Pentax K-3

[AprilForever]

This beast....

If pentax had in lens IS, and a longer brighter lens than 560 5.6, I would be totally tempted to spring for this beast...

Except, I have an odd fixation with the 7D. I eagerly await to pony cash over for the 7D MK II. But, Canon should take serious warning about this. Pentax has some very neat looking primes. Anyone shoot pentax too? (other than old m42 stuff... which is totally gold!!! I love that takumar thing...)

 

[garyknrd]

I have the Sigma 500 f4.5 and the Sigma 300mm F2.8 prime. Been waiting for this moment. I hope AF is good. I am in dreamland now...

 

[Marsu42]

If pentax had in lens IS

Also, as I just read this in-lens system suppresses moire so no aa filter is necessary?

 

[e17paul]

If pentax had in lens IS

Also, as I just read this in-lens system suppresses moire so no aa filter is necessary?

Pentax IS is at the sensor, not in the lens as Canon and Nikon. It is the sensor vibration mechanism that sets up a carefully controlled amount of blur to avoid moire, whereas other cameras use the micro-lens AA filter on the sensor to create a small amount of blur to the same effect.

IS at the lens is usually reckoned to be more effective, but the pentax IS (like Olympus) can work on all lenses - saving the need to buy IS equipped lenses.

If I wasnt invested in Canon gear, I'd be tempted to try my father's lovely manual lenses on a Pentax, to see how effective the IS at the sensor might be. On the other hand, if Pentax launch a full frame DSLR, I might sell up and switch.

 

[AprilForever]

If pentax had in lens IS

Also, as I just read this in-lens system suppresses moire so no aa filter is necessary?

Pentax IS is at the sensor, not in the lens as Canon and Nikon. It is the sensor vibration mechanism that sets up a carefully controlled amount of blur to avoid moire, whereas other cameras use the micro-lens AA filter on the sensor to create a small amount of blur to the same effect.

IS at the lens is usually reckoned to be more effective, but the pentax IS (like Olympus) can work on all lenses - saving the need to buy IS equipped lenses.

If I wasnt invested in Canon gear, I'd be tempted to try my father's lovely manual lenses on a Pentax, to see how effective the IS at the sensor might be. On the other hand, if Pentax launch a full frame DSLR, I might sell up and switch.

Pentax just may have its break here...

 

[pdirestajr]

Pentax is carving out a nice niche as the rugged-all-weather-outdoor-sporty photography brand.

I'm not sure they are focused (or should be) on the magical "full frame" that so many people think is necessary. Just look at their lens lineup! I think they have released only one "new" ff lens in the modern era (the 100mm WR macro).

Their new Limited DA lenses are really nice metal and compact. But are for APS-C... and have no AF motor. Like old Nikon lenses I believe they rely on a screw motor from the camera body. They are accurate, but loud and the focus ring spins powerfully while you are focusing. I guess that is part of the reason they can stay small. And no IS, which is in body. They are not cheap.

They also have some other top end all-weather DA* lenses that are also APS-C, and expensive.

The cool thing is that they take all the legacy K, M, A, etc. lenses beautifully!

I actually bought a Pentax K-01 as a fool around camera and it is AWESOME. The focus peaking on the old manual lenses makes it lots of fun to shoot those great old lenses!

 

[9VIII]

I looked at a review for the Pentax 560f5.6 a few days ago. It's a nice lens for sure, though it doesn't perform at its peak wide open and at $7,000 it's just a few grand off the price of a 500f4ISII. Saving 25% instead of getting the best lens out there in that category doesn't sound too appealing.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

I wished Pentax would come out with a full frame camera.

But, that K3 looks like a sweet camera. Looking forward to reading some test reviews. For the price, you can't beat it.

The K5 and now the K3 are making me re-look at my decision to go full frame.