The AF of the "PENTAX K-3 Mark III" has improved significantly, but it is still not as good as the D500.

Write By: administratorPublished In: Created Date: 2021-05-10Hits:405Comment:0

DPReviewTV has a review video and sample images of the PENTAX K-3 Mark III.

  • The body is not lightweight, but it is not heavy and has a good balance. Since the mirror shock can be suppressed with a single-lens reflex camera, it is better to have a little weight.
  • The grip is very easy to hold and the thumb grip on the back is great, but to be honest the grip is a bit big in my hand. But I think it's comfortable for most people. Overall, it feels really good when you hold it in your hand.
  • When it comes to button and dial placement, Pentax does a very good job, with many buttons and dials, but it's designed so that it doesn't feel cramped or mishandled.
  • The monitor is nice, sharp and nice, but unfortunately it has the drawback of being fixed, which is inconvenient for low-angle live view shooting. It's a shame that the fixed monitor is a big mistake, even though the live view has evolved a lot.
  • The viewfinder with a magnification of 1.05 is really wonderful with a beautiful view.
  • The AF is completely new, and the tracking of moving objects has improved significantly compared to the previous Pentax machines, and the hit rate was excellent, but the Nikon D500 consistently had a higher hit rate. However, if you are a Pentax user who mainly shoots moving objects and want to improve AF, the K-3 Mark III is the best camera.
  • Overall, I was satisfied with the AF speed and AF performance, but the buffer was insufficient and it quickly became clogged after continuous shooting. The D500 can shoot continuously longer than the K-3 Mark III.
  • The battery is the same old as before, and the battery life is about 800, but it is not as good as the D500.
  • The previous Pentax menu had a lot of room for improvement, but the K-3 Mark III has a new menu system that makes it intuitive, very easy to use and a favorite. Overall, the menu has been greatly improved over previous Pentax machines.
  • If you're looking for a video camera, there are better options, such as the X-T4 and Panasonic S5, for the same price range. 4K video is fairly clear, but the drawback is that the crop magnification is as large as 1.4 times, and the sensor size during recording is smaller than m4 / 3, which affects dark performance.
  • Camera shake correction is not top class, but it can remove small shakes and does a great job. It's a shame that it doesn't support 4K60p even though it has the same 26MP sensor as the X-T4. Video has improved significantly from the past, but it is not top-class performance.
  • The K-3 Mark III sensor is the same 26MP sensor as the X-T3 and X-T4, which are currently said to be the best in the APS-C market, and the details are very satisfying. The dynamic range has also improved and is wonderful.
  • For high sensitivity, K-3 Mark III is very quiet and clear in comparison with RAW with Fuji X-T3, but this is noise reduction applied to RAW at ISO 125 or higher regardless of whether the user needs it or not. Because there is. There's plenty of detail left, but noise-reduced RAW is no longer true RAW.
  • Which of the D500 and K-3 Mark III is the best APS-C SLR camera will depend on the user's application. If AF is important, the D500 not only has a higher hit rate for moving objects, but is also good for stationary portraits. The AF of the K-3 Mark III had a hard time focusing on the eyes. On the other hand, if image quality is important, I think the K-3 Mark III is better. The K-3 Mark III is a camera worth upgrading, but the downside is its high price.


The K-3 Mark III has been improved in all aspects such as AF, image quality, and operability, and it seems that it has greatly evolved from the K-3 Mark II. AF seems to be a little inferior to the D500, but it seems that the evolution from the past is big, so it seems worth upgrading for those who shoot moving objects.

Regarding image quality, RAW noise reduction seems to have pros and cons, but as a result, very good image quality is obtained, so this may be evaluated more.



Leave A Comment