Pentax K-3 Mark III sample gallery

I like your comment. You are objective and aren't like some of the trolls on here.

May 26, 2021permalink

It's like so much in life , you get used to something and while it's not perfect it's not like you want to have to reinvent yourself by changing brands again.I used Canon early and never connected with the product ,Nikon ticked all the boxes for many years as well as Fuji .I own neither now ,but am sick of the Pentax bashers as I never knew these critic's with Fuji or Nikon .Actually Leica gets the same responses as I worked for a Leica pro dealer.

May 26, 2021permalink

Toilet Roll

Pentax ought to just retire and sell any patents to Canon. Nobody in their right mind invests in Pentax exo system

May 23, 2021*permalink

mepaca

My Pentax cameras are capable of outstanding photos. I guess I am not in my right mind. What do you shoot?

May 23, 2021*permalink

So why comment in a Pentax review if you are Canon or Sony fan

May 23, 2021permalink

LightBug

Not so subtle screen name "T.roll."

May 23, 2021permalink

A sheep patting themselves on the back for a bit of self gratification .That would be an interesting image LOL. and what is an exo ??

May 24, 2021*permalink

Hoxton Bridge

Rather pompous and unnecessary comment...

May 25, 2021permalink

Toilet Roll

Well they must make no money as their sales are very poor. Wouldnt Pentax be better off just making native lenses for the other brands and stick a fork in their camera body production

May 25, 2021permalink

Maybe you should help those who need Canon advice and what is an exo while your at it - thanks .

May 26, 2021permalink

I don't know if I can take a comment from someone named "Toilet Roll" very seriously. I mean, don't people wipe their rear ends with you?

May 26, 2021permalink

DrawsACircle

@mepaca, he got flushed out.

May 26, 2021permalink

He's full of ------------

May 26, 2021permalink

Toilet Roll

Such immaturity on here. You guys are probably grown men too, just try not to be so upset and resort to insults when someone highlights the glaring truths of your fave camera brand

May 26, 2021permalink

Hoxton Bridge

Each of your comments are equally inane. The only glaring truth here is that you have no idea what you are talking about. Stick to sanitary products, they have a greater affinity for what you talk. Best wishes.

May 26, 2021permalink

wed7

For someone looking for a hobbyist with 0 existing lens line up, which is a better system to be used for travel/family/weekend photos?

Fujifilm aps-c (X-T3/X-T4)
Pentax aps-c (K-3iii)
Canon EOS RP (ff)

May 20, 2021permalink

Laqup

In most countries the RP is much cheaper than the X-T4 or K-3 III.
But this applies to cameras like the Z6 as well. So I would say skip APS-C at that price point and get a decent fullframe camera if you are starting completely new.

EOS RP to save some money, but there are other real gems available for <2000€/$ like the Z5, Z6, Z6II, EOS R, A7III as well... Currently you even get the Z7 for <2000€ in my country. So it depends a bit on where you are living and what you are planning to spend. At the current price point the Pentax is probably only of interest for already "invested" Pentaxians. The Fuji is good but compared to its fullframe rivals quite expensive. It might have the best "Out of camera JPGs" though with a bunch of nice film simulations.

May 20, 2021*permalink

Daft Punk

I would not buy the Canon RP.

The RP does not have IBIS. This image stabilisation ( or the lack of it in the Canon) makes a big difference.

The RP sensor is not as good as the Fuji or the Pentax. Dynamic range is poor. Dark shadows get very noisy.

Canon RF lenses are very large and expensive. You can use cheaper Canon EF lenses but you will have to use an adaptor.

You should also decide if you like electronic viewfinder or a traditional optical viewfinder. This is the main difference between the Fujifilm and the Pentax. Only you know which you like the most, it is very personal.

APSC or FF does not really matter. Do not forget the image quality between the two is the same 99% of the time for 99% of people. Also remember that full frame lenses ( telephotos ) can be a lot heavier.

On balance I would recommend the Fuji.

May 20, 2021*permalink

Lakecat

Why are you considering a high end action camera ie the K3iii for travel? Buy a KP and some DA or FA limited primes and have a killer travel kit.

May 20, 2021permalink

Lightright

Among the 3 of them, either get the Pentax or Fuji for more lens selection. Fuji got lots of lenses but they can be quite expensive. Pentax have plenty more to choose from including the ones that goes back all the way to the 70's with their K mount and you can get a good bargain on some of them on e-bay.

May 21, 2021permalink

Tomasz_Wk

For me the best cost-effect solution is Fuji. Especially if you get your camera with the excellent kit lens 18-55mm. You can also get the X-t30 as a good alternative to the more expensive x-t3/x-t4.

May 21, 2021*permalink

I'd say the RP, not so much for the body, but for what you can move into. Start out with the RP and move your way up (if you want) to an R, or an R5 or R6. You can also adapt many of the EF lenses using the RF adapter.

Fuji has a nice selection too, but fewer third party lens options. But they do have a basic set ("triloogy") you could buy and be covered for most FLs from about 10mm to 20mm (15-300mm equivalent in FF terms).

But for travel, you may also want to consider the Sony options too. The a6000-series bodies (or the a7c) is nice and small, but offer good image quality in a small (range finder style) format.

May 21, 2021*permalink

DrewRick

As always, it depends. The Canon RP is a very basic camera, only worth it as an entry ticket to a lens system offering the 28-70 F2 and collapsible 70-200 zooms or F1.2 primes if you plan on spending a lot more money later. Fujifilm offers mid-range bodies that beat the outdated-at-release RP on price, sensor technology and features, e.g. X-S10 with ibis, has an essentially complete lens system that is high quality but not exactly cheap and as a mirrorless allows adapting all sorts of vintage lenses including Canon SLR lenses with autofocus. Pentax is an SLR system famous for its excellent weather sealing and value for money (great viewfinders, ibis, astrotracking, pixel shift even in older bodies), with tiny limited lenses packing a punch but you won't do a lot of adapting due to the SLR flange distance leaving no room for adaptors. Pick your poison.

May 22, 2021permalink

DrewRick

When I was in your shoes, I went with Fujifilm bodies with a few native lenses but also adapting affordable Canon lenses. The Canon 10-18, 60 macro, 17-55 F2.8, 55-250, 200 F2.8 can be found way cheaper than their Fujifilm counterparts and perform beautifully on my Fuji bodies. The Fringer adapter rules supreme. On the other hand, the Fuji 18-55 kit and 35 F1.4 alone are worth it to get into Fuji and you'll have to pry them out of my cold, dead hands. Looking to get an XF 90 F2 for clean portraits. Love adapting vintage lenses of all brands for their unique looks.

May 22, 2021*permalink

robgendreau

No one can answer accuratly without knowing what lenses you intend to put on them and the budget for them. Full frame lenses, eg, aren't cheap. And if you are limiting yourself to the kit lenses, then I'd compare them. And other factors, like say weatherproofing. The Pentax is great for that, the RP has none.

May 22, 2021permalink

Hoxton Bridge

The Pentax or the Fuji. The Canon does not really do it for me, largely for reasons already described above. If I had to choose I would opt for the Pentax.

May 25, 2021permalink

I've reviewed all the images, and I have one major question about the photos, and that is, "who the heck puts a cat on a leash???"

LOL

May 19, 2021permalink

Better a cat on a leash than a dog wearing underwear on it's head.
NOT that my cat would ever submit to a leash, but..

May 20, 2021permalink

Ha! We have two cats that we walk on leashes, we've previously had two others. Lots of reasons to do it, few not to. They travel with us all over the PNW and love to walk on the beach, through the dunes, on wooded paths, etc. My K3III arrives tomorrow; I'll have to work up a kitty walking-on-a-leash AF-C sequence for the DSLR forum :-)

May 20, 2021permalink

I've seen a child on a leash. If for safety while walking in public, that's fine.

May 22, 2021permalink

I put mine on a leash when out hunting kangaroos.

May 22, 2021permalink

Ramon767

You should be ashamed to go hunting for innocent animals. Why don't you go hunting for criminals? You would be doing the society a big favor.

May 22, 2021permalink

You must be the most naive person ever.

May 23, 2021permalink

#Ramon767 The Net is riddled by those with little to NO sense of humor, and others who have totally strange ones. Ever hear of Bonsai Kittens??

I love satire, but I fully expect some, even many, to not recognize it.

May 23, 2021permalink

I’m not sure where the satire begins and ends in this thread anymore. I’m wondering if this is a parody of satire!

May 23, 2021permalink

I mean seriously, you can’t take a kangaroo down with less than two cats.

May 23, 2021permalink

Perhaps just "hunt" criminal roos? My two cats are hard pressed to take down big bugs - they just want to play with them. If a roo showed up, they'd probably all just party . . . .

May 23, 2021permalink

#Ramon767 OR, a satire on parody. BTW, you must have SMALL cats if you need 2 just for a roo..

May 23, 2021permalink

When you hunt lions without a weapon, as an equal, then I will respect you. Now, hunting kangaroos and still with guns ?! Is that serious ?!

May 23, 2021permalink

No guns bro, just a parody of satire hidden by kitty cats. Small KCs.

May 24, 2021*permalink

👍🏼

May 25, 2021permalink

PentUp

Not all Kangaroos are innocent. Some just haven't been charged, or convicted yet. Just sayin'

May 25, 2021permalink

Therefore, there must be a fair trial. We are all equal before the law.

May 25, 2021permalink

Yea, my post was more for satire.
I can understand putting a cat on a leash, really I can, as you just can't take them for a walk and expect them to come back. I have an excellent hound dog, that requires no leash, he always stays with me (some dogs won't though).

May 26, 2021permalink

#Michael Piziak I have had multiple cats that would walk with me, WITHOUT a leash, for several blocks. One even followed me into a store, and jumped on the counter when I was checking out. The staff would ask WHERE she was if I came in alone. Current cat follows me up and down the residential block I live on, moving away from me only when a car drives by. Then he comes back within a minute.

May 26, 2021permalink

Are you lucky, or do you train them?

I think I’d like to go for a walk with my cats. But they’re idiots.

May 26, 2021permalink

We've been walking cats on leashes for 15 years, 4 different kitties over that time. It helps to start young, though our first one was 5 and took to it pretty quickly. I did 4 1/2 miles one day recently (in several sessions) and we regularly walk 2 miles, though some days it's more about sniffing stuff and dawdling. they love to travel. I'll put up a few shots in the Pentax SLR forum though the AF-C test is still a ways out.

May 26, 2021permalink

#Ramon767 Well, I have never tried to 'formally' train a cat, though I HAVE seen such done. I also haven't had much luck getting share-worthy pix of them (simple snapshots is all), but I do have a great rapport with them that most don't seem to achieve.

May 26, 2021permalink

Can't post any pix here, but a gallery of cat walking shots is now up in the Pentax SLR forum for the curious . . .

May 26, 2021permalink

mmditter

Ever since digital got big in the mid-2000's I've been amazed at the quality we've been treated to
Sure, in some cases film still looks better but back in 2005 6mp cameras were awesome and cameras have mostly just gotten better since then

May 19, 2021permalink

BackToNature1

This gallery is perfectly fine. Dpr isn't trying to produce images for anyone's private gallery. Just a basic starting point for what a given camera can do.

May 13, 2021permalink

Oxygenum

The natural profile is not a standard profile , please make sample images in Bright profile!

May 13, 2021permalink

ed is the standard editor and Natural is the good profile*.

Please dpreview avoid Bright!

* Flat with slight saturation and contrast increase is also good

May 13, 2021permalink

Oxygenum:

Don't like the standard [ACR] profile, then download the raws, DNGs in this case, and extract away.

As general rule, Pentax/Ricoh does not have a great reputation for out of camera jpegs.

And I have no idea how good the ACR defaults for processing Pentax DNGs to jpeg work. Given my screen name, you can safely assume I don't care about ACR's default settings for Pentax DNG extractions.

But with the raws, you can determine what the camera/lens can do--within the limitation of your extraction software.

May 16, 2021permalink

aiki76

I don't see these images really helpful, it's impossible to make judgment of a camera with these images... Cheap or average standard lens, shooting with full light, no high ISO, no particular stresses to the sensor... Mah

May 12, 2021permalink

egk4260

Pentax like all the others has some superb legacy primes and superb recent FF directed primes and zooms. However one frequently hears of Ricoh’s offering of a broad selection of light and inexpensive APS-C directed Pentax lenses as a distinctive positive selling point over other brands. Unfortunately, users of other brands view most of those lenses as consumer zooms or cheap and average primes. And, as with other brands, that assessment is frequently accurate. Are we expecting testing with the exotics while promoting the mundane?

May 14, 2021permalink

ffking

It's a shame that they didn't have the newly redesigned star series 16-50/2.8 ready for the camera launch as the recent * lenses have been excellent optically and the PLM motor with a lightweight focusing group should be lightning fast focusing judging by the 55-300 PLM.

May 14, 2021permalink

aiki76:

I agree that there need to be more high ISO samples, but the lenses are not "standard", especially the f/1.8 Sigma zoom and the Pentax 35mm APSC lens.

May 17, 2021permalink

Matt1645f4,

I'd argue Pentax is in as good a position they can be in. They offer just a handful number of camera bodies, are such a small part of Ricoh that they only show up in the small "other" category on Ricoh's financial statement, have created a niche market for folks that prefer DSLR's over mirroless, and continued their tradition of keeping the same mount since 1975.

The camera market is saturated, according to a recent press release from Canon. There is an argument to be made that small, niche, camera brands are in a better position than the heavy weights in the industry that have depended on high sales and offer many bodies.

May 19, 2021permalink

Matt1645f4:

The K3 III is in many regards a better camera body than the good K1 II, which of course came out years ago, so the price has gone down.

Full frame does not necessarily equal better ILC body.

Too bad that Pentax cameras are reasonably widely available in the UK.

May 20, 2021permalink

Matt1645f4

Here in the U.S., most camera stores have closed their doors. It's not just Pentax that is hard to buy in store here. The camera market is saturated. Personally, I have never bought a camera in an actual brick and mortar store for over a decade.

Over here, in rural area I live in, one simply has to buy from B&H, Adorama, Amazon, etc.....

But in saying all that, reports are that the Pentax k3 iii is selling well. I think Pentax is continuing to exist in a niche market. Where a, the big 3 (Canikon and Sony), are perhaps finding it harder to sell mass quantities of bodies and lens as they did in the past. It may just be that niche companies are better positioned to survive this saturated market.

May 20, 2021permalink

ffking

SRS Microsystems and WEX photographic consistently stock the range of Pentax in the UK - I think most people actually buy online these days don't they? - that probably contributes to brand loyalty for better or worse as it's safer to get what you're familiar with.

May 20, 2021permalink

aiki76:

If you want high ISO raws (PEFs), Imaging Resource put up studio shots all the way through 11.

ART 1.8 (a stripped down, but updated RawTherapee--RawTherapee hasn't been updated since early 2020) extracts these PEFs nicely:

https colon //bitbucket dot org/agriggio/art/downloads/

May 21, 2021permalink

henricoo

....where the curve does not starts at zero output level....

May 12, 2021permalink

henricoo

Larger dynamic range can result in histograms where the curve does not at zero output level. So blacks are not real black and contrast will decrease. Correct levels and contrast in post and you get a very good looking picture with a lot of "pop".

It is the same when you extract the maximum amount of darks & highlights in RAW files using the blacks/exposure/recovery sliders. You have to correct the gamma and contrast to get the best results. No JPEG engine setting will do this to your own taste.

Smartphone pictures often look very contrasty because the narrow DR. It's like the difference between using color negatives and slides at the film era.

May 12, 2021permalink

LightBug

Does anyone think the 16-85 lens used for the gallery has some problem? Seems like none of the pictures taken with it is sharp. I have the 18-135mm and its output seems sharper than the 16-85 is capturing in this gallery, and the 16-85 is supposed to be better than the 18-135.

May 12, 2021permalink

Good catch LightBug. There is something wrong with the 16-85 used in this gallery. Check 16-85mm shots in both PF and Flickr, and you'll clearly see they don't have the softness. Then compare 16-85 shots in this gallery with those from the other lenses. It is evident the lens is defective. DPR please review and check the lens. RogerC can probably send you another one by FedEx quick.

May 13, 2021*permalink

I think people in general are too obsessed with sample variation. It's a variable aperture zoom with pretty big range of focal lengths. Things like that are never a treat for pixel peepers.

There are also other things to keep in mind, like shutter shock, mirror flap shock (it's DSLR after all), quality of light, focus adjustment (again, DSLR quirk), subject/camera movement (IBIS helps with the latter, but it's not a 100% reliable solution), and if you're looking just at jpegs - sharpening level settings.

May 13, 2021permalink

I agree with all your points SMCTak. Every manufactured product though has an acceptable range of sample variation. The problem is when an individual item is outside of that range. That's when it is considered defective.

Since we don't have the benefit of Roger's literally million dollar lens testing machine we can only go by the output and compare it to the output of a large sample of images easily found in other sites, and when you have a large enough sample, it can mitigate some of the other confounding variables. I don't even pixel peep, but the problem is visible in normal viewing distance. Of course also depends on the viewing medium. I can see it on my 27in. monitor, I can't see it on my 15in. MBP.

May 13, 2021*permalink

The 16-85 performs poorly in both galleries. Would be interesting to know if its the same lens.

May 18, 2021permalink

You're right.

May 19, 2021permalink

TheLastMan

Pretty well any 26mp camera from any brand will produce very decent RAW image files these days, and you can usually tweak JPG settings (sharpness, contrast, saturation etc) to suit your own taste. Pentax certainly has lots of settings for that!

This sensor seems to have slightly better low light ability than average, but not much else other than "pixel shift" which you had in the K3II anyway. The big image quality variable between brands is much more to do with lenses - and it is the lens, light conditions and photographer skill that will have most impact on these samples.

Pentax has a decent range of lenses, but few really modern ones. They have always gone with small and light with slightly reduced sharpness and slower aperture rather than large and heavy with ultimate image quality. Those of us who like to use primes and travel light are very grateful for that!

I find the usefulness of these image galleries to be very limited and say more about the weather and photographer!

May 12, 2021*permalink

Don Kiyoti

Newer Pentax lenses such as the HD FA* 50mm are anything but small and light with reduced sharpness. The same can be said for the HD DA* 11-18mm, which is considerably heavier and bulkier than the older 12-24mm.

May 12, 2021permalink

TheLastMan

@Don Kiyoti, true there are some new big lenses in their line-up, but the majority of their APS-C primes are smaller (and older) compared to other brands. The DA 15mm f4, 21mm f3.2, 35mm f2.4, 40mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 70mm f2.4 are all lovely miniature gems. Not as fast or sharp as, say, Sigma Art lenses, but a heck of a lot easier to cart around! Even most of their zooms aren't so big (or fast) as 3rd party alternatives. I have the Pentax 18-135 and the Sigma 17-50 f2.8. The Sigma is faster and sharper, but a lot bigger and heavier despite 85mm less reach.

May 12, 2021permalink

petebfrance

They look OK, but no post processed raw shots? Will there be some?
Disappointed with the Honda shot - possibly because wide aperture used so that the rather nice indicator lamps weren't clear and looked rather ugly (to me) OOF.

May 12, 2021*permalink

You do know you can download the raw files, right? At least if you PP them yourself then you know what you did. With a post processed JPEG done by someone else, you won't know what they did to come up with an image that you may or may not like.

May 12, 2021*permalink

petebfrance

Funnily enough, I never thought of doing that. Will have a go - tried a few, but need a bit more time to 'play' with them.

May 12, 2021permalink

Yeah, that's the most fun I have with these galleries. Sometimes, I will download raws even from cameras I am not interested in buying or can not afford to get simply out of curiosity and to have fun with the files in PP software. I think you do learn a lot more about a camera's output doing that than just looking at the pictures.

May 12, 2021*permalink

petebfrance

Having played with a few I can see what you mean!

May 12, 2021permalink

The photos, even photographed during the day, with excellent lighting and, even so, it seems that the photos are not with good quality. Is it the fault of the lens or the sensor of the camera? I would be able to take a much better picture with a Canon T3i and an EF 16-35mm f / 2.8L Mark 3 or a Canon EF 100mm f / 2.8L IS. Or with my Nikon D5600 + Nikkor 50mm f / 1.8. Realize that my equipment is humble and old. And yet, they take much better quality photos. So I found the quality of these photos strange. Perhaps Pentax will need to do a Patch Update.

May 12, 2021*permalink

What do you mean by "not with good quality"? These seem to be fine to me, for what they are - straight out of camera jpegs with neutral settings. I especially like those made with 35mm macro.

The lighting is also far from what I'd call "excellent", but then, the light outdoors is rarely excellent. It's either flat or too harsh, most of the time.

May 12, 2021*permalink

You would get better files in this same situation using a Canon T100 + Canon 50mm f / 1.8 STM. And if you have a Canon 600 EX II RT speedlite and know how to use it, you can do miracles at a very low price in this three-pack.

May 12, 2021permalink

...but what do you mean by "better"? Sharper? Contrastier? More vibrant? Better bokeh? You didn't provide any basis for evaluation, nor any example of the image from the equipment you mention to illustrate the difference.

May 12, 2021permalink

Only now did I understand what you meant. When I refer to quality, it's basically sharpness. In addition, there is a way to fix it. but lack of sharpness kills any photo. Even at low ISO, the photo is not sharp. It looks deteriorated. It looks like a photo taken with a cell phone sensor. Honestly, I think the fault is with the camera software.

May 12, 2021permalink

I don't think the photos lack sharpness or "are deteriorated". Sure, some are sharper than others. The dog pictures made with 35 macro are plenty sharp to me. Some made with the 16-85 are less sharp, but that's more or less what I'd expect from a consumer zoom.

I guess we'll just agree to disagree.

May 13, 2021permalink

In fact, looking more closely, I realized that the photos taken at f / 4 and f / 5 are good. At f / 2.8 they are blurred. So it can be the lens. Because my Canon EF 16-35 f / 2.8L Mark 3, it’s super sharp at f / 2.8 from end to end. I think I got used to it. And my Canon EF 100mm f / 2.8L Macro is also very sharp. This ends up making me unaccustomed. Even though my pictures were taken with an old camera (Canon T3i). In the end, you are right in your evaluation in this last one your comment. The problem is really in my eyes, unaccustomed to familiar lenses and well evaluated for their sharpness even at f / 2.8. And I'm not being ironic. I am here acknowledging my failure.

May 13, 2021permalink

Oxygenum

Natural profile is not good for standard photos.

May 13, 2021permalink

filipradich

The 'natural' profile looks so much better than the 'britght' one. Very nice!

May 12, 2021permalink

Oxygenum

No , natural have muted colors it is only good for flowers...

May 13, 2021permalink

BryantP

That depends somewhat on the camera. On my KP the "bright" profile looks unnatural - almost garish, but on my other Pentax cameras *ist Ds, K-5 and K-3 the "natural" profile is too muted and I use the "bright" profile almost exclusively.

May 13, 2021*permalink

zakaria

Pentax Fine sharpness needs to tweak it as done before with k1 and k3.

May 12, 2021permalink

I just had a look around other recent galleries for high iso shots when I realised this one had so many of them. I'm sort of an iso 100 person ocassionally going up to iso 800 (FF prime shooter) so my experience of high iso is limited. Anyway turns out recent galleries dont really have high iso shots but I found these moderate iso ones.

iso 2500
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/0329383169/nikon-z6-ii-sample-gallery/3243941437
the k-3III iso 2500 was not very comparable (beer glass) so the iso 3200 will have to do.
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/4949897610/pentax-k-3-mark-iii-sample-gallery/9953544563

iso 640 (I bet/hope some hight iso shots will be up coming for this gallery)
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/8035448300/canon-eos-m50-mark-ii-sample-gallery/4462751017
k-3III iso 640
https://www.dpreview.com/sample-galleries/4949897610/pentax-k-3-mark-iii-sample-gallery/0418012315

May 12, 2021permalink

Magnar W

Note that exposure might vary more than five full stop when you select a certain ISO value, and you can still have an okay looking final result. The amount of noise will of cause vary a lot, depending on the exposure.

You should judge noise level from how mature the exposure is, not only ISO value.

May 12, 2021*permalink

I've not made any judgement yet only now doing side by sides. Having to say I'm surprised looking at it. Over all impression of the other galleries was better but looking at similar iso shots reverse the whole thing.

May 12, 2021permalink

Barbu

Remember, if you are looking at the gallery here, you're just comparing JPEGs with (mostly) default settings for sharpness, colour, contrast etc. (so it's useful only if you're a JPEG shooter).
Thankfully, DPreview also gives us the RAW files; look at those too, if you're used to processing the results.

May 12, 2021permalink

Breakfastographer 2

You can just go to the comparison tool and plug in the KP while we wait for K-3 III studio samples. That will give you a pretty good idea, example:
https://breakfastographer.wordpress.com/2020/09/21/pentax-kp-keeps-up-with-nikon-z5-and-sony-a7-iii/

May 14, 2021permalink

DavidB77

May be its because I neved used OOC JPEG on my Pentax camera, or because the photographer do not used a tripod for landscape shots but IQ look crappy to me, compared to what I used to see with my K-3II. Is that the Fine Sharpness II algorithm that should be "nearly perfect" for Pentax?

I know that 18-35 is inconsistent to focus, that 20-40 is tricky to focus because of field curvature and that 16-85 is not that great... Its a pitty that Pentax do not released new DA* 16-50mm at the same time of the K-3III.

Problem is that its hard to buy into the Pentax system by looking at this gallery :(
Recent Fujifilm X-E4 gallery was shot using prime lenses only, and images are perfectly sharp and in focus. If I know nothing about Fuji and Pentax, and only look at the gallery, I will buy Fuji closed eyes.

May 12, 2021permalink

That was pretty much my impression but looking into it it seems it's mainly an issue of light/weather and iso. That DA16-85 doesn't look very convincing at all though...

The X-E4 gallery basically has great light all around and much, much better photography. Pixelpeeping it's not any better though. Differenc sooc smoothing but that's it.

May 12, 2021permalink

TOMSDPR

OK, thks - lets talk about the dog now : )

May 12, 2021permalink

Richard Murdey

White balance, saturation and color tone all on point. The fancy high ISO NR works as advertised. All good, in other words. A lot of the sample images are very clearly "lens-limited" .... as opposed to using a "limited lens". The latter might have satisfied the critics more, but wouldn't have added any practical value to the test.

May 12, 2021permalink

Mateus1

What an uninspiring gallery... poor composition and poor editing. Someone should better not advice any camera with such work.

May 12, 2021permalink

These types of samples are meant to show what the camera can do. They're not posting them here or taking them to win any photography awards. I can tell you shooting a test target isn't very interesting, but it can tell you a lot about a lens. Sometimes you have to look beyond the surface... ex. a portrait. OK may be the composition is wrong, but they're really trying to show how the camera reproduces skintones and colors.

May 13, 2021permalink

Plakanina

I agree. Very very amateurish photos

May 13, 2021permalink

Mateus1

>sirhawkeye64
some were edited... badly.

May 21, 2021*permalink

But you guys are missing the point here.... it's not about the edits. You have to look past that part. We as photographers are trained (or learn) to critique photos and can't look beyond that in some circumstances and look at what is really being presented to us. They aren't trying to sell us the photographer (or photo editor's) skills. They're trying to sell us on the overall capabilities of the camera, which some of it gets skewed by poor composition or post production edits, but I think you're missing the overall point.

Yes there are some that are quite bad, but I guess at the same time, we could critique and say that EVERYONE on here has some bad photos in their profiles too, along with the all the galleries for camera reviews.

May 21, 2021*permalink

medon78

I really like the Pentax color signature.

May 12, 2021permalink

elixer

Thank you for the images guys. If you can look at the 8th image in the gallery of the gentleman taken by Richard, the capture details and the lens details are inconsistent.
Cheers...

May 12, 2021permalink

Holger Bargen

Some kind of shaddows from a tree?
If I got the inconsistencies you are talking about, it does not look like a problem of lens or camera.

May 12, 2021permalink

The exif interpretation of new cameras is often wrong.

May 12, 2021permalink

Kenneth Almquist

Good catch. The page says that the image was taken with an HD Pentax-DA 20-40mm F2.8-4 ED Limited DC WR but the exif data says it was taken with an HD PENTAX-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR.

May 12, 2021permalink

Zvonimir Tosic

That Pentax HD DA 35mm macro is one amazing lens.

May 12, 2021permalink

zakaria

Thanks for the great effort. I hope that you try dfa*50mm 1.4 in some portraits. Thank you .

May 12, 2021permalink

Jesaja

It is unproven theory.
If you tasted true PENTAX colour rendering, any other brand's colour will feels watery and boring.
Many Pentaxians will agree with this theory, I hope.

I feels, it is little bit washed out on these samples. May it isn't comes from body but comes from shooting settings.

May 12, 2021permalink

Richard Murdey

I would characterize Pentax default color as deep blue greens and accentuated purples. If some of these sample photos look washed out, it's because of the flat overcast light.

May 12, 2021permalink

belnan

Man people are critical, the images coming from the camera are really good. Thanks for posting them.

May 12, 2021permalink

Satyaa

Overall, I liked the 20-40mm lens. It appears that each lens has its favorite aperture and subject distance. They seem to produce their best results at those parameters.

At the end, it proves that this camera can produce good results when paired with a good lens.

I liked the dog.

I liked that DPR introduced a cat model (yay!) but the cat photo is not as good as the dog photo. Please work on it ;-)

May 11, 2021permalink

Tibor1

Sample gallery....it has exactly ZERO value today for me and, reading the comment section, for many others as well.
But I am not going to criticise, I would like to suggest Dpreview an idea how to make the sample gallery really valuable and enjoyable.

For each newly reviewed camera (or lens) please:
1) Brainstorm first internally its main purposes, typical fields of photography for which it was created!
2) Give chance to young professional photographers to shoot great photographs in THAT particular field(s) of photography - to show people what can be really achieved with that camera (or lens) in right hands!
3) Upload those samples to your sample gallery - you will help those young talented photographers to become more popular and do what they love to do!
4) Enjoy the great feedback (and more clicks) from us - your customers

Regards,

Tibor

May 11, 2021*permalink

I like the idea, but may more experienced hobbyist photographers also participate?

May 11, 2021permalink

Carey Rose

Oh, Tibor, if only it really was that simple.

May 11, 2021permalink

Tibor1

Carey Rose
Oh, Tibor, if only it really was that simple.
-------
Hi Carey,

Sure, it's not a simple project by any definition.

But your (great) review site deserves to have an equally great sample photo section!

Regards,

Tibor

May 11, 2021permalink

jonby

Everyone thinks they know what useful gallery images should be, and a lot seem to think that everyone else wants the same. Fact is, they don't - what is useful for one person is not for another. It really is an impossible task and I don't envy those tasked with the job. Myself, I mainly look at the galleries for information about lenses rather than cameras. I have absolutely no need for the galleries to inspire me with great compositions or interesting subjects. I'd be happy with a few middle-distance shots of some waste ground from a raised perspective shot at f4-f11 so I can assess how the lens would perform for landscape on that sensor. DPR would get loads complaints if they did that, so I don't expect them to. I'm just happy to have something.

May 11, 2021permalink

Satyaa

I agree with Jonby about the complaints.

The original suggestion is a good idea in theory, but I can't see how it can be implemented.

I can already see hundreds, if not thousands, of complaints about DPR favoring a few professionals and not allowing others who can produce the best results from cameras of brand 'x'.

I have seen articles where DPR staff go to a soccer game or basketball game to test the abilities of a camera in the field. I see value in that.

May 11, 2021permalink

Magnar W

@ Tibor1:
1) No lens is made for a limited or typical purpose.
2) If the pictures are too good, you forget to pixel peep!
3) ?

May 12, 2021permalink

Revenant

DPR should hire a completely worthless, astonishingly untalented photographer. Preferably blind too. That way, no positive qualities of the sample photos can be attributed to the photographer's skill and experience, and we get a true idea of what the gear is capable of, untainted by the influence of man.

May 12, 2021permalink

ISO30,000 on image 20. Just downloaded the raw and will see if any of my raw converters can process it. Be interesting to see how it behaves in PP. The SOOC JPEG looks good in the gallery.

May 11, 2021*permalink

Add: All my converters handled it fine although none of them have the profile yet. I shouldn't have been surprised since it's a DNG. It's an advancement in photography to see how an ISO32,000 file from a "small sensor" can be that relatively clean. Anyone who says otherwise is probably biased.

May 11, 2021*permalink

Lotz

Hi,
I also downloaded the 32k ISO DNG to ACR and it handles approximately as my K200D files did at the maximum 1k6 ISO - but without downscaling to 10MPixels.
Incredible performance. Also, DR seems to be quite good: the different browns come out very very good and naturally muted.

Markus

May 12, 2021permalink

Mac McCreery

Nice to see some 'natural' images that don't need pp to obtain the desaturated look that seems in vogue. I use a Canon with the last gen 24mp sensor and a Pentax with the venerable Sony 16mp sensor. I always prefer the look of the latter.

May 11, 2021permalink

TheRealYeats

"...the K-3 III looks like the ultimate APS-C DSLR on the market right now."

There's not exactly a lot of competition.

May 11, 2021permalink

Well if you can live with a mirror, then this camera's specs and image quality (outside of cropped 4K video) stand up really well against a whole lot of its mirrorless crop sensor competition.

If you can shoot through an OVF and need it sturdy, then this is a great option.

May 11, 2021permalink

dp20210116

they still can't match how-old-it-is-already D500 in C-AF department... give it 5 more years they will get it done though... last dSLR standing

May 11, 2021permalink

To be fair, not many aps-c mirrorless match the D500 in C-AF either... if any.

May 13, 2021permalink

TheRealYeats

@dp20210116 - Sure, and the D500 was released it couldn't match Pentax with features such as Pixel Shift and IBIS, among others, even though those features had been available on Pentax and (and other brands) for years.

May 13, 2021permalink

Guys, as a photographer you have to pick your battles.... Sometimes you can't have everything so you pick what's most important to you and you sacrifice what you need to, especially when it comes to cameras like the D500 vs this or other cameras...

For example, many wildlife photographers are shooting fast shutter speeds (like 1/500s or faster), so IBIS may not even be all that effective anyway (especially with long telephotos). But fast AF may mean getting a sharp shot or missing the animal completely especially if the camera can't lock, so you prioritize what's important and deal with (or find a workaround) for what you have to give up. For most Wildlife photographers I know and talk to, fast AF is a must for them, especially if they're shooting BIFs or other unpredictable animals.

May 13, 2021permalink

Lightright

It's either the camera's default jpeg output, white balance, weather or the combination of any of these. They appear a bit washed out for my taste and the skin tone looks a bit cold. The high ISO images however are surprisingly detailed and nicely grained.

May 11, 2021permalink

They are using the 'Natural' profile which produces... natural... looking images ;) If you like punchy stuff it's not for you. Pentax cameras tend to white balance on the cold side compared to some other brands. I find it looks pretty believable for those overcast yet still in shadow shots that populate the gallery. The ones with a ray of sun look punchy enought to me.

May 11, 2021permalink

solarider

@Lightright try it in Vibrant Jpeg mode, or other choices. It's not set in stone.

May 12, 2021permalink

Lightright

@Lessiter, Pentax image processing reminds me of Fujifilm. I don't see anything bad, but just a matter of personal preference. I still have an older Pentax camera and I notice how they tend to have less saturation on their photos in their later models over time. Nikon and the latest Sony cameras appear to have richer color reproduction that is not as punchy as Canon's.

@solarider, I tried that but it just doesn't quite get the richer colors of Nikons or even some latest Sony cameras although I love the crispiness of their rendering especially with higher ISO.

May 12, 2021permalink

left eye

This sample gallery is very disappointing.

My K-5 looked better than these, OOC jpeg with 'Extra-Fine' sharpness and NR OFF.

The standard sharpening radius Pentax uses is rubbish, should not be the default.

Please DPR use 'Fine Sharpness' and turn NR OFF for low-medium ISO, 'Extra Fine' was better still, but not now available.

May 11, 2021permalink

The new sharpness algo should be default on the K-3III if i remember correctly. Somehow a combination and improvement of two previous settings. Pentax has never had aggressive sharpening sooc. For most cases I think this is a good idea.

Also make sure you check the iso of the shots you find lacking sharpness. I think you'll find that they are high iso. Except for the 16-85 ones.

May 11, 2021*permalink

Joe Bagadonuts

You mean they didn’t ask you first how you like them set up? Weird, I thought they would have.

May 11, 2021permalink

Holger Bargen

Turn NR OFF will be a little bit of a problem ...

May 12, 2021permalink

Holger download the raw files and have a look. The jpegs have the normal sooc noise reduction turned on. If you disable nr in your raw developer the files will become noisy. The baked NR is very subtle, I still prefer raw raw's by the way, it makes a difference but nothing like the sooc jpeg smoothing. Luminance noise is very much still there.

So there's no problem turning NR OFF but there will be *some* NR applied anyway, like with the Canon R's and Lumix S's.

May 12, 2021permalink

bcvthul

For ' out of camera JPEG' pictures, these are very nice pictures!

May 11, 2021permalink

Strobist

Yes, I thought the same.

Some sour lemons in the comments, but I like the sooc output.

The thing that the colors do not look like a neon sign on onverdrive is quite, refreshing.

Also the 1.05 OVF must be really nice to use.

Might just bite and have one, but lets see what the early buyers say when they had it for a month or two.

Thank you Pentax for bringing more options to a shrinking market.

May 11, 2021permalink

Jim in Hudson

What struck me is Ricoh/Pentax have perhaps improved their JPEG engine.

May 12, 2021permalink

NIce selection of lenses used. Is it just me though or are the 20-40 ones the only really sharp ones. Surprising because the 20-40 is more of a "rendering" lens and the DA35macro is one of the sharpest Pentax apsc lenses?

Those pink toes (?) shot with the DA15 is a pretty strong pink, glossy and slightly gross experience!

edit: Found the answer! Most of the 20-40 shots were at iso 100 and the DA35 ones I looked at were iso 1600... I'm not sure what it means that I didn't clock that immediately.

May 11, 2021*permalink

The pink toe truck is glossy and a slightly gross experience :-D So the camera just captured the magic that's there for us.

May 11, 2021permalink

starbase218

I agree the DA 35/2.8 is a great lens. It wasn't for me because I didn't need the macro capability but I remember it having hardly any CA.

May 11, 2021permalink

Ergo607

I call it the D500 lite with better vf, ergonomics and IQ.

Kudos Pentax!

May 11, 2021permalink

MartynasMartynas

Well, it is nice that after 5 years since D500 was launched, Pentax managed to release 1 camera and improve something while still lagging behind with AF. Meanwhile, Sony got insane real time AF, 30fps, Nikon created new mount and razor sharp lenses, Canon released two very strong mirrorless models, Fuji offered MF for unbeatable price in a compact package, Panasonic got robust and well speced FF mirrorless models with ability to shoot super high res images. Most of them are able to shoot 10 bit video or 8k and here comes a Pentax with 2000$ crop camera that barely beats a 5 year old Nikon. Kudos!

May 11, 2021*permalink

Ergo607

Not sure what you are trying to say, but there is not something like a free lunch. All camera systems you list are mirrorless, which all have some or all problems inherent to mirrorless design. To have that 'insane real time AF' they are sacrificing IQ and the only manufacturer that uses another AF system is not there yet (https://www.dpreview.com/articles/0171197083/coming-into-focus-how-panasonic-s-dfd-gamble-may-yet-pay-off.)

I am not trying to start a debate between mirrorless vs DSLR. That ship has long sailed. However, that is not to say that there isn't any place for a good DSLR platform. Pentax, for better or for worse and maybe also out of necessity has chosen to not enter the mirrorless battle and that could very well end up being a wise choice. Meanwhile, Nikon nor Canon are bringing out new DSLR's. I am comparing the K3iii to a five year old cam because there isn't anything else to compare it to (as per dpreview TV.)

May 12, 2021permalink

MartynasMartynas

Well, Nikon brought D6 as well as D780 which costs BTW almost same as Pentax and has traditional layout combined with mirrorless like AF in live view. Canon brought 1D series and some other DSLRS so not everything went mirrorless.

May 12, 2021permalink

Richmondthefish

Samples look fine but they haven't blown me away. Most of the images we are seeing are jpegs and Pentax usually has slight issues with them. I thought the files from the D500 vs K3 review last week easily looked better from the D500(that could be the fault of the picture profile being used by Chris)

May 11, 2021*permalink

Gesture

Why is it so hard to come up with images that look stunning on screen for any of these most recent cameras. In some ways, I can do better with my Canon Powershot 300HS or Panasonci LZ10.

May 11, 2021permalink

Richmondthefish

Its a combination of photographer, glass, picture editing(if RAW). JPEG settings. One thing for certain is that no matter how good the camera if all of those things are not aligned then the pictures will not be good. I've seen very subpar pics from a GXF100 and amazing ones from an a6500.

May 11, 2021permalink

The ones with good light are decent enough for a sample gallery. The weather and light makes all the difference for how nice galleries look. The camera? Not much difference.

May 11, 2021permalink

The last camera that blew me away on a DPR gallery was that gazillion dollar Phase One. Let's face it, all ILC cameras including the entry-level ones are so good these days, for 95% of photography they will all look about the same. You get more variation depending on the lens, jpeg engines and PP to taste, and of course conditions and photographer than on the body. The image comparison tool is the place to go, not the sample galleries for anyone comparing camera bodies. The galleries are places to enjoy photography, not a bad activity at all, more than to evaluate anything.

May 11, 2021*permalink

The sample galleries are there because most of us don't spend much time shooting the studio comparison too, as opposed to spending much time shooting various real world things.

May 11, 2021permalink

I would still like to see some competition among the dinosaurs. Canon has pretty much abandoned the concept, but Nikon is a different story. Maybe they will come up with D550 or something.

May 11, 2021permalink

UlrichSchiegg

Nice gallery and nice variety of lenses used. Thank you.

I hope for the studio tests you could get a DFA* 50mm.

May 11, 2021permalink

Satyaa

These initial images are impressive. Whether it will be the ultimate APS-C DSLR, let's see when the final review comes out.

I'd be happy if that's the case because Pentax may remain as the only DSLR maker in a couple of years and they need to put out the best.

May 11, 2021permalink

Rob890

“Ultimate APS-C DSLR on the market right now”
arguable..."One of many ultimate APS-C on the market right

May 11, 2021permalink

aris14

Canon, Nikon and Sony seem that they are not going to introduce in the future any APSC cams. The only manufacturers which invest on other than FF format are Pentax (DSLR) and FuJifilm (ILS) in APSC and Panasonic in M43 (ILS) since Olympus seems that just left the room.
Fujifilm recently managed to come close with the M43 system features, while Pentax's priority is photography over videography.

May 12, 2021permalink

Nikon I think is probably going to kill off their APS-C line, but based on their lens road map (OK one lens) and the rumor of a Z30 this year or next year, it might not be any time soon. I think that over the next 5-7 years they would like to be done with APS-C but I think as long as Sony keeps making a6000-series systems, Nikon will too. (I don't think Nikon cares too much about the EOS M system though as I think even Canon is probably considering phasing those out in the next say 5 years).

I believe there is also a rumor that an a6900 is also coming from Sony, FYI. Not sure when, and really, I don't think its necessary but that's what I've heard/read. So I think it's safe to say that at least Nikon and Sony aren't done with APSC yet.

May 13, 2021*permalink

aris14

@sirhawkeye64
Of course, they will not leave APSC the very near future, from the moment that there is a huge park worldwide of APSC users. And quite a lot of those APSC cameras are great tools and affordable.

May 13, 2021permalink

David610

Despite using a better range of lenses, the high megapixel count and APS-C sensor means that most images taken at apertures wider than f/5.6 are mostly OOF whist images taken at greater than f/5.6 are diffraction limited. The images are nice viewed at less than 100%. Conclusion FF 24mp images are superior.

May 11, 2021*permalink

That makes no sense. If we go by your logic then we can similarly say that most images taken at wider than f8 on an FF camera are OOF while images taken at greater than f8 are diffraction limited. So you don't again anything in going with FF. Of course there are other good reasons to use FF sensors but your reasoning is off.

May 11, 2021permalink

David610 Have you correlated your findings with the ISO of the samples? I made the mistake of not looking at the iso when evaluating the files. It made much more sense afterwards.

May 11, 2021permalink

David610

It may make no sense to you based on your belief system. I checked all 59 images both at fullscreen and at 100%. I reported what I saw. I own a 24mp DSLR and a series of primes and zoom lenses. I find the FF images superior in every way. I guess that explains the existence of the Pentax K1 and Mkii? Please confine your replies to facts and evidence.

The high ISO images were worse than I expected. My FF images still look good at ISO 6400.

May 11, 2021*permalink

https://petapixel.com/2021/04/24/a-high-iso-shootout-pentax-k-3-iii-vs-sony-a7-iii/

There is no "belief system" here - I own and use both APS-C and Full frame cameras with latest sensors and have a very good idea of image quality that comes out of both. I am not arguing against the idea that FF sensors produce better image quality. I am only contesting your reasoning. It's simple and straight physics. If you say that a 24MP or 26MP APS-C sensor is diffraction limited beyond f5.6 then that necessarily implies that a 24MP FF sensor would be diffraction limited beyond f8.4. Similarly If you say that an image at an aperture wider than f5.6 would be OOF on APS-C then it implies that an image at an aperture wider than f8.4 would be OOF on FF sensor. These are not opinions, these are hard facts from physics.

May 11, 2021*permalink

David610

@random78 In my experience physics is rarely 'simple and straight'.

Whilst the general gist of your post is correct, (No argument) I do not retract my position. What did you see in the samples? What did you use to view the samples? Are you a Pentax fan or completely independant? My post is based on what I see both in the sample gallery and from my own photographic experience, both FF and APS-C. The equivalence argument has many detractors on this site. I usually, am not one of them. I will not attempt to explain why I think sensor size may influence OOF rendering as it is beyond the word limit and scope of the comments section. It would be a suitable topic for Roger Cicala.

May 12, 2021permalink

bladerunner6

“Ultimate ASP-C DSLR on the market right now”

Strong words indeed.

May 11, 2021permalink

marc petzold

It's the latest & the best APS-C/DX DSLR onto the Market 2021 - not in AF Terms, this would be the D500 still, but from everything else.

K3 III vs A7 III HighISO 1:1 Sample Comparsion

May 11, 2021permalink

Looks like a great camera. As for ultimate APS-C DSLR, we also have to keep in perspective the fact that Nikon released its last flagship APS-C camera in 2016 more than 5 years ago and Canon released its last flagship APS-C in 2014 more than 7 years ago. So field has been left open for Pentax to try and take a crack at it.

May 11, 2021permalink

And how many tens of times more money for R&D do Canon and Nikon have versus Pentax?

May 11, 2021permalink