Review K3 mark lll?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
hikerdoc Veteran Member • Posts: 3,075
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

Roland Karlsson wrote:

I assume you are also just having fun as we take this way off topic :-), but:

hikerdoc wrote:

About the only thing I cannot do with my MILC is lock up the mirror.

Try to use the view finder without turning the camera on

True, but the images taken with my DSLR turned off are no better than my MILC when off.

How good are your MILC at emulating the mirror flap sound?

You mean that noise that many complain about and also include in discussions of artifact? They are not good at that.

Do you have AF adjustment? Do you?

Yes, AF tuning capabilities on both my DSLR and MILC

I don’t do astro. Lag is getting better with each iteration. I see the Nikon Z measured at 0.023 seconds, but that was three years back, not sure where these new Sony and Canon models sit.

 hikerdoc's gear list:hikerdoc's gear list
Apple iPhone 8
BryantP Regular Member • Posts: 354
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

PentUp wrote:

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 !"

Being a chocoholic that would be my worst nightmare - especially if dark chocolate were no longer available !

-- hide signature --

Bryant P.
Indianapolis, Indiana USA

 BryantP's gear list:BryantP's gear list
Pentax *ist DS Pentax K-5 Pentax K-3 Nikon D750 Pentax KP +10 more
Alex Sarbu Forum Pro • Posts: 12,949
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

John_A_G wrote:

So, not sure why Pentax faithful are so alarmed that reviewers aren't calling out OVF as a compelling criteria.

But that's the issue here: OVFs are compelling.

To a minority which happens to be the exact target of their DSLR/Pentax reviews.

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 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +9 more
PentUp Veteran Member • Posts: 3,017
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

John_A_G wrote:

doceyes 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?

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.

I purchased a Sony Rx100 about 2-3 years ago, one of the newest ones in the series. Read the reviews on several sites and all were excellent. Took it on one trip and then sold it. Why? The pop up viewfinder was difficult to view through it, difficult to focus my eye clearly, resolution not the best, and I kept struggling trying to compose a photo. Maybe it’s just me and all the reviews were wrong. Or maybe because I am used to the quality of the image through a prism . So maybe a reviewer needs to be experienced in all OVF’s?

I agree a reviewer of a OVF camera should be familiar with OVFs. As I sad though, as far as I know all the DPR reviewers are - so they should appreciate what an OVF brings to the table. I also think that EVF has been one of the things that upgrades every model. I don't have first hand knowledge, but from reading comments and reviews the newer EVFs are much improved over the ones 2 generations ago. Can't personally say if it's true or not. If it is true, the difference between OVF and EVF has shrunk.

Maybe? But while we can definitely say (for eg) that the AF-C on the K-3iii is much improved over the Pentax DSLRs of 2 generations ago, that doesn't mean that it is better than or equal to that of a D500 or many MILCs... AND in the same way newer EVFs being much improved over the ones 2 generations ago, doesn't mean that they are better than or equal to OVFs.

Also, the sales figures would indicate that many people are switching to EVF. Sure, there are a handful of people saying they switched back. But, the data suggests OVF isn't a driving factor for the majority. It may be for the minority. But in that case, that minority is going to care less about reviews anyway. They're only going to look at products with an OVF and there aren't many of those. So, not sure why Pentax faithful are so alarmed that reviewers aren't calling out OVF as a compelling criteria.

 PentUp's gear list:PentUp's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Pentax K-x Pentax K-5 II Pentax K-50 Pentax K-3 Mark III +11 more
PentUp Veteran Member • Posts: 3,017
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

Roland Karlsson wrote:

SrMi wrote:

The EVFs have improved considerably, but in my eyes, there is still a huge difference. I have been EVF cameras for several years. I much prefer the view through an OVF than through an EVF. The difference is especially striking when photographing with EVF and OVF cameras at the same time. But, again, this is my personal opinion.

Ben Lifson's comment when reviewing the early EVFs still sounds true to me: unlovely to look at, alienating; it tends to quench the feeling the subject gives me.

I fully agree.

Me too

I have not looked into the best modern ones. Need to try to find one to take a look into. Maybe I will change my mind?

Me too, I've used less expensive ones and not been impressed. But I simply couldn't afford the Best modern MILCs (and their lenses) ... and some thought that the K-3iii was too expensive?!?!

To me, the main benefit of EVF cameras is the reduced size and weight. With Pentax-3 III and the small Limited primes, that weight advantage of mirrorless cameras has been eliminated (except for m43 systems).

To me it is also that it focus on the actual sensor, no AF adjustments to make it work good. And also that there seem to come very fun lenses to mirrorless.

I hope that people will continue to be interested in OVF cameras.

Me too!

Me too, too

 PentUp's gear list:PentUp's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ300 Pentax K-x Pentax K-5 II Pentax K-50 Pentax K-3 Mark III +11 more
Ian Stuart Forsyth
Ian Stuart Forsyth Veteran Member • Posts: 3,950
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

PentUp wrote:

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?

It was taken with the Pentax K7

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,

An OVF or EVF with have no difference as to how much background blur will be visible as all this is happening before the light enters the VF. This is determined by the subject distance, FL, magnification, how much the image is enlarged, and the F-stop of the lens.

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,

You may be in for a surprise, if this is what you want to do, the EVF would be a better fit as you would be able with many cameras  setup it up to have a continues FOV with what DOF you have selected with the F-stop. With a OVF you would have to keep viewing the subject while using the optical preview or disable the aperture level as to not let the lens stay wide open for metering

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.

-- 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 *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Pentax K-7 +27 more
Ian Stuart Forsyth
Ian Stuart Forsyth Veteran Member • Posts: 3,950
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
3

bob5050 wrote:

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?

If your concern is to take a photograph would it not be your top concern as to have a clear representation as to how the medium is going to record the image

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.

I see all you do is walk around with the camera up to your eye all day long and this is how you enjoy your trip reality that can only be viewed thru you camera.

I have sat down and tried to remember how the subject look as I was looking thur the OVF and I cannot remember one time how it look not do I care as it is a tool there for a job. Its job to help me record what is in front of me. Reality is there whether or not the camera is in my hand and is not needed to view reality.

What I do remember is how far the subject was from me, what the light was like that day I can never tell you what it was like to look thru the OVF.

All the the VF for me is there to allow me to get the best information to recreate reality as I remember it.

If the camera is set up properly, it will take care of itself,

Without know how the cameras uses the medium how do you know its working correctly?

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 --

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 *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Pentax K-7 +27 more
bob5050 Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
3

Ian Stuart Forsyth wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

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.

I see all you do is walk around with the camera up to your eye all day long and this is how you enjoy your trip reality that can only be viewed thru you camera.

It is not possible to get from what I said to what you said.

If the camera is set up properly, it will take care of itself,

Without know how the cameras uses the medium how do you know its working correctly?

So your view is that I should try to figure out how the sensor works when I'm on-site? Shouldn't I already know that?

-- 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 Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +6 more
SrMi
SrMi Senior Member • Posts: 2,497
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

PentUp wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

SrMi wrote:

The EVFs have improved considerably, but in my eyes, there is still a huge difference. I have been EVF cameras for several years. I much prefer the view through an OVF than through an EVF. The difference is especially striking when photographing with EVF and OVF cameras at the same time. But, again, this is my personal opinion.

Ben Lifson's comment when reviewing the early EVFs still sounds true to me: unlovely to look at, alienating; it tends to quench the feeling the subject gives me.

I fully agree.

Me too

I have not looked into the best modern ones. Need to try to find one to take a look into. Maybe I will change my mind?

Me too, I've used less expensive ones and not been impressed. But I simply couldn't afford the Best modern MILCs (and their lenses) ... and some thought that the K-3iii was too expensive?!?!

I own and use the latest and greatest MILC cameras, and I am still not impressed. YMMV.

To me, the main benefit of EVF cameras is the reduced size and weight. With Pentax-3 III and the small Limited primes, that weight advantage of mirrorless cameras has been eliminated (except for m43 systems).

To me it is also that it focus on the actual sensor, no AF adjustments to make it work good. And also that there seem to come very fun lenses to mirrorless.

I hope that people will continue to be interested in OVF cameras.

Me too!

Me too, too

Ian Stuart Forsyth
Ian Stuart Forsyth Veteran Member • Posts: 3,950
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

bob5050 wrote:

Ian Stuart Forsyth wrote:

bob5050 wrote:

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.

I see all you do is walk around with the camera up to your eye all day long and this is how you enjoy your trip reality that can only be viewed thru you camera.

It is not possible to get from what I said to what you said.

If the camera is set up properly, it will take care of itself,

Without know how the cameras uses the medium how do you know its working correctly?

So your view is that I should try to figure out how the sensor works when I'm on-site? Shouldn't I already know that?

Know how a sensor work and knowing how and what data the medium is capturing may seem like the same thing but they are not. Take 2 different manufactures using the same sensor they often use that sensor in very different ways.

As you demonstrate in past threads you have posted in , knowing a little about how the medium is capturing data will help you decide how to use the camera. What is the difference in learning a little more? and using that knowledge when you're out traveling

Take this image here

If I was to use the camera and how it tells me to adjust the exposure I should be applying a - EC

But the simple truth is that it has nothing to do with the exposure and even clipping

as there is none

The reality is that this image is already underexposed and not knowing this will lead many down the path to making camera adjustments incorrectly for what they want to accomplish.

The Camera is only a tool, photography is deciding how to use it <------ this is the type of photographer I am

Its really not any harder to take a better photography out in the field when knowing how the medium is capturing that data.

This image is taken with a camera that requires 3 light sensors to produce the final image 2 of which are not even in the same optical path as natural light is hitting the sensor or your eyes

With a ML this would be even easier as you are not relying several different sensors telling the user how to use the camera, there even the problems of having to calibrate those different sensors so that you have a realistic representation of the data your imaging sensors is capturing.

-- 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 *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Pentax K-7 +27 more
Dowie D Junior Member • Posts: 31
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Why on Earth would one want to stop seeing the reality when he raises the camera to his eye?

Alex

Why on earth would you close one eye (and lose a dimension) to look through a VF? It's a poor representation of "reality".

Roland Karlsson Forum Pro • Posts: 29,702
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

SrMi wrote:

PentUp wrote:

Roland Karlsson wrote:

SrMi wrote:

The EVFs have improved considerably, but in my eyes, there is still a huge difference. I have been EVF cameras for several years. I much prefer the view through an OVF than through an EVF. The difference is especially striking when photographing with EVF and OVF cameras at the same time. But, again, this is my personal opinion.

Ben Lifson's comment when reviewing the early EVFs still sounds true to me: unlovely to look at, alienating; it tends to quench the feeling the subject gives me.

I fully agree.

Me too

I have not looked into the best modern ones. Need to try to find one to take a look into. Maybe I will change my mind?

Me too, I've used less expensive ones and not been impressed. But I simply couldn't afford the Best modern MILCs (and their lenses) ... and some thought that the K-3iii was too expensive?!?!

I own and use the latest and greatest MILC cameras, and I am still not impressed. YMMV.

That is useful info.

I am rather picky regarding what I see in an EVF. So, maybe I will feel the same.

I know thought, that some people do not care. They could use a VGA screen and be happy. More power to them.

I have some Sigma cameras without EVF, and for those you could buy a special magnifier view fonder to put over the LCD. And the LCD is really bad. And some people praised it! I got one of those and - no way! I see all ugly three color pixel and the color and contrast looked totally sh*t. So, it differs.

To me, the main benefit of EVF cameras is the reduced size and weight. With Pentax-3 III and the small Limited primes, that weight advantage of mirrorless cameras has been eliminated (except for m43 systems).

To me it is also that it focus on the actual sensor, no AF adjustments to make it work good. And also that there seem to come very fun lenses to mirrorless.

I hope that people will continue to be interested in OVF cameras.

Me too!

Me too, too

-- hide signature --

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

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp2 Quattro Sony RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax K-1 +14 more
JL Salvignol
JL Salvignol Senior Member • Posts: 1,777
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

The DP2M whith a  Voigtländer 28mm OVF is so nice Roland 😉

-- hide signature --

JLS

 JL Salvignol's gear list:JL Salvignol's gear list
Sigma DP2 Merrill Nikon Coolpix A Nikon 1 V1 Nikon 1 J1 Pentax K-01 +16 more
Alex Sarbu Forum Pro • Posts: 12,949
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

Dowie D wrote:

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Why on Earth would one want to stop seeing the reality when he raises the camera to his eye?

Alex

Why on earth would you close one eye (and lose a dimension) to look through a VF? It's a poor representation of "reality".

Do you stop seeing the reality if you close one eye? (without a camera) Most people don't

OTOH, there is actually a technique of looking with both eyes - one through the viewfinder, the other bare.

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 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +9 more
bob5050 Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

Ian Stuart Forsyth wrote:

Take this image here

I often suspect that irreconcilable approaches to how one shoots are actually based on differences in what one shoots. I'm not a birder, and no where even on my NAS would you find any pictures similar to those you posted. We aren't looking at the same things.

As for the histogram--I use them all the time in post, and would like to have a small overlay of one as an on-demand feature in my OVF.  I'm just not willing to give up the OVF to get it, nor to go to LiveView. Perhaps we'll have it in some future, more hybrid Pentax.

In the mean time, if I suspect I've got an exposure problem, checking the histogram in Instant Review suffices, and/or taking an additional shot or two further adjusted or in HDR mode has me covered.

-- 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 Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +6 more
John_A_G Veteran Member • Posts: 8,164
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

PentUp wrote:

John_A_G wrote:

I agree a reviewer of a OVF camera should be familiar with OVFs. As I sad though, as far as I know all the DPR reviewers are - so they should appreciate what an OVF brings to the table. I also think that EVF has been one of the things that upgrades every model. I don't have first hand knowledge, but from reading comments and reviews the newer EVFs are much improved over the ones 2 generations ago. Can't personally say if it's true or not. If it is true, the difference between OVF and EVF has shrunk.

Maybe? But while we can definitely say (for eg) that the AF-C on the K-3iii is much improved over the Pentax DSLRs of 2 generations ago, that doesn't mean that it is better than or equal to that of a D500 or many MILCs... AND in the same way newer EVFs being much improved over the ones 2 generations ago, doesn't mean that they are better than or equal to OVFs.

Right - but that's the benefit of reviews written by people who have some hands on experience with modern cameras from different manufacturers.  They are in the best position to say how an EVF from camera A compares to the OVFs offered in other cameras or how the AF-C compares to other modern cameras.  It's an imperfect world - in a perfect world every reviewer would have 3 months experience with every camera.  But, alas, that can't happen.  The best you can do is seek out reviews from reviewers you trust - not just pick a review whose conclusion matches what you want to hear.  If you don't trust the reviewer, why would you trust if they say something positive about a camera you like?  You either trust the reviewer or you don't  If you don't trust them, then it doesn't matter whether what they say is positive or negative.

Roland Karlsson Forum Pro • Posts: 29,702
Re: Review K3 mark lll?

JL Salvignol wrote:

The DP2M whith a Voigtländer 28mm OVF is so nice Roland 😉

I am right now bidding on a Pentax SV with a Xenar 50/2.8.

It curently has a rather low bid and I hope no one understanding the value of the Xenar turns up.

-- hide signature --

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

 Roland Karlsson's gear list:Roland Karlsson's gear list
Sigma DP3 Merrill Sigma dp2 Quattro Sony RX100 III Pentax K-3 Pentax K-1 +14 more
bob5050 Senior Member • Posts: 2,783
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

John_A_G wrote:

You either trust the reviewer or you don't If you don't trust them, then it doesn't matter whether what they say is positive or negative.

Trust is, however, context sensitive. A reviewer that's very knowledgeable and trust-worthy for one system might not be reliable on another. Or even on the same system in a much-different shooting context.

Applicable Zen story here: https://www.learnreligions.com/empty-your-cup-3976934

-- 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 Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM +6 more
John_A_G Veteran Member • Posts: 8,164
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
2

bob5050 wrote:

John_A_G wrote:

You either trust the reviewer or you don't If you don't trust them, then it doesn't matter whether what they say is positive or negative.

Trust is, however, context sensitive. A reviewer that's very knowledgeable and trust-worthy for one system might not be reliable on another. Or even on the same system in a much-different shooting context.

Applicable Zen story here: https://www.learnreligions.com/empty-your-cup-3976934

Agreed.  But then you shouldn't trust them when they have something good to say about the system they're unfamiliar with either.

hikerdoc Veteran Member • Posts: 3,075
Re: Review K3 mark lll?
1

bob5050 wrote:

Trust is, however, context sensitive. A reviewer that's very knowledgeable and trust-worthy for one system might not be reliable on another. Or even on the same system in a much-different shooting context.

Applicable Zen story here: https://www.learnreligions.com/empty-your-cup-3976934

It is always interesting in discussions like this that both sides to an argument could cite the same references in support of their positions. A direct quote from your cited essay (reference link above):

“Unfortunately, a true ideologue rarely recognizes a situation in which his beloved assumptions do not apply, which can lead him into colossal blunders.”

That may be a bit over the top in discussing choice of a camera.

This camera has been out for perhaps 4-6 months and has not created the excitement hoped for. It is a DSLR. Most “unique” features in any current DSLR system are in common use and unique only in marketing semantics. (I know, IBIS is unique) The reviews are all coming to essentially the same conclusion and any upcoming reviews coming to completely different conclusions should lead one to question that reviewer. There are beloved assumptions coming from both camps. Any review will eventually come to those comparisons which reveal uncomfortable truths for users of any system; cost, AF, buffer, etc are some of those things for this camera.
I see blunders in dismissing the camera because it is not an MILC or in dismissing reviewers as inept if they come to conclusions different than the faithful.

 hikerdoc's gear list:hikerdoc's gear list
Apple iPhone 8
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads