae we losing, and are the gains sufficient to make that loss worthwhile?"

Of course. They have to have a feeling for what is the future.

They love nostalgica and writes about it, but their business case is the future.

And now it sure looks like MILC is the future and DSLR is the past. And they have to adapt to that.

They also need to cover something new, and yet another DSLR is not all that new.

And actually, it totally is raining new MILC lenses. With new exciting specs.

-- hide signature --

/Roland
Kalpanika X3F tools:
https://github.com/kalpanika/x3f

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sony RX100 III Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp2 Quattro Pentax K-3 Pentax K-1 +14 more
Alex Sarbu Forum Pro • Posts: 12,920
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.

Alex

-- 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 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited +9 more
Tom Lusk Senior Member • Posts: 1,870
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

bob5050 wrote:

John_A_G wrote:

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?

Possibly, but probably not as interesting as someone who does see it as a benefit, or understands it as a benefit for some portion of users without calling them out as dinosaurs.

Pentax starts their explanation of the five principles this way:

"When you take a picture with a single lens reflex (SLR) camera, the light passes through the lens, and in turn the optical viewfinder. You view the image directly with your eyes, and feel it with your heart. This is the unique experience you get when using an SLR."

That kind of statement just makes me shake my head and wonder who this type of marketing is directed at.

Old hippies? Abstract artists?

Spoken word poets?

Alex Sarbu Forum Pro • Posts: 12,920
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

Roland Karlsson wrote:

PentUp wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Major mistake number one - think you yourself is a brilliant reviewer

Of course, if you like your new camera and have confidence in it, that is the most important for you. But, you yourself is the less objective reviewer when you yourself have bought the camera.

Have fun!

Uh yeah. I didn’t purport to be reviewing it. I just said that a review isn’t going to influence my opinion on it. Just the same way a food critic can’t tell me what I’m going to like. I am capable of making my own decisions. All I can do is share my experiences. And everyone else can take that for what that is worth or not

You are, of course, totally right on that.

But I can give you an example. I did not like dark chocolate some years ago, I thought it was bitter and horrible. I wanted soft milk chocolate. So, I thought I knew what I wanted.

Then, I learned that there are differences to dark chocolate, and in particular Trinitario beans make not so bitter chocolate. And I started to enjoy it and now can even it rather bitter stuff, and like it.

Of course, I could live a good life and still only eat milk chocolate, but I would have missed something.

And the sense morale? Non really, but chocolate is nice!

Perhaps... that you'd still have missed something if all dark chocolate reviews would say, "only for those who like chocolate, otherwise don't bother trying"?

Alex

-- 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 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited +9 more
bob5050 Senior Member • Posts: 2,770
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

Roland Karlsson wrote:

They love nostalgica and writes about it, but their business case is the future.

And now it sure looks like MILC is the future and DSLR is the past. And they have to adapt to that.

They also need to cover something new, and yet another DSLR is not all that new.

Which takes me back to the Upton Sinclair quote: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

MILCs may very well be the future--I personally think they are. But that's not where I live. The issue for the present is simple: what do MILCs offer that's significant in exchange for taking away the ability to look through the camera at the actual scene? Obviously right now, lighter weight and slightly smaller size. But that's still pretty much it. All the other advantages (50 fps? Does anyone need that?)

The payoff, when it comes, is probably going to be a really transformative AI capability--but they don't have that yet. And today's models don't have the memory or processing power to run it if they did. Yet.

So DPR could say "We think MILCs are the future, this is why, and we'll tell you when it's here. In the mean time, there's no real recompense for swapping out. Yet."

But as you say, for DPR, Pentax doesn't pay the bills. So they prefer to wax poetic over what the software industry calls 'vaporware.'

-- hide signature --

bob5050
All pictures I post here are SOOC, downsized 50% unless specifically identified otherwise.

 bob5050's gear list:bob5050's gear list
Fujifilm XP130 Pentax K-3 Pentax K-3 Mark III Pentax smc DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR Pentax smc DA 50mm F1.8 +6 more
bob5050 Senior Member • Posts: 2,770
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

Tom Lusk wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

Pentax starts their explanation of the five principles this way:

"When you take a picture with a single lens reflex (SLR) camera, the light passes through the lens, and in turn the optical viewfinder. You view the image directly with your eyes, and feel it with your heart. This is the unique experience you get when using an SLR."

That kind of statement just makes me shake my head and wonder who this type of marketing is directed at.

Old hippies? Abstract artists?

Spoken word poets?

Donno, I'm none of the above.

Personally, I could do without the "and feel it with your heart" addition. But the simple fact remains that I'm looking at the actual scene, the MILC photographer next to me is looking at one possible rendition of what his sensor offers, which depending on his settings might not really reflect the scene accurately at all. It's a tremendous loss of presence and control. I tell the camera what to do based on the actual scene, he tells it what to do based on a representation that's already two removes from what's in front of him.

I can see what he sees for the rest of my life in PS, LR, or On1 at home; that's not what  travel to see. But he'll never see what I did.

-- hide signature --

bob5050
All pictures I post here are SOOC, downsized 50% unless specifically identified otherwise.

 bob5050's gear list:bob5050's gear list
Fujifilm XP130 Pentax K-3 Pentax K-3 Mark III Pentax smc DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR Pentax smc DA 50mm F1.8 +6 more
hikerdoc Veteran Member • Posts: 3,066
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
4

bob5050 wrote:

Tom Lusk wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

Pentax starts their explanation of the five principles this way:

"When you take a picture with a single lens reflex (SLR) camera, the light passes through the lens, and in turn the optical viewfinder. You view the image directly with your eyes, and feel it with your heart. This is the unique experience you get when using an SLR."

That kind of statement just makes me shake my head and wonder who this type of marketing is directed at.

Old hippies? Abstract artists?

Spoken word poets?

Donno, I'm none of the above.

Personally, I could do without the "and feel it with your heart" addition. But the simple fact remains that I'm looking at the actual scene, the MILC photographer next to me is looking at one possible rendition of what his sensor offers, which depending on his settings might not really reflect the scene accurately at all. It's a tremendous loss of presence and control. I tell the camera what to do based on the actual scene, he tells it what to do based on a representation that's already two removes from what's in front of him.

I can see what he sees for the rest of my life in PS, LR, or On1 at home; that's not what travel to see. But he'll never see what I did.

He probably is seeing what you do. He just doesn’t feel that “seeing” is limited by the little reflection in his OVF or little display in his EVF. When I travel to see things I may use my DSLR or MILC to take images of what I see, but that little image in either viewfinder is only my framing of what I wish to capture. When I look through my OVF I hope my chosen settings accurately reproduce what I see. When I look through my EVF I try to adjust the settings so what I see in viewfinder accurately matches what I am seeing. The “heart” part for me is the being there, and that is hard to fully capture regardless of viewfinder.

 hikerdoc's gear list:hikerdoc's gear list
Apple iPhone 8
Jon Donahue Contributing Member • Posts: 858
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

Understood, Paul. So would you please write a weekly auto review column fir The Guardian? Only thing about the paper I don't like. Here in Arizona, I enjoy Dan Neil's Rumble Seat column in the Wall Street Journal, although my son thinks he's snarky, full of it, and anti-Tesla. Maybe so. Saw one o them lectric cars here yesterday, prolly lookin fer a horse to pull it back to Phoenix. But at least it wasn’t on fire, a new threat to our old wood buildings here in Tombstone.

 Jon Donahue's gear list:Jon Donahue's gear list
Ricoh GR II Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-70
Ian Stuart Forsyth
Ian Stuart Forsyth Veteran Member • Posts: 3,947
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
5

bob5050 wrote:

Tom Lusk wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

Pentax starts their explanation of the five principles this way:

"When you take a picture with a single lens reflex (SLR) camera, the light passes through the lens, and in turn the optical viewfinder. You view the image directly with your eyes, and feel it with your heart. This is the unique experience you get when using an SLR."

That kind of statement just makes me shake my head and wonder who this type of marketing is directed at.

Old hippies? Abstract artists?

Spoken word poets?

Donno, I'm none of the above.

Personally, I could do without the "and feel it with your heart" addition. But the simple fact remains that I'm looking at the actual scene, the MILC photographer next to me is looking at one possible rendition of what his sensor offers,

Would this not be the reason why one would want a EVF so that you have a real time representation of what the camera is recording as it is the sensor that is recording the image and it is it that is that medium that you will be processing into an image

which depending on his settings might not really reflect the scene accurately at all.

But with the correct settings it can give you more of a realistic representation  of the medium that is recording the data and that will be processed into an image

It's a tremendous loss of presence and control. I tell the camera what to do based on the actual scene,

You can only do this when you understand what the camera is recording

how can you have any control if this is what control is needed to optimally use the camera

As this it what the medium is capturing

he tells it what to do based on a representation that's already two removes from what's in front of him.

As apposed to someone who is using the camera based on the medium recording the information

I can see what he sees for the rest of my life in PS, LR, or On1 at home; that's not what travel to see. But he'll never see what I did.

Simply moving the camera away from the users eye will give him what is really there.

With the correct setting and a EVF will give that user a more realistic representation of the scene base on what the medium is recording,  as this is what is doing the recording more so than the imagined  and best guessed view from an OFV

And a side note I don't own an EVF camera, but I do know that it is not the OVF that will give the best control to evaluate how to use the camera. It is how the medium  is being used to captured that image.

-- hide signature --

The Camera is only a tool, photography is deciding how to use it.
The hardest part about capturing wildlife is not the photographing portion; it’s getting them to sign a model release

 Ian Stuart Forsyth's gear list:Ian Stuart Forsyth's gear list
Nikon PC-E Nikkor 45mm f/2.8D ED Pentax K-5 Pentax *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D +27 more
bob5050 Senior Member • Posts: 2,770
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
3

hikerdoc wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

I can see what he sees for the rest of my life in PS, LR, or On1 at home; that's not what travel to see. But he'll never see what I did.

He probably is seeing what you do. He just doesn’t feel that “seeing” is limited by the little reflection in his OVF or little display in his EVF.

To a certain extent yes, but to a greater extent, no. When I lift the Pentax to my face, I don't feel like I'm making a choice to leave the world and enter the camera's. I'm in both as the camera 'disappears' and I see through it. It supplements and extends my vision without replacing it. That just doesn't happen when I pick up a MILC.

In some ways it's like driving a stick vs. an automatic. The gain in efficiency and simplicity comes at a cost of connection and control. And on difficult terrain, or for pure pleasure driving, I'd still want a stick.

Pentax appears to be betting that a great enough proportion of ILC users (and prospective ILC users) either feel, or can be persuaded, that that difference matters.  For my lifetime, at least, I hope that they're right. I'd like the choice until such time as MILCs actually offer a compensating advantage as great as what they take away.

-- hide signature --

bob5050
All pictures I post here are SOOC, downsized 50% unless specifically identified otherwise.

 bob5050's gear list:bob5050's gear list
Fujifilm XP130 Pentax K-3 Pentax K-3 Mark III Pentax smc DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR Pentax smc DA 50mm F1.8 +6 more
PentUp Senior Member • Posts: 2,976
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

PentUp wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Major mistake number one - think you yourself is a brilliant reviewer

Of course, if you like your new camera and have confidence in it, that is the most important for you. But, you yourself is the less objective reviewer when you yourself have bought the camera.

Have fun!

Uh yeah. I didn’t purport to be reviewing it. I just said that a review isn’t going to influence my opinion on it. Just the same way a food critic can’t tell me what I’m going to like. I am capable of making my own decisions. All I can do is share my experiences. And everyone else can take that for what that is worth or not

You are, of course, totally right on that.

But I can give you an example. I did not like dark chocolate some years ago, I thought it was bitter and horrible. I wanted soft milk chocolate. So, I thought I knew what I wanted.

Then, I learned that there are differences to dark chocolate, and in particular Trinitario beans make not so bitter chocolate. And I started to enjoy it and now can even it rather bitter stuff, and like it.

Of course, I could live a good life and still only eat milk chocolate, but I would have missed something.

And the sense morale? Non really, but chocolate is nice!

Perhaps... that you'd still have missed something if all dark chocolate reviews would say, "only for those who like chocolate, otherwise don't bother trying"?

Or, "It's quite tasty... for Chocolate, but it is not Toffee, nobody makes Chocolate in 2021 anymore !"

 PentUp's gear list:PentUp's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Pentax K-5 II Pentax K-x Pentax K-3 Mark III Pentax K-50 +11 more
bob5050 Senior Member • Posts: 2,770
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
3

Ian Stuart Forsyth wrote:

But with the correct settings it can give you more of a realistic representation of the medium that is recording the data and that will be processed into an image

But isn't that, or shouldn't it be, a secondary concern? I don't travel because I photograph, I photograph because I travel. So I have little interest, while in the field, with what the sensor wants to show me--I want so see the reality. If the camera is set up properly, it will take care of itself, and I can tweak what it saw to my satisfaction when I get home.

You can only do this when you understand what the camera is recording

Again, that's a pre-trip and post trip concern: obsessing about setup and understanding how the camera works.

Simply moving the camera away from the users eye will give him what is really there.

My point exactly: the only way a MILC user can see what I'm seeing is to lower his camera.

-- hide signature --

bob5050
All pictures I post here are SOOC, downsized 50% unless specifically identified otherwise.

 bob5050's gear list:bob5050's gear list
Fujifilm XP130 Pentax K-3 Pentax K-3 Mark III Pentax smc DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6ED AL [IF] DC WR Pentax smc DA 50mm F1.8 +6 more
PentUp Senior Member • Posts: 2,976
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

bob5050 wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

They love nostalgica and writes about it, but their business case is the future.

And now it sure looks like MILC is the future and DSLR is the past. And they have to adapt to that.

They also need to cover something new, and yet another DSLR is not all that new.

Which takes me back to the Upton Sinclair quote: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it."

Wise words

MILCs may very well be the future--I personally think they are. But that's not where I live. The issue for the present is simple: what do MILCs offer that's significant in exchange for taking away the ability to look through the camera at the actual scene? Obviously right now, lighter weight and slightly smaller size. But that's still pretty much it. All the other advantages (50 fps? Does anyone need that?)

50fps to me means a lot of time spent deleting near identical photos to clear storage space. Even with a 12fps K-3iii I hardly ever shoot a full 12 frames in one press of the shutter (I prefer shooting in short sharp bursts, by knowing my subject matter).

The payoff, when it comes, is probably going to be a really transformative AI capability--but they don't have that yet. And today's models don't have the memory or processing power to run it if they did. Yet.

I am the first to recognise the superior AF tracking ability of the top MILCs, but to me, as well as the VF experience, the big trade off is the inferior battery life.

So DPR could say "We think MILCs are the future, this is why, and we'll tell you when it's here. In the mean time, there's no real recompense for swapping out. Yet."

But as you say, for DPR, Pentax doesn't pay the bills. So they prefer to wax poetic over what the software industry calls 'vaporware.'

 PentUp's gear list:PentUp's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Pentax K-5 II Pentax K-x Pentax K-3 Mark III Pentax K-50 +11 more
Jon Donahue Contributing Member • Posts: 858
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

Wow, this thread is stirring up the bees! THE review only days away! Here in Tombstone, my friend Steve started digging a foundation last week, uncovered an African-Brazillian bees, nest, was stung 110 times, but they gave him a shot at the hospital and he's doing fine... just like the K-3 III, no matter what the reviewers say. As for the bees, they are dead; we can only hope the negative reviews will suffer the same fate, ignored and unread.

 Jon Donahue's gear list:Jon Donahue's gear list
Ricoh GR II Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-70
PentUp Senior Member • Posts: 2,976
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

Ian Stuart Forsyth wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

Tom Lusk wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

Pentax starts their explanation of the five principles this way:

"When you take a picture with a single lens reflex (SLR) camera, the light passes through the lens, and in turn the optical viewfinder. You view the image directly with your eyes, and feel it with your heart. This is the unique experience you get when using an SLR."

That kind of statement just makes me shake my head and wonder who this type of marketing is directed at.

Old hippies? Abstract artists?

Spoken word poets?

Donno, I'm none of the above.

Personally, I could do without the "and feel it with your heart" addition. But the simple fact remains that I'm looking at the actual scene, the MILC photographer next to me is looking at one possible rendition of what his sensor offers,

Would this not be the reason why one would want a EVF so that you have a real time representation of what the camera is recording as it is the sensor that is recording the image and it is it that is that medium that you will be processing into an image

which depending on his settings might not really reflect the scene accurately at all.

But with the correct settings it can give you more of a realistic representation of the medium that is recording the data and that will be processed into an image

It's a tremendous loss of presence and control. I tell the camera what to do based on the actual scene,

You can only do this when you understand what the camera is recording

how can you have any control if this is what control is needed to optimally use the camera

As this it what the medium is capturing

Nice image Ian. It raises a question in my mind though (please bear with me). In this image the background is obviously OOF. So the question is (bearing in mind I don't know if this was taken with a DSLR or a MILC), when looking through the viewfinder, was the background OOF in the VF, if this is a EVF or was the background clearly visible in the VF prior to pressing the shutter?

Now I hear it often said that an EVF shows you what the image (when taken) will look like. And I do understand the merit in that from a purely image capture point of view.

However, and I expect that I am squarely in the minority here on this point... To me it is important (at times) to have a clear view of the background/surrounding environment of the subject before, during and after the shutter actuation (well, as clear as can be short of putting the camera down from my eye).

For example (and again I recognise that I may be alone here in this), when I am photographing lion cubs in the wild, and they are often not far from their mother so the mother is often in frame as well, I prefer to be aware through the viewfinder of what the mother is doing, her body language, expression changes, movement and other tell tale signs that the photo session needs to conclude... When using a DSLR I am often able to keep that awareness of environment through the OVF, even if it require no more than a quick twist of the zoom ring out wider (another benefit of a lens with a flexible zoom range), or a small turn left or right to see what mum is up to.

Obviously that is not a concern for most, but it is a bit of comfort/ enjoyment that I personally get from DSLRs and such photography is why I spend what I spend on camera gear. So anyway, just curious.

he tells it what to do based on a representation that's already two removes from what's in front of him.

As apposed to someone who is using the camera based on the medium recording the information

I can see what he sees for the rest of my life in PS, LR, or On1 at home; that's not what travel to see. But he'll never see what I did.

Simply moving the camera away from the users eye will give him what is really there.

With the correct setting and a EVF will give that user a more realistic representation of the scene base on what the medium is recording, as this is what is doing the recording more so than the imagined and best guessed view from an OFV

And a side note I don't own an EVF camera, but I do know that it is not the OVF that will give the best control to evaluate how to use the camera. It is how the medium is being used to captured that image.

 PentUp's gear list:PentUp's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Pentax K-5 II Pentax K-x Pentax K-3 Mark III Pentax K-50 +11 more
Jon Donahue Contributing Member • Posts: 858
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

I confess to buyer's error... bought a Ford Pinto once, as try as hard as I could to like it, swear to God it was as evil little car... from it's weird octagon headlights back to its exploding fuel tank. The world's worst awkward manual shift, and it would go sideways if you hit the brakes, even with the wheels aligned and the tires pumped up.  The American Yugo, for sure.

But Pentax cameras? No. All good, no complaints, and many recommendations over the years to my friends.

 Jon Donahue's gear list:Jon Donahue's gear list
Ricoh GR II Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-70
Jon Donahue Contributing Member • Posts: 858
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

Bob, that's so true. EVERY modern camera is well made and works just fine. And so like you say, the reviewer is actually writing for the reviewed brand's audience, since owners of other makes aren't interested... unless there's a huge tech breakthrough, and there aren't any.

So. If DPR reviews the K-3 III, they are writing for us. And I would expect the reviewer to be a Pentax owner for at least five years, loyal to the brand, invested in at least two DSLR Pentax cameras and at least three lenses... plus maybe a GR, icing on the cake. And I'd expect the reviewer to have enjoyed his cameras on a level much deeper than P Program or the Green Button. And there are a LOT of you guys on this forum who would make excellent DPR reviewers... with a real depth of knowledge and many years' experience! And from you, I'd pick someone who owns both digital FF and APS-C cameras. Experience is primary, writing skills are secondary. Interpreting DP test lab results is interesting, but opinions from thorough field tests is most important. To me, anyway!

 Jon Donahue's gear list:Jon Donahue's gear list
Ricoh GR II Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-70
Jon Donahue Contributing Member • Posts: 858
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

The Japanese like to wax poetic over industrial design. Had a Miata MX-5 a few years ago, and it certainly came with its share of dreamy design adjectives. But my old 2008 Pontiac Solstice wiped out the Miatas in SCCA racing, has more room inside, and corners better than a Corvette. But being rushed to market, if in Japan it probably inspired wabi-sabi poetry, glorifying the art of imperfection. Like how the top won't go up anymore, and how you have to take off a front fender to change the battery.

Anyway, I like the Pentax poetry. I'd bet that, like the Miata car, it comes from proud engineers rather than marketing folks. Engineers convinced that their designs go beyond just plastic and metal into something that becomes part of us, enhancing the days and nights of our lives.

 Jon Donahue's gear list:Jon Donahue's gear list
Ricoh GR II Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-70
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads