Frank in Bridgewater: People who make decisions on the quality, or otherwise, of lenses, cameras, based on sample internet galleries and talk about 12 or 14 or 16 bit color and stuff seem to forget that what you are seeing in a browser are 8 bit jpegs displayed at (probably) 72 dpi (or less).
Your X-Ray could well be my Ultra-Violet. (No we're not married)
matthew saville: It's reasons like this that I'm enjoying third-party brands and, basically, anything OTHER than Nikon or Canon.
Between Sigma and Rokinon, (and the new Tamron-inspired Pentax trio of 2.8 zooms) ...I think Pentax is now a DSLR system that really ought to be giving both Canon and Nikon semi-pro flagships a real spanking. Too bad consumerism is an addiction, and Canikon are the drug of choice these days.
From my readings, the new Pentax 70-200 is not a Tamron 'inspired' zoom but is a 100% Pentax * lens.
7seven7: Wow !!! :oThe image quality in PS Mode is as good as the best Medium Format Camera... for the price of the best APSc DSLR !So the Lens makers will come back designing the best lenses for the Pentax K mount !Great !
Mate, this camera is going to redefine digital photography for at least 5 years. They are already walking out the door.
Prognathous: With this kind of performance, Pentax should add an option to expose-to-the-left, basically aligning exposure to the left of the histogram. The pictures may look dark before processing, but at the same time will provide the fastest possible shutter speed (for a given aperture) - without loss of detail in dark areas and without blown highlights (possibly not even light sources).
What a great idea dosdan.
aris14: Three top of their line cams each one aiming in 3 different niche of users. Given what they offer more compared to existing rivals I say that Pentax has a clean advantage overall mainly due its price and specs .
I own two D800E and a D810 and I can't wait to get my hands on a K-1. Calling Astrotracer a 'gizmo' is like calling the Hubble Space Telescope a gimmick. Huh!
bossa: The non-pixel shifted K-1 images appear to have less camera sharpening and some kind of motion artifact in play. I wonder if the virtual AA filter and/or the shake reduction was ON when it should've been OFF when the tripod was in use.
Anyway, I can't see how that huge increase in resolution could result from a soft lens - soft is soft. I have an FA77 and it's one of the sharpest lenses I own. There's another explanation for this. Pilot error?
Tempted to sell one of my D800E for this camera as I still have some tasty Pentax lenses and would love to try the Astrotracer and Pixelshift.
Thanks for that. The K-1 even beats out the 645Z. Scary tech!
The non-pixel shifted K-1 images appear to have less camera sharpening and some kind of motion artifact in play. I wonder if the virtual AA filter and/or the shake reduction was ON when it should've been OFF when the tripod was in use.
Wouldn't Pentax's flagship be the 645Z? Well of course it is.
JackM: The text in the center is the only place the K1 with pixel shift wins. Everywhere else, the D810 and 645Z are sharper.
I didn't see it like that.
I look forward to trying one though, and testing for amp glow, which is my main gripe for my D800s and D810. My K5 and lowly K-01 show absolutely none and I expect the K-1 to do likewise. I'm looking to do some astrophotography.
zakaria: Why not using the sigma 70 mm macro and make the standard lens for all testing work since it is available for all.
The three FA Limiteds were designed for real world subjects, not test charts. It's my understanding that they deliberately exploit field curvature in order to control the way a 3 dimensional subject renders and focuses - ie. portraits.
Excerpt from http://www.northcoastphotographer.net/files/7a6bf1d209118e0d9790f4d66274c8b1-124.html
"By not giving a priority to resolution, MTF measurements, and other numerical evaluations, the limited lenses achieve a degree of aberration correction unattainable by earlier lens designing practices. This enables us to manufacture a lens capable of producing images that leave a vivid impression on the mind. This is because, under current lens design practices, numerical evaluations of the subject plane take precedence over how well that lens depicts (or renders) solid objects. While numerical evaluations are important, they should not be given first priority when designing a lens. "
The pixel shift image allows reading the text right down to the smallest words on the last line. None of the other images does that without distracting artifacts.
KL Matt: The amount of positive, almost glowing K-1 coverage on DPR now is just astounding! The first blurbs sounded like the angle they were taking was: 1. Mock Pentax for taking 15 years to bring the K1 to market, 2. pan this landscape camera for lacking blazing fast AF tracking, and 3. proceed to pair the highest resolution DSLR Pentax has ever made with the very worst legacy manual focus prime Pentax has ever made and complain about the results. Interesting to see this about-face! No idea what to expect in the review. But it's almost like DPR actually gets the significance of the camera and what its intended purpose is now (i.e.: this is not a sports shooter, nor is it a camera made for manual focussing with the optical finder).
Unlike my D810, my K-5 makes a confirmation 'beep' in manual focus mode. With Nikon you have to keep averting your eye from the scene to the little visual range finder LEDs at the bottom of the display during manual focussing.
The focus point in the Pentax' VF also illuminates red when manual focus is attained, and, so long as this is accurate, I believe this method (combined beep and illumination) to be superior to split prisms.
Xentinus: Touch and try lol
If the K-1 were a tease she'd say "Try and touch... if you dare" ;-)
The above information about the DA*55 needing to be stopped down is incorrect. According to the following article it's a pretty even match with Nikon's recent $1700 58/1.4
iAPX: As usually for Pentax: where are the lenses?!?
Yes, fast full frame lenses, that don't need to be stopped-down, or cropped to work.
Reminds me of my Pentax K10D that was perfect to use old lenses, but didn't have fast lenses, and thus lost it's value to be sold at a bargain, to be replaced by a Nikon D300 (that I still use today!) with fast lenses.
Don't overlook the fact that the DA*55/1.4 is also really a FF lens.
Weegee: I've always had a thing for Pentax. Even though I mostly used Nikon, when I tried the fabulous Pentax LX, I had to have one. I still own it!It was 3/4 the size of a Nikon F2 and silky smooth to use.
Now I'm more or less with Olympus ( EM-1 ) so switching would pose a problem.
I too owned an LX with a motor drive (MX too) and a sports finder. The best camera I ever owned!
I've been thinking of selling one of my D800E bodies lately (got two and a D810), and the K-1 will seriously tempt me to do that as I have wanted to do astrophotography for some time.
Pentax ergonomics leave Nikon for dead. Almost everything can be done with the right hand. Every time I have to use my left hand to make a settings change with a 150-600 sports or 120-300 sports attached to my D800 things become more than a little precarious where a tripod is not involved.
Pentax was my first camera and do I have a soft spot for them.
PS: I still own a K-5, K-01, FA31, FA77, DA*55 & DA*200 - all Full Frame lenses.
bossa: I hate to be pedantic (no I don't) but the twenty first century didn't start until 2001. The year 2000 is the final year of the twentieth century.
It goes like this: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
Not like this: 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
That's great. Thanks. :)
Some Pentax lenses are branded as DA when they are still Full Frame designs:
The DA* 200/2.8 is a FF lens. It is a redesigned FA 200/2.8. The DA*300/4 and DA*55/1.4 are both also FF lenses.
I'm sure there are a few more as well, but I thought I'd mention this as the DA*55 was listed as a crop lens in the article.
I hate to be pedantic (no I don't) but the twenty first century didn't start until 2001. The year 2000 is the final year of the twentieth century.
PKDanny: Great News!!
Where's mid-range body??? I hope Pentax will announce a new Pentax FF mid-range soon.
@PKDanny At this price would that be the camera they pay you for?