1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Been out with the K-3 at last

Discussion in 'Pentax Chat' started by Monobod, Oct 13, 2014.

  1. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

  2. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    Very nice, looks every bit as good as reported.

    Though that statue gives me the creeps!

  3. Atavar

    Atavar Well-Known Member

    Blimey, looking very good indeed :)
  4. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    Yes, but I am learning that a warning I had from a friend is proving to be true. He said the added resolution will show up imperfections in my lenses and in my technique for taking images.

    Landscapes hand held at slow shutter speeds, show the softness in lens edge detail far more than on the K-5. But using a tripod and a small aperture for depth of field with related slow shutters is better. I am learning that I need to sharpen up my approach to photography and that 'point and shoot' stuff really is not getting the best from the K-3. I have got to get really serious at last. :)

    This camera really needs top glass, so I am looking at having to buy perhaps the 20-40 limited and the 15mm limited prime eventually. Oh dear.........more expense.

    It begs the question, do I keep the K-5 for the general stuff, or trade it for a better lens?

    Be careful if you are tempted to upgrade without changing lenses too.
  5. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    It depends on how you look at your pictures.

    If you look at them at 100% on screen, then any deficiencies in your lenses will be more visible.

    If you make prints at the same size as before, without tighter cropping, and look at them from the same viewing distance, then things should look slightly better - it's down to the way the MTFs of the lens and sensor combine in the overall optical system. Prof Newman did an article about this a few years ago.

    Nice pictures, by the way. I'm glad you got a chance to appreciate the low light focus!
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2014
  6. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    I must admit that this was literally a grab shot. I stopped the car grabbed the camera out of the boot, checked the ISO and took the picture. Hand held of course as the rain was just about to descend. Reduced to 1600px it looks not too bad, but you can see some softness at the edges. Printed from the full image at A3 and it looks really soft. Centre is fine. This is 10-20 EX siggy at full stretch.

    https://flic.kr/p/pnCYsfWEATHER FRONT OVER HINGHAM https://flic.kr/p/pnCYsf by Monobod https://www.flickr.com/people/30174638@N00/, on Flickr[/IMG]
  7. Atavar

    Atavar Well-Known Member

    What a grab :)
  8. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    Now that's what I call a sky shot.:cool:

    Looking at the EXIF data you were at f4 and 1/30th so I'm not at all surprised that it's a bit soft at the edges... Even on my modestly pixelled 40D I'd expect soft edges and corners.
  9. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    I can't remember which Sigma 10-20 you have, but they're both a bit soft at the edges wide open, improving on stopping down a couple of stops. I think the f/4-5.6 version is slightly better, but it depends on whose reviews you read.

    Mind you, I can see how that could've been tricky - it must've been really dark under that cloud, needing 1/30 @ f/4 and ISO 400. Pushing the ISO to 1600 to get f/8 would mean you'd need to use noise reduction, which would probably soften it a bit all over, and I'm not sure how well the Anti Shake would handle 1/8s.
  10. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    WowdeeWow, David, that is an absolutely brilliant shot and, IMVHO, who gives a rats if the edges a tad soft as that won't detract one iota from the subject matter, again IMVHO. :) But, as you're aware, I never been one for expecting perfection in my pics :eek: which may be a downfall in me picture taking (cap)ability :(

    Also, the statue show is brilliant and as is the landscape shot :) …. from your neck of the woods, I'm gathering, or, maybe not, I'll have to check Google Maps to see where Derbyshire is ;)

    Cheers and congrats on three magic pics :)

  11. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    Actually, I think Jack has the best point - it's an awesome picture, and in the limited time you had, you got the essence, so don't worry too much about whether it achieved technical perfection. It's probably better than you'd have got if you only had the K5 with you anyway.
  12. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    Thanks both of you for boosting my flagging confidence! :) I wondered at the time if some of the pro photographers would have cared either about the edges! Ha. Sometimes we can get too picky.

    Derbyshire shot was taken near to Buxton, we spent a week away in the caravan at Chatsworth House. A great place to visit by the way.
  13. Done_rundleCams

    Done_rundleCams AP Forum Ambassador to Canada

    Cheers and I take 'em when I get 'em ;)

  14. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    We had a day out at Holkham Hall, on the north Norfolk Coast. A splendid expansive estate with a walled garden and a deer park. Here is an image taken with the Pentax 28-105 f/4-5.6 power zoom (from the Z1-p film camera). This lens outshines the cheaper Sigma 17-70 and shown what the K-3 can really do. Bear in mind that this is a reduced image.

    https://flic.kr/p/oMEdAUHOLKHAM HALL https://flic.kr/p/oMEdAU by Monobod https://www.flickr.com/people/30174638@N00/, on Flickr[/IMG]
  15. steveandthedogs

    steveandthedogs Well-Known Member

    Think you're worrying about the edges too much. That's how the human eye sees things.

    The storm shot is a cracker, as are the others.

  16. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    I am beginning to sus out the hidden problem of higher resolution. None of my earlier images look any good any more! What the medium format Pentax must do to ones sanity is unthinkable. :)

    Be warned.......
  17. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    I've made a conscious decision not to worry about it.

    Which is why the 16-50 DA* is on the K20D and the Sigma 17-70 is on the K3.

    Or at least, why they're still that way around... :)

    I just appreciate the K3's low light AF, 100% viewfinder, 10FPS, dual card slots, etc...
  18. Ffolrord

    Ffolrord Well-Known Member

    I'm sorry but I won't have a word said against the K5 without piping up. As good as the K3 is it has its strengths and weaknesses just like any camera. In some areas the K3 is better than the K5 but in others the K5 outperforms the K3. The K5 is a remarkable camera. It is capable of results that will stand the time for years to come yet, I have no doubt about that. There are areas where the K5 outshines the Nikon D800, it really is that good. What is now a budget option of a K5 with a 30+ year old lens can produce results that can still compete with anything, even a 645Z, I have no doubt about that. It is all about learning the equipment. The K5 is much better than I am and every day it teaches me something more. Stands down from soapbox.
  19. Monobod

    Monobod Phantom of the forum

    What you say here is genuinely a valid comment. I have been using the K-5 for a number of years and have found it to be a solid, well designed and well made camera. Printing to A3 I have absolutely no serious issues but I am amazed by the increase in detail that 24Mp gives one. Landscapes just have an edge in distant tree detail. Portraits have extra detail the the subjects hair. The ability to crop in tighter to a bird in flight is better and as said below, the faster shutter rate, the much improved focus tracking and the other upgraded attributes are all noticeable in use. Things do move on. In a few years perhaps, the K-3 will seem outdated as high ISO noise control improves perhaps from a FF body. It is called 'Progress' :D

    It pains me too sometimes, as it costs more money all of the time. Better lenses are needed and that does not come cheap. A good friend of mine commented that chasing resolution leads to madness. He could be right. I get amazing images from the 12Mp 50mm prime module on the Ricoh GXR, but it is not as flexible as the K-3.
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2014
  20. AlexMonro

    AlexMonro Old Grand Part Deux

    I'm sure the K5, as well as the K3, are both better than the K20D. I sort of had my eye on the K5 for a while, until I more or less by accident ended up with a K3 at a very good price. I think the K5 is probably slightly better for noise and dynamic range, but there's not a lot in it.

Share This Page