K1 Mk 2 review - disappointing to say the least


spinno

Link Posted 16/05/2018 - 09:10
Algernon wrote:
Pixel peeping DPR samples really is sick. There's nothing between any of the cameras. They are made for taking photos not this nonsense.

--

Hear Hear
David

LennyBloke

Link Posted 16/05/2018 - 09:21
RobL wrote:
Nicely played, Lennybloke! When I read this article it put serious doubts about whether I should go ahead with the internal upgrade of my K1, and still unsure. The ISO performance should also be apparent at say 800, not just the silly levels everyone says they donít need so I would be interested to see how that pans out. I am attracted by the improved autofocus more than anything else though.

Hi Rob - to be totally honest I haven't gone looking for issues, all I've done is pick up where I left of with the K1 - just taking photos!

I have not noticed anything that is worse than the original K1 and the areas that have improved are not giant leaps just little steps forward. The AF is better - my hit rate is significantly better, I can't quantify it - but my confidence in the AF is much higher. The high ISO handling appears better, probably only by about 1 stop, but to my eyes it is better. I haven't used PixelShift (in any form) as yet so can't comment.

I doubt the upgrade is worth it for most people (particularly those who are happy with the overall performance and results from their K1) but the features that were advertised as improved were the ones that were of interest to me so I went for it, and have no regrets. If my MkII is degraded in some way I don't have the skills to spot it, so I won't worry - but agree that none of this can help the Pentax cause
LennyBloke

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 16/05/2018 - 10:31
Algernon wrote:
Pixel peeping DPR samples really is sick. There's nothing between any of the cameras. They are made for taking photos not this nonsense.

I totally agree! Several people have posted comparison scenes that 'prove' the K1ii is slightly better. But either way, it's splitting hairs on a gnat's crotch. The differences between these full frame cameras are now meaningless in real world use IMO. Fretting about small differences in how the cameras render noise in a 100% crop at IS0 51200 is a form of neurosis.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

richandfleur

Link Posted 16/05/2018 - 13:20
Fully agree. Reality is these days all cameras are pretty good. We're a long way from the early days where sensor tech was advancing in leaps and bounds. IQ is pretty good all round.

Nowadays it's the supporting aspects that are worth noting. AF abilities, ergonomics, touchscreens, wfii/gps etc, and dare I say it video. Over to each individual as to what parts of these are important to your own specific use case.

stub

Link Posted 16/05/2018 - 14:25
It isn't an upgraded K1.. Its a K1 with a system designed for the KP added.. Which just seemed like a good idea at the time.. I would still settle for an off camera TTL flash trigger....lol
K-1Gripped K-1 ungripped K-5ii K7 Various lenses

Stuart..
Last Edited by stub on 16/05/2018 - 14:27

tyronet2000

Link Posted 16/05/2018 - 20:13
So at last I'll be able to take photos in the coalhouse, with the door closed. The price of a slightly used K-1 is looking attractive, by Christmas it may be in reach
Regards
Stan

PPG

pgweber

Link Posted 03/06/2018 - 17:26
DP Review - studio scene re-shot:

https://www.dpreview.com/articles/1423988259/letter-from-the-reviews-editor-pent...
Peter

Pentax K10D & K5
Pentax DA 18-55 Mk1, 50-200 (Samsung), 16-45, , 55-300, 35 f2.4
Pentax MZ6 + FA28-90, FA50 f1.4
Ricoh KR10 Super + 50mm f2, Tamron 80-210mm & 28mm

RobL

Link Posted 03/06/2018 - 22:26
I donít care how much of a pro photographer you are I just donít believe you can assess ANY camera just by using it for a couple of hours. If you are a Nikon or Canon user (as most of them are) then you will be familiar with the menus and operations so maybe you could with one of their offerings, but Pentax cameras work very differently. They rely less on the menus and instead offer much more control through the various buttons which is far quicker and, once you are familiar with them becomes intuitive. I reckon you would need several weeks to get your mindset round to this way of working. Also a big deal is made of the jpeg quality - who cares? Anyone buying this sort of camera will work in RAW and that is the performance that matters.

Another issue with these reviews is you canít resist reading the comments below which are nearly all just plain silly, ignorant and childish, and I have to hold back from wasting my time responding. My bet is those people spend more time posting that actually taking photos.

Algernon

Link Posted 04/06/2018 - 08:23
It was the same in the 60's/70's I had a Spotmatic and bought a Spotmatic 2 I spent hours pixel peeping the negatives with a microscope and couldn't see any difference between shots off the two cameras


--
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

HarisF1

Link Posted 04/06/2018 - 09:26
Algernon wrote:
It was the same in the 60's/70's I had a Spotmatic and bought a Spotmatic 2 I spent hours pixel peeping the negatives with a microscope and couldn't see any difference between shots off the two cameras


--

LennyBloke

Link Posted 04/06/2018 - 10:08
RobL wrote:
I donít care how much of a pro photographer you are I just donít believe you can assess ANY camera just by using it for a couple of hours. If you are a Nikon or Canon user (as most of them are) then you will be familiar with the menus and operations so maybe you could with one of their offerings, but Pentax cameras work very differently. They rely less on the menus and instead offer much more control through the various buttons which is far quicker and, once you are familiar with them becomes intuitive. I reckon you would need several weeks to get your mindset round to this way of working. Also a big deal is made of the jpeg quality - who cares? Anyone buying this sort of camera will work in RAW and that is the performance that matters.

Another issue with these reviews is you canít resist reading the comments below which are nearly all just plain silly, ignorant and childish, and I have to hold back from wasting my time responding. My bet is those people spend more time posting that actually taking photos.

So well put Rob - and as an extension to your point about working in RAW, a user will apply their own processing to produce results in their own style - if there has been some change to the handling of noise in the K1 mkII RAW files then a little tweaking in PP would bring about the desired results.

You're right too about many of the comments - but fortunately there are now quite a few more actual 'user' posts appearing with real use opinions and plenty of high quality images - these are far more meaningful to most than the complaints of self appointed experts.

Perhaps it's time to revert the "industry standard" test for both cameras and lenses to the GOAUI methodology
LennyBloke

derek897

Link Posted 04/06/2018 - 10:43
LennyBloke wrote:
RobL wrote:
I donít care how much of a pro photographer you are I just donít believe you can assess ANY camera just by using it for a couple of hours. If you are a Nikon or Canon user (as most of them are) then you will be familiar with the menus and operations so maybe you could with one of their offerings, but Pentax cameras work very differently. They rely less on the menus and instead offer much more control through the various buttons which is far quicker and, once you are familiar with them becomes intuitive. I reckon you would need several weeks to get your mindset round to this way of working. Also a big deal is made of the jpeg quality - who cares? Anyone buying this sort of camera will work in RAW and that is the performance that matters.

Another issue with these reviews is you canít resist reading the comments below which are nearly all just plain silly, ignorant and childish, and I have to hold back from wasting my time responding. My bet is those people spend more time posting that actually taking photos.

So well put Rob - and as an extension to your point about working in RAW, a user will apply their own processing to produce results in their own style - if there has been some change to the handling of noise in the K1 mkII RAW files then a little tweaking in PP would bring about the desired results.

You're right too about many of the comments - but fortunately there are now quite a few more actual 'user' posts appearing with real use opinions and plenty of high quality images - these are far more meaningful to most than the complaints of self appointed experts.

Perhaps it's time to revert the "industry standard" test for both cameras and lenses to the GOAUI methodology

👏👏👏👏👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
I know what i like, If not always why.

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 04/06/2018 - 13:15
I think the issue is that the K1ii does some 'baked-in' noise reduction to RAW files which you *cannot* change in post processing, but I think the issue is being overblown. We're at a stage where the difference in ISO noise between the camera brands seems fairly minuscule, but people still place so much importance in it - as if it was connected to their sense of self-worth or something.

I disagree with comments above about jpeg quality. Sometimes it's nice to have the option of shooting jpegs, and having nice usable images 'straight out of the can'.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

HarisF1

Link Posted 04/06/2018 - 13:16
From what I've seen of the KP, the accelerator unit makes a huge difference from the K-3. I'm honestly not fussed if it's eating details in images taken at ISO1600. The bottom line is that images look so much cleaner, even when enlarged.

johnriley

Link Posted 04/06/2018 - 13:49
There are lots of cameras that process the RAW output to some degree, especially mirrorless ones.

The new AP does a long review of the K-1 II, quite positive in most ways, then elsewhere in the magazine adds a comment article that might wind a few people up a bit.
Best regards, John
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.