The camera shutter are scarcely audible and when you press the shutter button the first time, then you can hardly believe that the recording is already made. I use bracketing 3 pictures with different exposures. They are so fast "in the box", since one hears only in quick succession quiet "flap", "flap", "flap". Fantastic!
Now for the photographic qualities. The focus is as fast as it creates the lens. It may be that the camera less often back and forth-row (hunting), but it's hard to make a direct comparison with the K-5 here because you never has exactly the same situation. But I can confirm that the AF is very accurate. Until now, I had no reason to carry out a fine adjustment with respect to FF or BF. In the K-5 there was the problem that when fast lenses a FF correction of +5 was necessary because the cross-type sensors were designed to a lower light intensity f5.6. The K-3 has a pair of sensors which are suitable for lenses with higher luminous intensity in the center of f2.8. Addendum on 15:11 .: after many very critical tests I think I have found that the AF point is set to the front line where the depth of field begins. That is, ideally, the AF adjusts to the object that is closest to the camera, where then the area of greatest sharpness begins and from there, depending on the aperture more or less goes to the back. Because that has always to do with tolerances, I mean that a fine adjustment of +2 little more security brings when very often works with full aperture (+2 means one moves the AF point a shade closer to the camera ). Supplements 20.11. because demand: there are many on the Internet instructions for fine adjustment, where most of the CDAF is taken as a reference for the PDAF. My approach is somewhat pragmatic and because of the ever-present tolerances (due to temperature, focusing from infinity or from Nahanschlag starting) perhaps purposeful: I'm doing a series of about 100 to 200 shots of various types, determine the number of my sharp-appearing images, disguise the fine adjustment +1, doing 100 to 200 shots again and again count me sharp appearing images. When these have become more at +1, then I have at least chosen the correct sign. The same I can now make a fine adjustment of +2 and so on, until the number of "keeper" (ie, the images that you want to keep) drops again. The fine adjustment with the highest "keeper" rate I will then set. Supplement 6:12 .: AF is really very precise. Bin namely concluded that only the 100mm macro lens a fine adjustment of +1 to +2 requires, while all the others are perfectly sharp even at the default setting of the camera. This is effectively the same with the experience of other testers, with a fine adjustment of 1 is just at the limit of perception.
I look at the pictures like 1: 1 on the 30 "monitor I see no more noise, something else but as with the 1:.. 1 View the pictures are available from the K-5 simply more pixels for margins I mean the back and forth. The sharpness is despite the slightly higher resolution remained the same, maybe even better. It's not like that the anti-aliasing filter would have made the images of K-5 totally blurred. The absence or presence the AA filter you notice any case only for very specific motives. A good and high-contrast lens consists also against a weak AA filter. What impressed me was the test where I photograph from my living room window of an opposite street sign. In the K-5 was the text just to "guess" at the K-3, he is clearly out. The higher resolution makes itself in such situations noticeable. Experiments with AA filter at the K-3 I had failed because I previously had no problems (moiré) without this filter.
At higher ISO values you can safely get out in the development of something more. For now, once I give myself satisfied with the camera preset. Until 1600ISO it is anyway usually without any problems, the result also depends on the subject. In making motives noise falls hardly on, because the noise reduction is apparently enough contours that you can trace and other motifs you can already see a significant noise in the higher ISO ranges. I have the dynamics not measured at ISO100, but it is by no means less than that of the K-5th Upwardly (ie 1 stop) you just 1EV air that you can get with the RAW developer. That was at the K-5 no better. Addendum 27.11 .: It is no longer necessary to carry out to get some more saturated colors a permanent exposure. In the K-5, it was still common practice to have always set an exposure compensation of -1/3. The K-3 provides innately better colors and at first I thought she had this correction already in the basic setting. Have therefore again taken and found that both under the same conditions ("natural") set completely same exposure values shooting with two cameras.
The included software Digital Camera Utility 5 is a significant improvement from the previous version 4. It is faster and now uses all 4 processors for the development (probably more, if any, I only have a quad-core). Those who could work with the version 4 which is also found in the Version 5 cope immediately. And there are both a 32-bit version and a 64-bit version. The 64-bit version should have the advantage that they can use more RAM, which I have not tested.
A few brief remarks on the lenses. This camera requires excellent lenses. If you are not willing to invest a multiple of the price in the camera lens, then the purchase is not worth it. With the famous Kit Zoom 18-55mm what I got included with my first digital camera Pentax K 20D, you will not achieve better results, as for example with a K-50th By comparison, the 50mm macro lenses and 100m from Pentax sufficient reserves in the focus and they keep them to the brim. Those who still have old K or M lenses that were not built for digital sensors, can sometimes experience surprises. The CA, which are the unwanted color fringes that particularly show up at the edges of the image, can be quite clearly at this resolution. My old 300mm lens from 1978 is on this camera completely unusable. It's never occurred to me when I was photographed with film.
Supplement 15:11 .: If you already have a K-5, then you can continue to use the old battery. I had the old battery of K-5 freshly charged, when I gave him for the first tests in the K-3 and after exactly 409 shots conclusion was (camera turned itself off). It should take into account that this battery has behind him already 3 years of intensive use. I never use the flash, but save RAW and JPG that a slightly higher energy requirements needed than if one collects only JPG on a map.
Conclusion: the upgrade of the K-5 to K-3 has definitely paid off. The higher resolution is an asset with good lenses.
