Pentax K-01 studio test shots published

bcalkins:

Um, that semi-transparent mirror impedes light and makes low light work more difficult; it's only a neat trick up to about ISO 1600.
No matter what Sony claims.

As for phase detection, perhaps Fuji doesn't want to build that kind of sensor and then sell it to Ricoh-Pentax for use in the competition. And this K-01 is definitely competition for the X Pro1.

But doesn't phase detection require another sensor which is not the image sensor itself?

Weight. Size. Price. I guess reliability should be better too with fewer parts.
It was not a bad choice to reuse the same lens system as in their DSLRs compared to Sony/Samsung/Fuji trying to build new systems from scratch, with no advantages in terms of size and weight (as they have to cover the same-size sensors). The advantage for customers is apparent: their first mirrorless body, and the system is bigger than any other mirrorless system already. Plus if you are their DSLR customer, you don't have to re-buy all the glass again or try to work through adapters which are never really satisfying. Milking the customers for all-new glass would be probably more profitable though, in the off-chance they all would not leave for m43/Nikon 1/whatever.

they have seen the future and it is mirrorles. toe in the water and educating their rather small audience of loyal buyers into the shape of non whippy-uppy things to come imho

simple, no mirror shake let you capture better lowlight shots, combined with high iso capability and high iq 35mm lenses made this baby a powerfull "image toy". the advantage of range finder is no the size, it se smooth shutter they have, excellent for night shooting. on other hands inside space let design more compact lens that extence optics to the inside.

But dpreview did report the RUMOR CAMERA recently , please check again

"shame on dpreview" for honouring embargos and thereby maintaining strong and mutually trusting relationships with manufacturers.

Riiight...

"strong and mutually trusting relationships with manufacturers"? lol, is that supposed to clarify your independence and trustworthiness?

@ageha: all serious publishers follow embargos, they are contractually obligated to do so in order to maintain a good relationship with the brands whose products they cover.

Only blogs who want brief moments of spotlight break embargos. If you trust someone who breaks contracts more than you do someone that follows them, then you should have your head examined.

The NEX-CF3 is clearly out there; and this has been reported by various other non camera specific sites. Its a shame then that dpreview don't have the gravitas/relationship with Sony to run a feature. As for dp's policy of not reporting on non released camera's:

a) since when (that hasn't been the case in the past)
b) maybe you should change this stance if you want to be taken seriously in the photographic world. It hardly gives the site credibility when it reports on things weeks after non camera related sites have told all

Can anyone recommend other camera sites that do report on future releases ... don't know about anyone else but I like the rumour stuff and its most helpful (especially to Panasonic buyers who find a new model released 1 week after buying the latest model!)

DPR doesn't run features on new cameras before the official announcement, and they never have done so in the past either. The new NEX hasn't been announced yet, and therefore they haven't written about it. That's why they ARE taken seriously in the photographic world, as opposed to all the rumour sites and non-camera specific sites.

The NEX HAS been announced; so I suggest you quit your trolling insults (I've been commenting on here long before you came to the site!) and stfu! I'm in the 'photographic' world and I no longer consider dpreview to be taken seriously .... This being the perfect example where dp don't ave the quodos with Sony ... and instead fill their pages with iPhone app reviews instead of reporting on what's new in the world of photography (released or not!) I know all about the NEX now, courtesy of other (non photographic!) sites ... Which was my point. If idiots like Francis don't like that then I won't loose any sleep!!!!

Solved (partially): DPR studio widget interacts badly with FF's cache system. After I reloaded page with shift-F5 (bypassing cache) it work fine.

Pentax obviously does heavy NR in RAW, at least in the chroma channel. There is no point to compare it to others, who do not (Sony does too BTW).

waxwaine, every camera manufacturer cheats on ISO value, not just Olympus. «The ISO sensitivity test allows a certain latitude, so for example a Nikon D4 set for ISO 204,800 is actually shooting at 139,250, according to DxO's tests, and a Pentax K-01 set for ISO 3,200 actually is shooting at ISO 2,724. Pentax's ISO setting might give the camera an edge in a comparison to a rival's ISO 3,200 performance, since the Pentax is actually shooting at a lower ISO with lower noise. But at the same time, other camera makers could be playing the same game...» That's a quote from this article: http://news.cnet.com/8301-11386_3-57415777-76/how-dxo-labs-tests-hot-cameras-like-canons-latest-slr/

At the end of the day will we see a difference at 11x14 or 16x20?

Read this post from Andy Westlake:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=41407104

zxaar, ryansholl has every right to decide it's ugly, just as you have every right to decide it's not. What you don't have is the right to tell him he doesn't have the right. Nobody asked for your certificate, either, but this forum gives you the right to voice your opinion, just like ryansholl, me and everyone else.

Whilst it certainly looks rather odd with that 40mm lens on, it looks much better with a more traditional lens attached

http://i47. photobucket.com/albums/f197/leopold44/__IGP6909lower.jpg

@Familyogre: The yellow ones with 40mm look toyish, but the black and silver with SMC or limited lenses look great. If it had a swivel screen and weather proofing I'd buy one. They should do that with the next model.

@jkokich, who is he??? He can only decide for himself. No-one appointed him to decide for everyone.

"looks a lot like my cassette deck @ 6 years old." - ryansholl

It's a simple rule - if you think it looks like a toy, you're too old for the target demographic.

Inversely, if you think the new Olympus and Fujis look like they're from a deceased estate sale, you're too young for them. ;)

This camera is ugly.

Then I saw it in person, and I thought to myself, "Ugly....and big!?"

This isn't new.... Both Sony and Nikon have been doing it for a while to their raw files. Nikon uses NIK software in their cameras since 2006, and Sony has their own proprietary method. Sony bent to public pressure and finally offered an option to allow users to shut that function off.

Here's a great article on the subjects from the measurebators themselves: http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Insights/Half-cooked-RAW

All modern CMOS sensors have NR circuitry onboard and although this is a different approach, do note that we all have some level of NR in our RAW's and we still call them RAW's.

It's their camera, they can do what they want. Would you prefer to be offered the Red Green and Blue sensor data separately and interpolate them yourself? Perhaps just the stream of numbers and let you decide how they should add up?

Once you have viewable image on your screen from the sensor data, it is no longer RAW. Give it a rest.

Simple question: If K01 RAWs are so much better, why the jpegs look worse than 5N?

Are you telling us that Pentax starts with 1 stop better RAW, but ends up with worse jpegs than 5N?

Yes, K01 RAWs have less noise, but that's nothing more than applying RAW NR, as noted by dxomark,

And again, so what? How many people really care about that? Are photographers mathematicians who will incessantly look on graphs, charts and tests before looking at the final output to judge if the photo is OK? :)

So they're deceiving the customers, that's what. People relatively new to camera hardware, who assume that RAW means raw and untouched data, will look at these comparisons and conclude that the RAWs of K-01 look almost as good as those from the D700 and make uninformed purchase decisions. Other companies might be doing this, too, but nowhere near as much as done in the K-01

If high ISO NR was the only factor here, (you have noted that it begins at ISO3200), why does the K-01 have less chroma noise in the shadows even at ISO1600?

And it appears to have has less chroma noise at ISO1600 even looking at it next to the D4 and 5D III.

In any case, with any visible loss of detail being immaterial, I'm sure it won't be long before other manufacturers follow suit.

@BBViet

The point you say that other companies might be doing this too conflicts your saying that "So they're deceiving the customers, that's what". Was Pentax the first to do this? No? Then how come when other brands do it (perhaps before Pentax did), why isn't anyone complaining? What, internet wasn't there yet?

Any alteration, may it be .00000000001 or 1000000 or whatever to what the "real" raw file might have looked like, is already "deception" by the manufacturer. That means, everyone might be doing it; who knows what a "real" raw file looks like, after the sensor reads a scene? It's somewhat bad trying to defend something by saying "they're doing it less". If this is the case, then we are all making "uninformed decisions" like you said.We are all being "deceived", like you said.

K01 uses even stronger RAW NR than K-5. See SNR graph of K01 vs K-5 on dxomark. The RAW NR starts at ISO 3200

Basically what I am saying is it's not " 1EV advantage" .. It's simply RAW noise reduction applied by default.

The jpegs (where both sides can apply NR) look worse than 5N

ET2 sure jpegs look bad. Do you think none of us know how to use RAW data?? There are two things either you or user of this camera understands photography or not. If he understands then using RAW is not a problem. If he does not understand then it is very unlikely that he would be comparing jpegs with OMD5 and say geez these looks bad compared to OMD, I shall buy OMD instead. So moral of the story if you know what you are doing k-01 is not a wrong choice.