Pentax K-1 Mark II: What you need to know

So far I've found pixel-shift to be useless outside of indoor product photography. Anything outside at all seems to have an issue ever when I can't detect wind. I've A and B photos shot on a tripod and I've found artifacts show up pretty easy. It's possible i'm not using the software correctly but as we all know the software Pentax has for processing pixelshift is terrible.

You can use continuous studio lighting....

trouble is not all photographers are WR

I had a Pentax K20D. I shot with it in continuous rain for 3 hours. No sissy plastic dog-dropping clear bag to "keep the rain off." It worked perfectly and never had a problem thereafter. They know what they are doing in that department.

If I was a fish... I'd buy one if those WR Pentax's in a heartbeat... BUT... I'd probably end up with lots of wave and bubble photos... and find myself battered in somebody's frying pan.

A lot of people never take their cameras into bad weather. Heck, some never take them out of their back garden. Just not all people.

DiffractionLtd said; 'A lot of people never take their cameras into bad weather'.
You're correct, but that is likely due to the owners manual for most cameras tell you not to let the camera, lens, battery grip and flash get wet.
Pentax is telling owners to keep on shooting in the rain, snow, cold ect.
Yes Canon and Nikon have some models of cameras and lenses that are WR, but Pentax has all 6 cameras, 16 lenses, 3 battery grips and 2 flash units.
This is an important feature that others don't offer at the Pentax price point.
FYI: I shoot Nikon

For me FF is the sweet spot between IQ-Size-Weight-Cost but that is just my opinion.

I think that Pentax should be congratulated for offering and updating an advanced and reasonably priced Full Frame camera. Now Pentax users have more choice which has to be good news for the brand users.

I think the K-5 II(s) is the sweet spot when it comes to Pentax DSLRs. No AF tracking, but that doesn’t work so well anyway. Smaller than a K-3 (II) and cheaper when buying used.

Another insecure butthurt fanboy

Ignoramus in its finest...

Do I shot with a Pentax?... buy a clue idiot... would I mention all it's shortcomings and then turn around and buy one... OR even own one?... LOL... and what 'fanboy' am I?... did I list what I shoot with?... LOL... not even... did people agree with my comment?... SEVERAL did... who's the ignoramus?... now we know... :D

Ricoh is actually changing the hardware, so it's not something that "Fuji could deliver on a firmware upgrade." Disclosure: I own a Fuji X-E3.

The vast majority of companies with their respective models ask you to buy the next model.

Give it up Raist3D. Some Pentax users are not dumb, and I certainly know Pentax gear and lenses; it is the accelerator unit that Ricoh is using as an excuse for hardware upgrade, and all it does is smoothing the signal to reach better hi-ISO using existing (old) sensors. I am not interested in good 800K ISO, nor in accelerator. Better AF and the framerate are far more important, and K-1Mk2 ain't getting new AF module, nor new mirrorbox, no. For less than an extra grand, one gets D850 which is superior in everything, including DR, and K-1 Mk2 deal for existing K-1 users is no deal at all.

Seems like many Pentax users disagree with you. It's only fair to point out that you are paying for an upgrade that many companies don't bother doing. You don't have to upgrade.

Swapping a motherboard by someone costs money. Then people wonder how a company is not being profitable they want something for nothing.

You can sure buy the D850 and.. well? The D850 is not a Pentax. Doesn't have the tilt LCD or the pixel shift. And that's fine, different camera. Different people like different things. Superior here is more than DR, but also the menus, usability, what features you like etc.

With each new year film is becoming more expensive to process, and old cameras more difficult to repair. At some point, shutter curtain will be broken, exposure metering will be all over the place, all beyond repair, and nothing could be done about it. Unfortunately, such simpler DSLR camera must be digital. I am hoping for Nikon and their Df2. If they deliver Df2, and fix issues with Df, that would be it.

The difference between ridiculous, idiotic, ludicrous and absurd is completely imperceptible. When just simple silly would do. I might be within 0.3% of silly here, I'll admit. :9)

This is probably why Nikon uses terms like Hi1 and Hi2 for really high ISO values. But yeah I agree, and I actually wish Nikon would stop doing that because I don't know where I am if I'm at Hi-something (except that I'm really high :)).

My preference would be for every doubling of iso to equate to one unit of count with a preffix of 'R' for Resolution*:
iso 100=R1
iso 200=R2
iso 400=R3
iso 800=R4
iso 1,600=R5
iso 3,200=R6
iso 6,400=R7
iso 12,800=R8
iso 25,600=R9
iso 51,200=R10
iso 102,400=R11
iso 204,800=R12
iso 409,600=R13
iso 819,200=R14
it would avoid the embarrassment of future developments being:
iso 1,682,400=R15
iso 23,64,800=R16
iso 47,29,600=R17
iso 94,59,200=R18
iso 18,918,400=R19
iso 37,826,800=R20
I mean are we going to end up saying "iso thirty seven million eight hundred and twenty six thousand and eight hundred"? That would be nonsense, ridiculous, idiotic, ludicrous and absurd in one large number!

Or "R twenty". Nice!

But all figures are meaningless without an agreed standard so that image quality is related to the claim. This is really what matters to users.

PS *Can't use 'S' for Sensitivity or Stop because it could be confused with S for Seconds.

There is already an old German norm called DIN (marked with °):
ISO 50=18°
ISO 100=21°
ISO 200=24°
ISO 400=27°
ISO 800=30°
ISO 1600=33°
ISO 3200=36°
ISO 6400=39°
ISO 12800=42°
ISO 25600=45°
ISO 51200=48°
ISO 102400=51°
ISO 204800=54°
ISO 409600=57°
ISO 819200=60°
etc.

Prognathous,
Keep in mind that, for Ricoh, releasing its first true MILC (not a Pentax K-01 successor, which would not be compact), with a shorter lens mount-to-sensor distance, requires an accompanying brand new line of lenses, because you do not want to use only the existing lenses with an adapter, don't you ?
And I am afraid that Ricoh is not strong enough to build a new FF MILC system...
IMHO, a smaller, cheaper, less featured DSLR is the easiest way to go for Ricoh. With full support of the M lenses, of course ;-)

Amen to that mandm. And one really wonders, how many of those commenting here can shoot :-D

It's because most of the people here are gear heads and not photographers, and the majority of those that are here have never sold an image in their life, much less operated a photography business. They don't understand Pentax and are for the most part Canikon fans, and have never even picked up and shot with a Pentax.

"people buy a system not only a body." This tells it all. "People" in general have a lot of spare money to buy a camera system or they must cease to exist. I wonder what kind of people is "dansclic". Probably a "problem spotter". What about photographers who have plenty of K mount lenses, who like Pentax colours, who doesn't need technology packed FF cameras but an affordable one. There are plenty of totalitarian minds here. I've never owned a Pentax camera by the way.

Dansclic has obviously not even looked up the pentax lens line up! Unlike Canon and Nikon they actually make high quality APS-C lenses, Like the superb rendering Da limiteds 15, 21, 35macro, 40 and 70, and the weather sealed DA* series lenses 16-50/2.8, 50-135/2.8, 60-250/4, 55/1.4, 200/2.8 300/4 and soon the 11-18/2.8. All of them come with top of the line lens coatings that exceed the competitions best, which means they have outstanding contrast, colours and flare control. The DSLR competition on the other hand has a 17-50/2.8 and a cheap plastic pancake lens and that about it. Mostly its a bunch of consumer level zooms with crappy coatings to choose from before they try and jawbone you into buying an expensive FF system to get decent lenses.
Of course the FF line up is a bit limited, did we mention the FA limiteds, some of the best lenses ever made, referred to as like Ziess but with AF. Then of course we have the a decent trio of F2.8 zoom. More awesome lense will come.

I think 'mostest' was used for a while but it isn't really hip now

'more better' is a good choice and could be used in place of several '-est' words

Dansclic; you are correct and many/most/all Pentax owners know that other cameras may have slightly better specs in some areas and at a higher price; the K-1 like all Pentax cameras offers a lot of features at a lower price.
Pentax owners like to shoot outside in all weather conditions, sooo…
All, Yes All 6 Pentax DSLR bodies are Weather-Proof or Weather-Resistant.
13 Pentax Lenses are Weather-Resistant, Plus 3 Lenses for WR 645Z.
All Pentax DSLR’s have Built-in Image Stabilization (not including 645Z).
These are features that Pentax owners expect in all Pentax DSLRs.

Like practically every k mount lens ever made.

cirtapfotos, thanks for your opinion, it's based on using the K-1 or other Pentax cameras, correct! You need to update your product list as it shows Nikon D750, D850 and before that Sony.
So many Pentax experts who have never owned one! OR
You do own/shoot Pentax, but on this forum act like you don't.

cirtapfotos

Did you miss the part about the new electronics? With faster processing? That's hardware, not firmware. I'm not a Pentax owner, but I think this is a great move by Ricoh/Pentax and a good swift kick to the rear of other manufacturers which keep selling old re-badged gear.

Wow, what a sad and disturbed person. Turns their nose down and insults everyone and everything but the best in their mind!
Why is it every time Pentax does anything, all the Pentax ‘Experts’ on DPR, who don’t even own Pentax, explain why it’s too slow/too late/too expensive/outdated/won’t sell and then they insult all Pentax owners for buying into the dying brand in the first place, why?
Is it because Pentax keeps doing its own thing and for some reason, non-Pentax owners just don’t get it!
Pentax K-1 owners can update their cameras to a Mark II and for some reason, non-K1 owners don’t like it!
Is it because Pentax owners don’t switch brands every couple of years just to get the newest, greatest, biggest, smallest, lightest, shiniest, gripyest, bestest, mostest, cheapest, expensivest camera or lens; they just keep shooting with their old Pentax camera.
Note: Yes I know, some of the words I used are not real words.
FYI: I wrote this before your last post, boy did I nail it!

CIRTAPFOTOS, thanks for showing us all what a clueless fool you are. And by the way, that five year old SONY sensor outperforms any Canon sensor in terms of dynamic range and S/N.

utphoto - Keep Canon out of this. 60% of the camera equipment used in the 2016 Olympics was Canon. Later, check what equipment was used in the current winter Olympics.

MyReality. My comment was in response to Cirtapfotos ignorant remark about the SONY sensor in the K1. And don't lecture me about Canon, I shot Canon for years and still would be if the sensors performed to the current state of the art, or, if I was shooting sports photography. But i shoot landscapes, nature, travel. I picked the right tool for my job. Stop being another typical fanboy.

MyReality...and likewise while the Canon sensors are more than acceptable, if not state of the art, Pentax AF is quite acceptable, if not state of the art. Again, choose the right tool for the job. In my case, the K1 does it better than any Canon, or Nikon, for that matter.

@MyReality, it's not about where something's used but rather if that something is feasible and makes sense to your photography. That's what matters. Whether someone uses an 800mm f/5.6 lens at the Olympics doesn't make 'any-never-mind' to most photographers on the planet as far as their photography is concerned. Equipment is going to perform the same in a particular climate or condition whether you're using that equipment at the "olympics" or not.

Whether someone uses a D4 mated to a 500mm f4, at the Olympics or shooting University sports doesn't matter. Either you can make good use of a lens/equipment or not. Either you can afford the equipment or not. Sure, people are interested in what's being used at the Olympics for gee-whiz, but that's not because it's "relevant" to their photography.

Whether pro or amateur, you simply choose the tool that fits you best, irrespective of what others are using.

I wouldn't expect any improvement with moving subject.

If the handheld pixel shift does work, this will be nice for me. Handheld pixel shift should be useful in some dimly lit places where tripods are often disallowed, such as churches. Low light performance should be increased and so this will be a good thing.

4K? Whats that?

Unless I'm missing something, isn't 4K pretty much useless unless you have a 4K tv or monitor? So far I see no real need for anything above 1080i.

4K TV's are pretty cheap. 50" is like $30, 55" $400 and 60" $500.

BryanTP,
If you have some time to spend in post-processing, high capacity storage, and a powerfull equipement, downsizing a 4K video to full HD gives a sharper image than recording in full HD...

I'm convinced it sold about as well as Ricoh could have expected, and that it counts for them as a definite success.

The mid-life refresh is a smart move to keep up the appeal of the camera and convert the interest of the few remaining "late adopters" into sales.

It will not sell especially well vs the K-1, but it does not have to as there is little additional R&D Ricoh spent to develop it.

Thanks for the enlightenment, Death69. I hadn't realized that was a metaphor for robustness and rugged build. If it weren't for you I'd still be thinking it was a crazy, senseless analogy.
I'm considering a move to the UK. You're all so bright over there.

We're not bright. Dark, sarcastic, morose, moronic... Well it seems that way a lot of the time. And we easily forget that not the whole world uses the same smilies and metaphors as us. 🤗

I had a 2006 Honda and bought a 2015… same engine, 9 years after and was and is still is relevant. Its just a mather of perspective...

In which way is that "old" sensor inferior to current sensors?

What's even slightly funny about it, let alone beyond hilarious?

This 2012 sensor is as good as a Canon sensor from 2024.

My guess is, that this will exactly be, what you'll see on the K1 II: better S/N with even better shadow recoverability. I do not own a K1, but from what I've read around the web, the K1 should be even better than the D810 in the respect of dynamic range i.e. shadow recoverability? But I guess, if the K1 is slightly behind a D810, as you report, the Mk II should be noticeably in front.

Markus

Markus may be overselling the coprocessor. It's probably inserted after the analog amplification and ADCs and before the jpeg engine. It looks at the RAW data and runs sophisticated NR algorithms on them, and in PS mode it takes RAW data from several frame buffers and compares, aligns, and combines them.