[sungibr]

from pentax cameras as they do with the other brands.

I just use a DNG profile I've made because none of the adobe's built in profiles for pentax are good. Lacks contrast, not sharp enough. Color are wrong.

[stevebrot]

The difference in colour is probably Lightroom supporting camera profiles from the Nikon and not from the Pentax.

He was using DNG files for the K-1

The fact that DNG was used for both should not have a bearing. Although both cameras are supported in LR and both used the same RAW file type, the camera profiles* applied should not be assumed to be strictly equivalent. The default import profile for supported cameras is "Adobe Standard". Despite the name, the "Adobe Standard" profiles are always camera-specific and are the created by Adobe. While the results from Adobe Standard are usually quite good, they often are not comparable between cameras.

This assumes that both camera's files were processed using "Adobe Standard". If embedded profiles or any of the manufacturer-supplied "Camera" profiles were used, all bets are off.


Steve

* It is important to realize that a camera profile for ACR or LR is different and distinct from a device ICC profile. A DCP is much more complex.

[stevebrot]

from pentax cameras as they do with the other brands.

The same "Adobe Standard" profile is used for DNG as for PEF for supported Pentax bodies.


Steve

[sungibr]

The same "Adobe Standard" profile is used for DNG as for PEF for supported Pentax bodies.


Steve

I quoted DNG because that's what I use. And because I made mine personal profile with the Adobe's own DNG Profile Editor.
But, at least for K5II, theres is only the Standard or embeded (wich I don't see much of a difference in LR interpretation). For Nikon and Canon, the last time I played with other RAW files, they profiled all of their camera color profiles. That makes a huge difference

[stevebrot]

I quoted DNG because that's what I use. And because I made mine personal profile with the Adobe's own DNG Profile Editor.
But, at least for K5II, theres is only the Standard or embeded (wich I don't see much of a difference in LR interpretation). For Nikon and Canon, the last time I played with other RAW files, they profiled all of their camera color profiles. That makes a huge difference

Your custom camera profile* will also work with PEF.

Standard and Embedded as the only options sounds correct for the K-5II. The "camera" profiles you see for Nikon and Canon were submitted by those makers for inclusion in LR. Newer model Pentax cameras** (e.g. K-3II, K-1, etc.) also have camera profiles that correspond to the JPEG custom image modes, presumably provided by Ricoh. Despite the presence of many options, Lightroom still defaults to the "Adobe Standard" for import. If a user desires another option (e.g. camera vibrant), they can reset the default to that.


Steve

* People call these DNG profiles, but they are more properly called Digital Camera Profile (DCP), which just happens to be the extension for the profile file name

** I believe the practice started with the K-3II. I was able to back-port the camera profiles to my K-3 by manually editing the DCP files and dropping them into the profile directory in LR 5.7.

[kraigg007]

I know the reviewer loves Pentax. He is very fair on other reviews. Could have had a bad copy as his results were miserable. I actually love the K1 with my Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS lens. It is super fast and sharp.

I thought about upgrading to the Pentax lens but don't see the value in it especially if my copy is working for me.

[SpecialK]

His copy was front focussing and he had no idea.

My feeling as well. No hood, either? Complained about AF speed on a static subject. And, he wore black clothes (and a hat) in front of a black background. And you can't grab a tripod foot with one finger in front and two behind?

[MMVIII]

My feeling as well. No hood, either? Complained about AF speed on a static subject. And, he wore black clothes (and a hat) in front of a black background. And you can't grab a tripod foot with one finger in front and two behind?

Follow up:
the lens specimen tested was faulty (got knocked during shipping).

Here the video with this information:

You Tube

You Tube

Would have been really weird otherwise. Especially as other tests did not support a sub-par performance.
Pentax HD PENTAX-D FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW Review

I guess case closed, bad performance of a broken lens, not more, not less.

[D1N0]

Rises some concerns how easily you can whack the lens out of calibration, but we don't know what happened to it. May also have been a QC issue or earlier damage.

[normhead]

What a loser. nothing else to be said.

I've done tests where the same camera and lens did better than itself. The logical thing to do is to do some research and find out what you did wrong. DOn't go on the internet , show everyone how bad you can screw things up, and then proclaim one better than the other, But these idiots comparing one camera system they know and ones they don't know, just boycott them. Don't go to their site and give them revenue to keep propagating propaganda,

They are there because we support them.

I know the reviewer loves Pentax.

I bet 99% of those who love Pentax don't know how to do a lens calibration. But those that need it learn to do it. I did. That's no excuse. What we have here is incompetence on parade. But here would be my challenge to the guy. Give me the lens for a week and let's see what I can get out of it. If I do better than you I get to keep the lens. Ya right, didn't think so.

The world is full of incompetent people who would use a lens needing calibration or repair for a lens test. And the internet eats it up.

[SpecialK]

This guy could use some presentation tips. Too giggly, repeats a lot. Took 4-1/2 minutes to say he had a bad lens. Would not be in my top 10 resource-page list, but neither is Ken Rockwell.

[cyberjunkie]

From what I read It seems that a brand new lens has been knocked out of whack during transport, with no visible signs of damage.
I know from personal experience that Sigma f/2.8 zooms are not very robust. I had to send two for service.
Now I'm starting to believe that it's not just Sigma. Other brands seem to have similar problems.
I guess that there are technical hurdles not so easy to overcome, at least regarding fast focusing AF zooms with huge barrels and heavy glass elements.
A real pity, I'd be relieved if I could handle modern zooms the same way I have done with huge, heavy manual ones from the eighties

Cheers

Paolo

[normhead]

From what I read It seems that a brand new lens has been knocked out of whack during transport, with no visible signs of damage.
I know from personal experience that Sigma f/2.8 zooms are not very robust. I had to send two for service.
Now I'm starting to believe that it's not just Sigma. Other brands seem to have similar problems.
I guess that there are technical hurdles not so easy to overcome, at least regarding fast focusing AF zooms with huge barrels and heavy glass elements.
A real pity, I'd be relieved if I could handle modern zooms the same way I have done with huge, heavy manual ones from the eighties

Cheers

Paolo

According to Lensrentals.com it doesn't matter what brand you buy, there are going to be some lemons. Part of every photographers "things to know" would be how to tell if they buy a bad lens or get a lens damaged in shipping, and how to calibrate a lens. Those who don't understand this definitely shouldn't be publishing comparisons.

[rawr]

According to Lensrentals.com it doesn't matter what brand you buy, there are going to be some lemons.

This. It should be obvious to most camera people and Youtubers, but it clearly isn't.

I'm sure most modern lenses are designed very well. But manufacturing processes, and the real-world life a lens has to live, will often get in the way of maintaining the pure intentions of the lens designers.

[Gyroscope]

I think some people are being a little harsh on this guy. He genuinely loves pentax gear and was trying to add some badly needed pentax content to youtube. Maybe some of the knockers who think they have better skills should put their own videos up. Yes he learnt a bit of a lesson, he should have suspected it was a dud but he has had the guts to follow up on it with another video and promised to redo the review.

He did a great review of the 150-450 and seemed to think it compared really favourably to a canon system his mate was using.