A Great Camera Nobody Will Want: Pentax K-3 Mark III

A Great Camera Nobody Will Want: Pentax K-3 Mark III

It's a perplexing state of affairs: the DSLR as a product category is officially on life support now that more mirrorless cameras ship every year. Of what is left of the DSLR sector, Canon and Nikon hold a staggering 98% of it. So, why on Earth is Pentax releasing a flagship model?

Pentax has officially unveiled the K-3 Mark III, its flagship 26MP APS-C DSLR that builds upon the previous iterations. For those with hazy memories, the 24 MP Mark I arrived in 2013 with a great sensor, IBIS, and much-improved autofocus. There was also a novel virtual anti-aliasing filter that worked using the IBIS system. The Mark II arrived in 2015 with an in-built GPS unit that had additional Astrotracer functionality, as well as a pixel shift feature that allowed for higher-resolution raw files. The Mark III now sports a new 26 MP sensor with a top ISO of 1.6 million and includes a panning module, a completely revised autofocus system, better IBIS, and 4K video. Perhaps the biggest changes are with the body, which has undergone significant revision including an all-new pentaprism viewfinder, something Pentax is keen to highlight.

Perhaps what Pentax has best captured with the K-3 range is a fully featured APS-C DSLR that plays to its core customers. This product category has something of heritage, with the likes of the much-beloved Nikon D300 and its eventual replacement, the D500. As I've commented on before, the APS-C market is comprised of two segments: firstly, higher-end users who need great reach and fast shooting speeds and secondly, a more amateur-focused market, where cost is a greater differentiator. Off the bat, the K-3 range has never intended to be in the first of these. Pentax has a heritage built upon well-made, competitive cameras that can use their vast back catalog of lenses. And once you are tied into a system, you tend to stick with it. It's for this reason that we see the development of high-end APS-C models, and the K-3 Mark II had strong competition in the form of the Canon EOS 70D, Fuji X-T1, Nikon D7200, and Sony A6000 to name but a few. This isn't a surprise, as with the contraction of the camera market, the focus has shifted to more profitable segments, such as the high-end amateur.

A Mirrorless Future?

So, where does all this leave Pentax and the K-3 Mark III? Is it better than the Nikon D500 (or D7500) or Canon Rebel T8i? Or the Fuji X-T3, Sony a6600, or Nikon Z50? It's certainly got some fine credentials based around favorable Pentax ergonomics, a good optical viewfinder, and that IBIS system that is used to great effect with the virtual anti-aliasing filter and pixel shift system. Yet the biggest problem it has is that it's a DSLR.

As a reminder, the camera market peaked at 120M units shipped in 2011 and has subsequently shrunk from that highpoint to the current low of 8.7M. It's not necessarily as desperate and bleak as that figure suggests — COVID has severely impacted all businesses, and in 2019, the number of cameras shipped was a more respectable 14.8M units, similar to the number in 2000. In short, we seem to be returning to a high-ticket, niche technology item rather than a mass-market compact camera sector. That manufacturers are targeting high-value goods is no surprise.

However, the other big news for 2020 is that more mirrorless cameras were shipped than DSLRs. In fact, the latest 2020 figures suggest there were just 2.4M units sold with only 40,000 not attributed to Nikon or Canon (which Pentax will account for). DSLR sales are unwinding quicker than might have been anticipated, which has caused Nikon to rapidly restructure its Imaging Division. In fact, any release of a DSLR is now a surprise, with the 2020 arrival of the Canon Rebel T8i met with some bemusement. Was this a case of historic development plans, squeezing every last penny out of a dying market or just plain crazy business? Whatever way you look at it, the days of volume DSLR camera sales are long past, and while lens sales will likely persist for some considerable time, it is hard to see any kind of future for DSLR development.

Pentax and the K-3 Mark III

Following on from the above, the delayed and belated release of the K-3 Mark III is somewhat baffling. I've commented before on the bizarre business strategy of Pentax, with the headline for its brand vision website:

Pentax believes in the future of SLR photography

Yet that's patently not the case. The brand vision is therefore not so much about the fundamental principles of Pentax as a business and how it will build its camera division going forward, but rather as a backstop to justifying a DSLR-only ILC development strategy. I don't doubt the cost of developing a new mirrorless is hefty; in a general sense, Nikon's financial results demonstrate this, as it has had to maintain the absolute cost of research and development while income has dropped. As a result, a greater percentage of income is going to R&D. This was fine when camera manufacturers were cash-rich at the height of the market, but is much more difficult to justify in a declining sector.

The key question for Pentax that then follows is this: are existing sales enough to maintain a DSLR-only approach? Given that Olympus divested itself of its Imaging Division on sales of up to 10 times the number of cameras, it would be difficult to argue for this. However, all camera businesses are not the same, and it is difficult to know what internal cross-subsidy might be happening. For example, Fuji has a small but successful digital camera division, where much of the profit is driven by its Instax business.

However, Pentax's portfolio is diminishing, increasingly stale, and outdated. Witness the 2014 medium format 645Z — sector-leading at the time — still on sale. The K-3 Mark III is a DSLR that appears to be able to rank alongside the best in the sector and bears some striking similarities in the target market to the Olympus' OM-D E-M1X. That fact is at least reassuring for customers; however, Olympus' future took a sharp turn shortly after the release of the E-M1X. What Pentax's future is remains to be seen.

Lead image and body image courtesy of Joergens.mi/Wikipedia (and also here) via Wikipedia, used under Creative Commons.

If you're passionate about taking your photography to the next level but aren't sure where to dive in, check out the Well-Rounded Photographer tutorial where you can learn eight different genres of photography in one place. If you purchase it now, or any of our other tutorials, you can save a 15% by using "ARTICLE" at checkout. 

Mike Smith's picture

Mike Smith is a professional wedding and portrait photographer and writer based in London, UK.

Log in or register to post comments
63 Comments
Previous comments

It's not that no one wants the camera, it's that no one wants to pay that price for it. $2000 for an APS-C DSLR in 2021 is a terrible joke. This is a $1000 camera at best.

Sorry Jason sometimes purchasers have different ideas of what dictates good value .I don't want articulated back screen or great video but demand great optical viewfinder , weather sealed and compact body with great battery life .My K-3 will get upgraded to the Mk111 version hopefully in the next 12 months .Price over 5-6 years of ownership is not so bad on that bases .

US$6,000.00 for an F-type camera prior to 2055 is a terrible joke. …As is paying US$12,000 for a lens.

Its BIGGEST STRENGTH is; it's a DSLR. It's clear to most of the photographers that manufacturers have started producing MILCs due to lower cost and higher margin opportunities. Blind enthusiasts who dance to any new tune have found it gamechanger; let alone the paid fanboys.

Reality: Seasoned photographers found no compelling reasons to ditch DSLRs in favor of MILCs.

Verdict: DSLR lives and rocks.

Congratulations to Pentax for showing the guts to defy the noisy but pointless hype.

Incorrect information.

Reality: Premium black kits almost sold out on pre-order.

Since you are reviewing a DSLR; is it logical to express the concern that it's not an MILC?!

In case you are an anti-DSLR warrior; you shouldn't have taken up the review in the first place. Leave it to someone with more rational mindset that takes into account the realities and not the manufacturers' desperate yearnings for sales.

Yes, as a DSLR user; I have concerns re the price tag of $ 2k for an APS-C DSLR especially when both Nikon D500 and Canon 7DII sell for $ 1.4k.

Hi I agree with your sentiments on the K-3 mk111 and Dslr's overall compared to MILC . In Australia the difference in price for the Nikon D500 is about $500.00 AU less than the K-3 mk111 .But when you are paying $2300 compared to $2800 inc GST for a newer model over 5-7 years I would pay the difference ! .I will buy a K-3 Mk111 but I can't bare to part with my K-3 still after all these years

Well said.

Perhaps Pentax diehards will want it. So far those diehards have kept Pentax in business.

I have Canon and Nikon DSLR systems, but for astrophotography the only solution they can offer me is to buy an equatorial mount, and for something like a 300mm 2.8 or 500mm 4.0 that I have, the mount is massive, heavy and expensive.

Pentax on the other hand can offer the K-1 II, the K-3 III that doesn't need the EQ mount.

If your lens doesn't have IS/VR and want to use OVF you are out of luck with Canon or Nikon, you may need a tripod or higher ISO. With Pentax you have IBIS.

Some with high resolution photos. With Canon or Nikon, will have to do it in Photoshop.

And that's now. When Pentax introduces hybrid OVF/EVF finders, it may be very interesting.

Those features are not for everyone, but imho Pentax will find it's clients, together with Nikon that I think will keep selling DSLR's.

One point not much mentioned is the high quality of Pentax cameras. Overall quality has little to do with bells and whistles or which brand has all of the latest gimmicks. True, the price of the K3 mkiii is high in comparison with some other cameras. However, those other cameras are not Pentax. I count myself very lucky to have finally found the camera brand that I love and respect. Having come to that conclusion after a series of Sony, Canon and Nikons. And as for the 2000 dollar pricetag it does not scare me away. It might come down a bit later. I do not see mirrorless cameras as a great attraction and I predict Pentax has correctly decided to hold its ground. Time will show.

I’m not sure all the people who have had the aperture block failure in their K30 K50 and even K70 models will say they are high quality.

Well obviously I must be bucking the trend because I am going back to a DSLR because I want to slow down my whole process of taking photos and there is just something about using a DSLR that you can't get with a mirrorless camera. I had an Olympus EM1ii which was an amazing camera and then I changed that for a Sony RX10iv which again was a very good piece of technology but it still did not feel right for me. I still had a Pentax K7 DSLR and really enjoyed using it with a prime 50mm lens but the K7 was not one of the best models, so I have traded in my RX10iv to MPB for a Pentax K3 mk1 with only 4000 actuation's and also a 31mm f1.8 Ltd.