gravelhopper

Lives in Germany Germany
Works as a Structural Corporate Development
Joined on Apr 13, 2014

Comments

Total: 43, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)
In reply to:

mxx: Well, as a Pentax user I'm convinced now that the K1 cannot take pictures of people on moving bicycles. But luckily that still leaves cars, aeroplanes, birds etc. So all is not lost.

Rishi: I reread the AF references in the review just now. There are text changes in AF and conclusion sections, formulations that lead everybody to understand "AF-S fails half the time" (paraphrased) were removed/changed. Your AF-S references are now much more differenciated and comparable to our experience. But now you are going at me and blaming me for the old misleading text? Wow. An anouncement in the article or a hint in your personal response that you adjusted the text would have been fair.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 05:57 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)

There is not only the undifferenciated conclusions for AF. Also regarding pixel shift: why does DPR only test the limits of the system, going with its photographed subject almost beyond its stated scope of application? Your test is valid and appreciated. But why not also test with really still subjects having finest details? (the city scape picture is not suited since mostly lacking any relevant details. There are many better examples from users and other sites) Why not in addition show where Pentax implementation of pixel shift shines?

There is valid criticism, no doubt. But the sum of omissions and invalid criticisms leaves a bad taste.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 04:00 UTC as 200th comment | 4 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)
In reply to:

mxx: Well, as a Pentax user I'm convinced now that the K1 cannot take pictures of people on moving bicycles. But luckily that still leaves cars, aeroplanes, birds etc. So all is not lost.

Carey: we are fighting about nuances in writing that can make worlds of difference in meaning. If the article had said "There can be no doubt that the K-1 AF is capable of excellent photographs of a wide variety of subjects, and at a very high level of image quality to boot. Still, the AF tracking is poor compared to what other more capable systems can deliver" you guys wouldn't need to spend your nights responding to our irritated posts. Carey and the review team: all your efforts are well appreciated :-)

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 03:38 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)
In reply to:

mxx: Well, as a Pentax user I'm convinced now that the K1 cannot take pictures of people on moving bicycles. But luckily that still leaves cars, aeroplanes, birds etc. So all is not lost.

Carey: that is exactly the issue with the article. It does not say that "there can be no doubt that the K-1 AF is capable of excellent photographs of a wide variety of subjects, and at a very high level of image quality to boot". Because of that blanket statement "poor AF" and the (paraphrased) "half AF-S failed" (whitch is impossible) the review basically sais that the K1 is not capable of all that. We know that K1 tracking is behind other brands' tracking. Still it is capable of great action pictures as posts in Pentax forum proove. The problem with your tracking test is that only latest and greatest tracking systems with high on-chip intelligence can pass it while less intelligent tracking systems completely fail. Your test assumes less intelligence on the user side than a Pentax user is capable to apply. This is what some of uf us try to convey but seems to be ignored in defense of your test methodology.

Link | Posted on Jul 8, 2016 at 03:18 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)
In reply to:

odpisan: @DPreviev
It looks that this review is the most popular of all ever written on your site.
Is it possible that there is 1783 comments?
Or .. is it possible that there is some sort of mistake?
:o/

This is a collection of posts that date back to what was posted in the first impressions Review.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 18:03 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)
In reply to:

fatdeeman: Why isn't the Pentax forum filled with posts where people have carried out similar tests to debunk dpreviews claims?

If users are genuinely having a much better experience and believe dpreviews findings to be as erroneous as they make out then it should be a pretty simple matter to prove it.

Nice try. The Pentax forum is filled with plenty of that kind of posts and samples.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 17:58 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)

Rishi: first let me express my appreciation that you guys put up with us :-)
To my point: could it be there is no progress in that discussion between DPR and many of us because we have different frames of reference? So let me phrase it like this: you make a blanket statement that K1 AF is poor. What impression do you think this makes on Pentax users who mostly have a different experience? What impression have you expected to make? And: why do they claim to have a different experience than what you have assessed? Are they not using their camera "propperly"? Are they covering up the truth? Are they nasty folks that enjoy rioting and driving you crazy? :-)

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 17:53 UTC as 222nd comment | 1 reply
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)
In reply to:

pentaust: More argumentation isn't necessary. I encourage everyone having access to a Pentax K1 to do the test himself and publish the results online. And there are already plenty of examples online showing Pentax K1 tracking capability, but, one review ignore them all. Interesting.

Barney: the review in essence suggests that the K1 AF does not work - while all K1 users are happy with it (within its limits), and having first hand experience with it are baffled by your conclusion. Something does not add up. If I was a reviewer / editor I would ask what is wrong with that equation.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 14:13 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)
In reply to:

Craig from Nevada: It appears that many the negative comments directed to the reviewers are from individuals seeking validation instead of information regarding purchasing options. It is the latter that my comment addresses.

My problem stems from how the reviewers hand out Silver and Gold Awards. Consider the statement made in the review that "even in the most basic, single point AF shooting modes, the results are far from what we would expect from a modern DSLR focusing system." This is a very strong statement regarding something that is a core attribute of the camera and not a cool feature. If anything the reviewers should be admonished for slapping a Silver Award on a $1,800 camera built in 2016 that lacks "a proficient AF system". It is tough to reconcile these. Perhaps it is time to toss the Gold and Silver awards and rely on the scores and written reviews. The consumer might benefit. You guys are too nice about it.

Craig, the negative comments come from users that actually own a K1 or other recent Pentax DSLR system and have no problem with their AF.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 14:04 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)

I do not know if someone else already summed up to what the AF / AF-S discussion boils down - so here is my take: It is irritating that DPRs test procedures makes them dismiss the K1 AF in their conclusion with "poor AF", and in their autofocus section dismiss even the AF-S as failing about half the time - while literally all K1 users are happy with the K1 AF (operating within its limits respectively compensating its limits with skill, see plenty examples on Pentax DSLR forum).
This should raise questions: if (a) either DPR test procedures do not match how real world K1 users apply their K1 or (b) the K1 users are plain stupid to not notice their failing AF.
Plus, it remains to be asked if DPR used a faulty body / lens: I have never heard of or used a Pentax AF-S failing about half the time (no matter if center point, border point or auto).
Regarding AF-C and tracking: for me no doubt here, the Pentax implementation is miles behind what other manufacturers deliver.

Link | Posted on Jul 7, 2016 at 10:54 UTC as 238th comment | 3 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)

"The autofocus tends to hesitate, even in AF-S mode with the center point - itโ€™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).

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 10:20 UTC as 299th comment | 7 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)
In reply to:

gravelhopper: Some people really got nervous the K1 could get a full DPR endorsement and now are happy to see the bad marks for the K1's AF. They are expressing their relief with Pentax-bashing in this comments thread.

I am sorry to see some people's self esteem depends on how "their" camera brand is reviewed on sites like this. This can be observed across all brands, also with some Pentax users.

That type of people exist, if you like it or not. When I look at your gear list, I do not know why you feel addressed by my comment anyway, you shouldn't. No need for you to become offensive.

What disappointment do you have? When you need Canon/Nikon AF-performance, buy a Canon/Nikon camera. I would do so. When you want to know how the K1 AF performs because you consider to buy the K1, go to the Pentax DSLR forum here and talk to the actual K1 users.

When someone comes to me claiming that 50% of his AF-S attempts have failed, I would ask him if he has checked his test body and lens, one of them may be a defective one. I have never had a Pentax with 5% or more AF-S failure rate, except for back-focus/front-focus which can be corrected. But I guess it was not worth the trouble with the K1.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 09:08 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)

Some people really got nervous the K1 could get a full DPR endorsement and now are happy to see the bad marks for the K1's AF. They are expressing their relief with Pentax-bashing in this comments thread.

I am sorry to see some people's self esteem depends on how "their" camera brand is reviewed on sites like this. This can be observed across all brands, also with some Pentax users.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 06:33 UTC as 319th comment | 3 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)

You want to know how this camera performs? Then go to the Pentax DSLR forum here and see how capable photographers apply the K1 AF to challanging action subjects and its pixel shift to appropriate subjects with finest details. See the results for yourself.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 23:17 UTC as 351st comment | 2 replies
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2650 comments in total)

Why would I be interested in users of other brands to "convert" to Pentax? Would it help me make better pictures with my Pentax camera? Obviously no. Would it make me feel better about myself? Luckily no.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 23:17 UTC as 352nd comment | 3 replies
On article Pentax K-5 II and K-5 II S (23 comments in total)

I love my K5ii :-)

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 10:31 UTC as 3rd comment
On article Pentax K-1 real-world sample gallery (143 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Ok, absolutely serious question. What exactly is everyone raving about with this gallery?

They're nice images, but there's nothing particularly exciting or unique about the image quality, at least to me.
The low-light stuff is just ok, and pixel-shift seems to resolve detail slightly better in some images, but it's not spectacular, and seems to come at the price of reduced contrast, as far as I can tell.

As for the rest, pretty standard IQ for a FF camera. I mean, I've seen more impressive IQ shot with a K-3 or even a K-5. And before anybody says it, yes, I shoot both APS-C and FF and am aware of the differences. So, am I missing something??

Again, not trolling or trying to be a contrarian. I'm genuinely interested in what is so special about the image quality here.

I guess some of us Pentaxians seeing everything coming from the K1 through pink glasses ๐Ÿ˜Š
But I may be wrong with my assessment. Anyone here who can enlighten us?

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2016 at 11:35 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 real-world sample gallery (143 comments in total)
In reply to:

locke_fc: Ok, absolutely serious question. What exactly is everyone raving about with this gallery?

They're nice images, but there's nothing particularly exciting or unique about the image quality, at least to me.
The low-light stuff is just ok, and pixel-shift seems to resolve detail slightly better in some images, but it's not spectacular, and seems to come at the price of reduced contrast, as far as I can tell.

As for the rest, pretty standard IQ for a FF camera. I mean, I've seen more impressive IQ shot with a K-3 or even a K-5. And before anybody says it, yes, I shoot both APS-C and FF and am aware of the differences. So, am I missing something??

Again, not trolling or trying to be a contrarian. I'm genuinely interested in what is so special about the image quality here.

I am with you. The subjects in most of the pictures here are not really demanding or suitable to proove specific quality aspects. For example the added quality coming from pixel shift is best demonstrated with static subjects having finest details - like fibers in fabric, certain plants, insects and others. A city scape with buildings does not provide that kind of detail, albeit static. Go to the Pentax forum to see the results that users come up with, especially those that also use other camera brands and provide unbiased experience.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2016 at 10:54 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 real-world sample gallery (143 comments in total)
In reply to:

samtheman2014: Despite being a long time Nikon user the Pentax K-1 is the most interesting DSLR to come out in years hope it does well for them. Like many I have a soft spot for Pentax and my first "real" camera was the Pentax Me

I cannot imagine Pentax making a mistake with the viewfinder. It is probaly a concession to a related construction aspect, maybe the info-overlay.

Link | Posted on Jul 2, 2016 at 06:38 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Pixel Shift: An update (96 comments in total)

Kudos to Simon Joinson, editor-in-chief, and his team to take that article down.
See his response: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57856750
It is good to see them listen to the readers and take them seriously.

And thanks to the community here who was very outspoken with factual criticism and with a plea for appropriate diligence in testing and journalism. I was impressed to see everybody joined in, not matter from what brand somebody's gear is coming.

Cheers

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 20:55 UTC as 49th comment
Total: 43, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous123Next ›Last »