Its been discussed a few times before, and I can see both viewpoints .... ie its good to compare and float ideas etc .... plus its good to have a Pentax only zone as there is very little Pentax related stuff elsewhere on the web. The powers that be here take the 2nd view on it.

Its got a bit more flexible lately, lets face it .... not that long ago 'Full Frame' was seen as 'irrelevant' to PU members. Although having checked the prices of those offerings on the other thread from Canon, Pentax and Nikon, it may well still be irrelevant to many of us

Its an impressive lineup, for sure ! Its always interesting to see our fellow PUers revealed, out from behind the viewfinder ....

Hi Algi, yes thanks, I can see the applications for accurate AF confirmation with a manual focus lens. But .... I did believe that AF fine adjustment required the camera to store the adjustment in its memory, and that surely requires the lens data & ID to be transmitted from the lens ROM, via electronic contacts ..... how can that occur with an M series lens?

Its not a free world everywhere A thread thats only about a Hasselblad camera is sort of 'out of bounds' here! ('Out of bounds' .... that just came to me suddenly, I don't think I've used that term since high school!)

Now the other recent thread, with the impressive lineup of FF cameras and F2.8 zooms .... well, thats got 2 Pentax cameras and 2 lenses in it, so I'm guessing thats OK, it puts the Pentax models in a wider context (ie they're all big, and all expensive .... apart from the K3 / 50-135 combo )

I suppose you might be able to set the AF fine adjustment, I'm just not sure what effect it could have with an M series lens ....?

I believe the received wisdom regarding Shake Reduction focal length inputs is to use lens plus TC combined focal length figure. It's the magnification that counts, that is what adds to the shaking as the focal length increases, and so the TC has to be factored in also.

I'm confused ..... how can you have an AF adjustment of +2 with a manual focus lens?

I'll start the process of answering your question ....by asking you a question!

Why did you buy a K1?

.... And the small differences between the two jpeg outputs could be mostly eliminated by a few adjustments to either one of the camera custom image settings.

I can see absolutely no legitimate purpose to comparisons of default jpeg processing outputs, certainly not on such high end cameras (there might be legitimacy to such a test between very simple point'n shoots where the makers are not expecting their customers to understand image processing or digital imagery in general).

The whole point of jpeg processing tools in a camera is to allow the user to tailor the output to suit each type of subject, lighting situation etc, plus some personal 'taste'. This means it's a dynamic tool, giving the camera added flexibility to deal with a wide range of photographic scenarios.

So the default, no input, no adjustment state has no relevance to any real world situation. There is no common default state to make any comparison valid.

Yes, and look at what's happened to the background as well. .....

I was out with the family on Saturday in hilly terrain, lots of long views but plenty of distracting tree lines and tangly forest textures in behind. I found that by standing back from my portrait subjects and zooming in to 105mm, my backgrounds became less distracting because there was less to see in behind the subject ..... the perspective difference had reduced the field of view in behind, so there was a more uniform range of textures and colours, plus the background was more OOF, making the subjects stand out nicely in front.