ET2

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Aug 25, 2010

Comments

Total: 1134, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: I went back to LR to look at the the current set of images in DPR's K-1 review, and found out where the center of each frame were (left and right below refers to image's left and right, opposite of cyclist's left and right, in focus means the face is in sharp focus):

IMGP2813: left side of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2814: top left edge of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2815: left side of helmet

IMGP2816: face

IMGP2817: face

IMGP2818: face

IMGP2819: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2820: center of face

IMGP2821: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2822: face (in focus)

IMGP2823: left ear

IMGP2824: left side of face

IMGP2825: left side of face

IMGP2826: left ear

Compared to the AF overlay image, the center autofocus point seems about the same size as the cyclist's face in the first image.

I suspect the starting 3 frames having the focus point on side of helmet may cause some tracking issue.

No, it's still just AF system that tracks moving objects. K1 and K3 performed subpar Of course 80D, 7D II, D500, all went through the same bike test, and they all performed better than K3 and K1, despite numerous tries and with many lenses.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 14:53 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: I went back to LR to look at the the current set of images in DPR's K-1 review, and found out where the center of each frame were (left and right below refers to image's left and right, opposite of cyclist's left and right, in focus means the face is in sharp focus):

IMGP2813: left side of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2814: top left edge of helmet (in focus)

IMGP2815: left side of helmet

IMGP2816: face

IMGP2817: face

IMGP2818: face

IMGP2819: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2820: center of face

IMGP2821: center of face (in focus)

IMGP2822: face (in focus)

IMGP2823: left ear

IMGP2824: left side of face

IMGP2825: left side of face

IMGP2826: left ear

Compared to the AF overlay image, the center autofocus point seems about the same size as the cyclist's face in the first image.

I suspect the starting 3 frames having the focus point on side of helmet may cause some tracking issue.

A7RII was tested under same conditions

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-7r-ii/11

and it's clear K1 AFC is sub-par, by a huge margin.

Link | Posted on Jul 10, 2016 at 07:52 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: AF test is not valid, because they can't create the same light condition and don't use the same lenses. They compare apple with oranges.
Imaging resource uses the same SIGMA lens with different mount for testing cameras.

DPREVIEW -
You could compare the cameras of the same brands - for example, K-1 and K-3II.
You could compare K-1 in APS-C mode with APS-C cameras of P, N, C and S of the same price level.
You could compare K-1 with FF cameras of the same price range.
It would be INTERESTING.

And you should keep the same light condition, condition of test and the same DOF

Everybody know that D5 and 1Dx have better AF than K-1 without tests. It's different league and to make conclusion based on comparison with the best reportage cameras in the world is simply SILLY.

In the tracking (riding in curves) test, the K-1 lost focus because the target left the focus area. That may be considered unfair.

"Show me, please, the list of lenses for AF-C tests with K-3, K-3II and K-1 "

That info is in the review and exif files, and in the case of K3 I remember Richard Butler posting on the forum other lenses he tried, after similar whining back then.

"ogl
please, go here and discuss http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4025698"

Yes, I have, and that guy post is already answered. He is wrong. Remember these tests were done many times, and with three cameras over last two years (K3, K3II, and K1) and Pentax AFC system consistently failed, so it's not a fluke. It's consistently subpar performance, and not compared to D5 (that's a strawman) but compared to average DSLR and mirrorless came.

see http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4025698?page=4#forum-post-58025880

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 14:50 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

odpisan: Fuji X-Pro2 .... 2480
Sony A7R II .... 2159
Sony A6300 ... 2128

Pentax K1 .... 2206 & rising
:o)

I bet that
next week Pentax K1 will have over 2500 comments & it will be the most exciting camera on DPr.

This page has all the comments on K1 going back to announcement day 5 months back

A7RII comments are split. For example, outside of those 2159 comments on the review, here are 1250 comments on announcement

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/8917769536/sony-alpha-a7r-ii-has-42-4mp-on-full-frame-bsi-cmos-sensor

(there were many other articles on A7RII with many more comments but let's ignore that now)

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 08:44 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

ogl: AF test is not valid, because they can't create the same light condition and don't use the same lenses. They compare apple with oranges.
Imaging resource uses the same SIGMA lens with different mount for testing cameras.

DPREVIEW -
You could compare the cameras of the same brands - for example, K-1 and K-3II.
You could compare K-1 in APS-C mode with APS-C cameras of P, N, C and S of the same price level.
You could compare K-1 with FF cameras of the same price range.
It would be INTERESTING.

And you should keep the same light condition, condition of test and the same DOF

Everybody know that D5 and 1Dx have better AF than K-1 without tests. It's different league and to make conclusion based on comparison with the best reportage cameras in the world is simply SILLY.

In the tracking (riding in curves) test, the K-1 lost focus because the target left the focus area. That may be considered unfair.

"Imaging resource uses the same SIGMA lens with different mount for testing cameras."

IR uses Sigma lens for studio shot. They don't do AFC tests.

"Everybody know that D5 and 1Dx have better AF than K-1 without tests"

That's absolute nonsensical strawman. No one expected K1 to perform at D5 level. What the review says is that K1 AFC does not perform at the level of average DSLR (like D750) or mirrorless camera, like A7RII.

"In the tracking (riding in curves) test, the K-1 lost focus because the target left the focus area"

No, this has been discussed many times on the forum. That's not true. And these tests were performed many times with many different lenses and three different Pentax cameras (K3, k3II, and now K1). All these cameras consistently performed below average (and note no one here is comparing them to D5, that is a strawman, they are below average DSLR and mirrorless)

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 07:55 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

elixer: "At high-ISOs the K-1 performs on par or better than its peers, such as the Nikon D810, WITH RESULTS COMPARABLE to the Sony a7r II. It even out performs the D810 in ISO's that exceed 6400 which is very impressive for a camera at this price point. The low light performance performance of the K-1 is surprisingly nearly on par with 645Z. When comparing the K-1 to full frame cameras at its price point such as the Sony a7 ii, the camera out performs its competition in nearly every aspect"

Reviewers, please help me to understand why there is such a HUGE gap in the "Low light / high ISO performance" when I compare the Sony A7RII and the Pentax K1 using your resource. Can you break it down just a little more?

It's also is known that Pentax sometimes apply raw noise reduction to files that can't be turned off, so you can't conclude too much about 1/2 stop "less noise" at ISO 128000 or whatever.

Link | Posted on Jul 9, 2016 at 07:47 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Gesture: If I could get 80 percent of the quality of a Rolls Royce, Ferrari, whatever for 1/2 the price, I might consider it Golden?

4K has many other uses. YOu can crop to 1080p if you have 4K original. That gives you a lot of option (even panning option).

If you have 4K video, you can also crop out STABILIZED version of 1080p from that. That's another plus

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 17:45 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

rrccad: I personally dislike the AF test. I think it weighs a times heavier on scene and image tracking versus what usually happens when you pan and move the camera with the subject as what typically happens.

However this test is repeatable. It's one where if dpreview had enough $$ they could even simulate it in a studio (think a moving focus target mounted on a radio controlled vehicale frame at a on a straight or zig zag track coming to the camera). Then you could also add in back lighting, etc .. and also have controlled acceleration and deceleration.

However AF tests are HARD .. and they are hard to be repeatable across multiple cameras, systems, lenses and nuances.

So I have to respect that dpreview is trying to do something across a VERY difficult problem domain- most reviews don't even try. It's a hard problem, and it's nice to see dpreview try and then put up with all this after the fact.

Leandros S, the tests were performed many times, on different days, in the case of K3, as I remember, they went back and tried even different lenses, same result. Why is that? The simplest explanation: Pentax's AFC is just worse than others, which in fact is actually the real fact, even if fanboys will never admit it.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 16:13 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: DPR writes: "While the AF system of the K-1 can't keep up with some of its peers, it is an improvement over previous Pentax DSLRs."

Then how come the K3's review didn't have a single conclusion "Con" related to AF performance and the K-1 had "Poor AF" listed as the very first con? This is a clear contradiction, and the fact that the K-1 is essentially an entry level FF with specs that trash the competition (5-axis IBIS, 36 mp, weather sealing, build quality) makes it worse. If there is a Con for the K-1 AF based on DPR's testing, it would be more accurate, fair and consistent to say "AF tracking not up to level of peers".

As it stands, the Conclusion bullet points are unfair and inconsistent with their own assessment of the K-1's AF as an "improvement over previous Pentax DSLRs", considering that the K3 and K-5 II had zero AF "Cons" listed in the Conclusion section. Unusually harsh, inconsistent review that I believe Ricoh did not deserve.

No, DPR says Pentax claims K1 AF s improvement, but the tests done by DPR shows it performs same or worse as previous Pentax cameras tested.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 00:33 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

LightBug: KKsniper analyzed how DPR's AF tracking test may have some issues, such as failing to keep focus points on the subjects head:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/58016586

KKsniper is simply wrong, as DPR responded to the claim

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4025507?page=4#forum-post-58016958

"We made it easy for the K-1: we focused on the high contrast target in the cyclist's jersey, and kept the single point over this target the entire tim"

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 23:14 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

elixer: "At high-ISOs the K-1 performs on par or better than its peers, such as the Nikon D810, WITH RESULTS COMPARABLE to the Sony a7r II. It even out performs the D810 in ISO's that exceed 6400 which is very impressive for a camera at this price point. The low light performance performance of the K-1 is surprisingly nearly on par with 645Z. When comparing the K-1 to full frame cameras at its price point such as the Sony a7 ii, the camera out performs its competition in nearly every aspect"

Reviewers, please help me to understand why there is such a HUGE gap in the "Low light / high ISO performance" when I compare the Sony A7RII and the Pentax K1 using your resource. Can you break it down just a little more?

A7RII and A7II are two different cameras with different sensors and different low light performance.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 18:21 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Leandros S: The reason I asked about the bicycle test being done equally on other cameras is because it seems to be absent from the D5 review and the D500 review makes a strange excuse for not doing it properly, if I understand correctly, stating: "Even in circumstances where it only has a fraction of a second to acquire both the subject and focus, it does very well indeed, rendering our bike test irrelevant." and "In this instance, the rider started off too far back for us to be able to specify that the camera should focus on his face, so instead it's focused on his shirt, but the consistency between shots is excellent." I don't quite know what to make of this - it almost sounds like the camera focuses on the wrong thing, but we make an excuse for it and declare the test a success because it is "irrelevant". It is often the case that if you believe that a certain outcome is the "correct" outcome, you can generate a test case that bears this out,

LOL @ "we are shown at the shirt not face." Full resolution of images are available if you click on the image. You neither has not read any of the review for past 2 years but you aren't even familiar with how to use DPR site. Also, do you know these tests are done multiple times, 18 times for K1 and same was true for K3 where DPR even tried various lenses.

fanboys will always blame the reviewers and defend their brand.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 18:14 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

marc petzold: Given about all the buzz here - yesterday, in just >1h over 1000 Comments, i hope the K-1 would really sell well, for Ricoh, for Pentax...to survive as a competitor for Canikon & Sony. The market needs alternatives, competition is also good for pricing.

These comments go bak to 5 months, not 1 day. Look at the date on older comments.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 17:47 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Daft Punk: Regarding the AF row clearly kicking off here, I have a question.

Could there be sample variation? Think of all the QC problems Nikon have had with D800 left side focusing.

Did DPR have one just K-1 unit or more ?

Sample variation for all K3, K3 II and now K1? They all performed consistently bad in the AFC tracking tests.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 15:44 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

gravelhopper: "The autofocus tends to hesitate, even in AF-S mode with the center point - it’s nowhere near as fast as most Canon and Nikon DSLRs."

What is not to understand about this statement? It is very clear and I think it is formulated as intended. Now the relevant question to help us understand may be: what does DPR mean with "hesitant"? Hesitant like "I cannot catch the moment, I miss it" or hesitant like "I catch the moment, but it takes 0.2 sec versus 0.1 sec like Nikon"?
(don't shoot me for the figues I put here).

Zvonimir Tosic
"When I first use Nikon DSLR, I would not nail down 50% of the shots. T"

Funny how you are claiming that DPR used the camera first time when they had the camera for 3 months and in some cases for year (like K3) and shot thousands of images with it and performed the AF test (according to the reviewers) over 18 times for K1 and more with K3 with different lenses and settings and got same poor results with K3, K3II and K1 consistently.

The excuses by these fanboys are just hilarious

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 15:20 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: DPR writes: "While the AF system of the K-1 can't keep up with some of its peers, it is an improvement over previous Pentax DSLRs."

Then how come the K3's review didn't have a single conclusion "Con" related to AF performance and the K-1 had "Poor AF" listed as the very first con? This is a clear contradiction, and the fact that the K-1 is essentially an entry level FF with specs that trash the competition (5-axis IBIS, 36 mp, weather sealing, build quality) makes it worse. If there is a Con for the K-1 AF based on DPR's testing, it would be more accurate, fair and consistent to say "AF tracking not up to level of peers".

As it stands, the Conclusion bullet points are unfair and inconsistent with their own assessment of the K-1's AF as an "improvement over previous Pentax DSLRs", considering that the K3 and K-5 II had zero AF "Cons" listed in the Conclusion section. Unusually harsh, inconsistent review that I believe Ricoh did not deserve.

K3 and K3 II performed poorly in AFC tests

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-3/8

And in the comments back then reviewers mentioned they tried various lenses and settings and posted the best results, which were still worst compared to the competition, so K1 results are actually in line with previous Pentax reviews.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 14:58 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: Sorry, D610, 6D nor D750 cannot be used as peers to judge AF in the K-1. All those use more forgiving lower-res sensors and don't have anything even remotely as sophisticated as the pixel-shift mode.

K-1 uses the 36MP sensor, and has a new AF with 25 cross points for a very serious reason: the image must be in perfect focus because the 36MP will pay you big penalties — especially in pixel shift mode.

In fact, some more experienced reviewer would presume (and even expect) that K-1 must be slower because of the extreme demands which the sensor, and special shooting modes, put on the camera and its AF system.

This is serious science here in K-1, serious photography stuff, and very serious tech that has certain requirements and needs apt minded folks to appreciate and value correctly.

D810 is more expensive so that's why it has better AF? First time a pentax fanboy admitted that D10 is a better camera. Their usual line is that K1 is both better and cheaper. A7II and D750 both have better AF and they are cheaper. On DSLR sensor plays no part in AF as AF is done by PDAF sensor.

As for K3, both K3 and K3 II performed poorly in AFC tests

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-3/8

so Pentax results are consistently bad for years.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 14:52 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

marike6: From Imaging Resource K-1 review: "Autofocus performance was swift, comparing well with the Pentax K-3 II in my informal, real-world testing. (And our lab testing likewise found autofocus performance to be a strength of the Pentax K-1.)" That's odd. Why would another respected review website have the exact opposite results as DPR? Did DPR have a defective K-1?

Imaging resources do not test AF-C with subject movig towards the camera. They test AF acquisition time by the lens in studio. Not the same tests done by DPR. DPR got the same bad results with K3 and K3II in AF-C mode with subject moving towards the camera.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 14:43 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jesaja: Wow. More than 1400 posts in lesser than 1 day. I never seen this before. At least, Pentax K-1 is the hottest potato ever been.

These comments go back to 5 months, not one day. That's 1500 comments in 5 months.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 14:26 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2663 comments in total)
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: Sorry, D610, 6D nor D750 cannot be used as peers to judge AF in the K-1. All those use more forgiving lower-res sensors and don't have anything even remotely as sophisticated as the pixel-shift mode.

K-1 uses the 36MP sensor, and has a new AF with 25 cross points for a very serious reason: the image must be in perfect focus because the 36MP will pay you big penalties — especially in pixel shift mode.

In fact, some more experienced reviewer would presume (and even expect) that K-1 must be slower because of the extreme demands which the sensor, and special shooting modes, put on the camera and its AF system.

This is serious science here in K-1, serious photography stuff, and very serious tech that has certain requirements and needs apt minded folks to appreciate and value correctly.

A7RII has 44 MP (denser than K1) sensor but yet the AF works better than K1

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-7r-ii/11

D810 has better AF too.

Your excuse that the worse AF results are due to the 36 MP imaging sensor is a pathetic fanboyish excuse, given on DSLR AF is done separately by PDAF sensor and has nothing to do with the imaging sensor as mirror is blocking the sensor during AF. You also forgot that both K3 and K3II performed similarly before K1 in these same tests, so Pentax's AF results are consistent.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 13:49 UTC
Total: 1134, showing: 61 – 80
« First‹ Previous23456Next ›Last »