Could this be the in the Pentax K1 mark3

reh321 · 11-24-2018, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by punkrachmaninov

neither does pentax. they want to market the anniversary edition k-1000 mirrorless camera. anything else is screaming into a chasm...

The K-1000 was a primitive 'monster'; large and loud, not the sort of thing you would base a MILC on; my Super Program would be a much better base for launching forward - but Pentax had many models of its ilk, including the LX mentioned by @monochrome

reh321 · 11-24-2018, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by punkrachmaninov

no, i'm aware of the k-70... currently they have three various and still slightly warm bodies available on the slab at the warehouse... prefer to buy a modern camera for this year's upgrade cycle.

So, why did you say that the K-1ii was the only one they haven't slashed the price of?

If you look a little deeper, you would see that the technology which gives excellent high ISO images is 'modern' - forward leaning - and is shared by the K-70, KP, and K-1ii. The fact that only Pentax does it doesn't make it undesirable.

**BigMackCam** · 11-24-2018, 10:23 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by punkrachmaninov

oh right... i forgot. you are a blad guy. now it all makes sense.

No, I'm not a brand-specific guy at all, though if I had to hang my hat on just one it would be Pentax. That's certainly where most of my investment in bodies and AF glass lies, and I don't see that changing

punkrachmaninov · 11-24-2018, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by reh321

So, why did you say that the K-1ii was the only one they haven't slashed the price of?

If you look a little deeper, you would see that the technology which gives excellent high ISO images is 'modern' - forward leaning - and is shared by the K-70, KP, and K-1ii. The fact that only Pentax does it doesn't make it undesirable.

it's a gimmick when you compare it with any BSI sensor...

reh321 · 11-24-2018, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by punkrachmaninov

it's a gimmick when you compare it with any BSI sensor...

It's not a gimmick - it actually improves Image Quality - and doing in a way that is not 'follow the leader'.

awscreo · 11-24-2018, 11:51 AM - **3 Likes**

I feel that we're getting trolled)

photoptimist · 11-24-2018, 12:01 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by awscreo

I feel that we're getting trolled)

It's a online Black Friday special -- 100 ft of troll-film for the low price of FREE!

(Seems appropriate that mirrorless hypesters can't see themselves for what they are.

)

reh321 · 11-24-2018, 01:04 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by punkrachmaninov

"yeah, i use iso 800000 all the time... it improves everything, no further innovation was required whatsoever..."

It opens a whole new world of photography - a working definition of "revolutionary" - several steps beyond "innovative" - and it is not aping what someone else is doing.

Every January, photo discussion forums will get several questions of the form "My son/daughter/grandkid is playing basketball; how can I photograph them?" .... and the inquirers go away sad when told to buy a $$$$ f/2 long lens that they'll never have another use for. If they could just buy a K-70 or KP, a camera that they will have other uses for, and a PLM lens, that would be an entirely different plot.

**Rondec** · 11-24-2018, 01:40 PM - **8 Likes**

I don't understand why mirrorless folks are such evangelists. If SLRs are doomed then there is no particular need for evangelism of those pagans who are still using them. We'll figure out when we can't buy them any more or when the price of SLRs sky rockets versus mirrorless offerings. At present, if you don't shoot video, there is little difference between SLRs and mirrorless, other than the whole OVF versus EVF argument.

And the OVF versus EVF argument is basically unwinnable. On one hand, you have people who like the longer battery life of OVFs and don't like EVFs for whatever reason (lag/eye strain/headaches) and on the other hand, you have people who say that EVFs give them a better feel for how their photos will look, offer focusing helps, and a histogram in the viewfinder. In a sense both are right, but it's like arguing about whether the best color is green.

In the end, there are similar sensors in mirrorless and SLR cameras and for the most part, you can take very similar photos with one style versus the other. The lenses and photographer's skill are far important in the photos produced than whether the camera had an EVF or OVF.

awscreo · 11-24-2018, 01:57 PM - **2 Likes**

Don't know why people care what equipment someone else is using, except to show their superiority, to show that they are smarter because they are using something else that is "superior" in some way. Most of the time they can't even say what is so superior about their gear, and how it would improve others experience)

**Digitalis** · 11-24-2018, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

Pixeldensity is the same as for the 100mp sensor for medium format, just a smaller cut from the wafer.

and therein lies the problem with this statement:

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

With that 60 megapixel sensor they could closedown the 645 line.

Yes, resolution would be higher than the 645Z - but the sensor is physically smaller, which means the DOF, and character of bokeh will be different. And if pentax does go for that 51X44mm sensor in their next 645 camera the differences will be even more obvious.

RonHendriks1966 · 11-25-2018, 04:19 AM

Originally posted by Digitalis

and therein lies the problem with this statement:

Yes, resolution would be higher than the 645Z - but the sensor is physically smaller, which means the DOF, and character of bokeh will be different. And if pentax does go for that 51X44mm sensor in their next 645 camera the differences will be even more obvious.

Well that bigger sensor would be a huge difference.

The point I made was that wenn that 60mp sensor could come in k-mount (and other mounts like Nikon) then how many photographers would be left over for the medium format system with the current smaller 44x33mm senor? The market would simply crush that niche by sales.

**Rondec** · 11-25-2018, 04:35 AM - **3 Likes**

Megapixels aren't the be all, end all of photography. I doubt very much that folks shooting medium format will switch, even if they manage to get 100 megapixels in a full frame sensor. There is a different look about medium format and certainly just adding megapixels to smaller sensors won't change that.

It isn't as though the medium format market is that big anyway and most medium format photographers have other cameras that they shoot as well (if this forum is any judge of things). The whole "medium format killer" idea was more a tag line that websites broke out when the D800 was released. But of course it really didn't affect the medium format market much either way.

awscreo · 11-25-2018, 09:43 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Megapixels aren't the be all, end all of photography. I doubt very much that folks shooting medium format will switch, even if they manage to get 100 megapixels in a full frame sensor. There is a different look about medium format and certainly just adding megapixels to smaller sensors won't change that.

It isn't as though the medium format market is that big anyway and most medium format photographers have other cameras that they shoot as well (if this forum is any judge of things). The whole "medium format killer" idea was more a tag line that websites broke out when the D800 was released. But of course it really didn't affect the medium format market much either way.

Yup, especially since canon 5dr/s has been out for years, and I don't see 645z people flocking that way

I dream of someday in future building a nice medium frame kit for landscapes, but so far it's entirely out of my price range

There's definitely a special look to mf photos, something ff can't quite capture (whether it's tonal, amount of detail, can't quite put it myself).

Blue · 11-26-2018, 03:06 PM

Originally posted by punkrachmaninov

lol oh my goodness... you guys are all missing the mirrorless boat, aren't you?

Some of us have the k-01 so no boats were missed. Mirror fearing vampire pentaxians were happy as well or not.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K1 or Pentax K1 Mark ii	giselag	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	15	01-04-2019 01:36 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K1 Kit - Pentax K1, Sigma ART 35mm F1.4, and Pentax 77mm F1.8	Jerry_Lundegaad	Sold Items	14	11-13-2018 03:10 PM
What you could do with a K1 that you can't do without	biz-engineer	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	79	07-04-2016 11:37 AM
PF when you test the K1, could you ...	BarryE	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	5	04-30-2016 08:10 AM
Landscape Could be anywhere, or could it?	Ole	Post Your Photos!	5	04-27-2014 10:56 AM

11-24-2018, 10:13 AM	#31
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,178	Originally posted by punkrachmaninov neither does pentax. they want to market the anniversary edition k-1000 mirrorless camera. anything else is screaming into a chasm... The K-1000 was a primitive 'monster'; large and loud, not the sort of thing you would base a MILC on; my Super Program would be a much better base for launching forward - but Pentax had many models of its ilk, including the LX mentioned by @monochrome

11-24-2018, 10:17 AM	#32
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,178	Originally posted by punkrachmaninov no, i'm aware of the k-70... currently they have three various and still slightly warm bodies available on the slab at the warehouse... prefer to buy a modern camera for this year's upgrade cycle. So, why did you say that the K-1ii was the only one they haven't slashed the price of? If you look a little deeper, you would see that the technology which gives excellent high ISO images is 'modern' - forward leaning - and is shared by the K-70, KP, and K-1ii. The fact that only Pentax does it doesn't make it undesirable.

11-24-2018, 10:23 AM - 1 Like	#33
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,670	Originally posted by punkrachmaninov oh right... i forgot. you are a blad guy. now it all makes sense. No, I'm not a brand-specific guy at all, though if I had to hang my hat on just one it would be Pentax. That's certainly where most of my investment in bodies and AF glass lies, and I don't see that changing

11-24-2018, 10:33 AM	#34
punkrachmaninov Banned Join Date: Nov 2018 Posts: 75	Originally posted by reh321 So, why did you say that the K-1ii was the only one they haven't slashed the price of? If you look a little deeper, you would see that the technology which gives excellent high ISO images is 'modern' - forward leaning - and is shared by the K-70, KP, and K-1ii. The fact that only Pentax does it doesn't make it undesirable. it's a gimmick when you compare it with any BSI sensor...

11-24-2018, 10:39 AM	#35
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,178	Originally posted by punkrachmaninov it's a gimmick when you compare it with any BSI sensor... It's not a gimmick - it actually improves Image Quality - and doing in a way that is not 'follow the leader'.

11-24-2018, 11:51 AM - 3 Likes	#36
awscreo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,722	I feel that we're getting trolled)

11-24-2018, 12:01 PM - 1 Like	#37
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,122	Originally posted by awscreo I feel that we're getting trolled) It's a online Black Friday special -- 100 ft of troll-film for the low price of FREE! (Seems appropriate that mirrorless hypesters can't see themselves for what they are. )

11-24-2018, 01:04 PM - 1 Like	#38
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,178	Originally posted by punkrachmaninov "yeah, i use iso 800000 all the time... it improves everything, no further innovation was required whatsoever..." It opens a whole new world of photography - a working definition of "revolutionary" - several steps beyond "innovative" - and it is not aping what someone else is doing. Every January, photo discussion forums will get several questions of the form "My son/daughter/grandkid is playing basketball; how can I photograph them?" .... and the inquirers go away sad when told to buy a $$$$ f/2 long lens that they'll never have another use for. If they could just buy a K-70 or KP, a camera that they will have other uses for, and a PLM lens, that would be an entirely different plot.

11-24-2018, 01:40 PM - 8 Likes	#39
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	I don't understand why mirrorless folks are such evangelists. If SLRs are doomed then there is no particular need for evangelism of those pagans who are still using them. We'll figure out when we can't buy them any more or when the price of SLRs sky rockets versus mirrorless offerings. At present, if you don't shoot video, there is little difference between SLRs and mirrorless, other than the whole OVF versus EVF argument. And the OVF versus EVF argument is basically unwinnable. On one hand, you have people who like the longer battery life of OVFs and don't like EVFs for whatever reason (lag/eye strain/headaches) and on the other hand, you have people who say that EVFs give them a better feel for how their photos will look, offer focusing helps, and a histogram in the viewfinder. In a sense both are right, but it's like arguing about whether the best color is green. In the end, there are similar sensors in mirrorless and SLR cameras and for the most part, you can take very similar photos with one style versus the other. The lenses and photographer's skill are far important in the photos produced than whether the camera had an EVF or OVF.

11-24-2018, 01:57 PM - 2 Likes	#40
awscreo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,722	Don't know why people care what equipment someone else is using, except to show their superiority, to show that they are smarter because they are using something else that is "superior" in some way. Most of the time they can't even say what is so superior about their gear, and how it would improve others experience)

11-24-2018, 02:37 PM	#41
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Pixeldensity is the same as for the 100mp sensor for medium format, just a smaller cut from the wafer. and therein lies the problem with this statement: Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 With that 60 megapixel sensor they could closedown the 645 line. Yes, resolution would be higher than the 645Z - but the sensor is physically smaller, which means the DOF, and character of bokeh will be different. And if pentax does go for that 51X44mm sensor in their next 645 camera the differences will be even more obvious.

11-25-2018, 04:19 AM	#42
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by Digitalis and therein lies the problem with this statement: Yes, resolution would be higher than the 645Z - but the sensor is physically smaller, which means the DOF, and character of bokeh will be different. And if pentax does go for that 51X44mm sensor in their next 645 camera the differences will be even more obvious. Well that bigger sensor would be a huge difference. The point I made was that wenn that 60mp sensor could come in k-mount (and other mounts like Nikon) then how many photographers would be left over for the medium format system with the current smaller 44x33mm senor? The market would simply crush that niche by sales.

11-25-2018, 04:35 AM - 3 Likes	#43
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Megapixels aren't the be all, end all of photography. I doubt very much that folks shooting medium format will switch, even if they manage to get 100 megapixels in a full frame sensor. There is a different look about medium format and certainly just adding megapixels to smaller sensors won't change that. It isn't as though the medium format market is that big anyway and most medium format photographers have other cameras that they shoot as well (if this forum is any judge of things). The whole "medium format killer" idea was more a tag line that websites broke out when the D800 was released. But of course it really didn't affect the medium format market much either way.

11-25-2018, 09:43 AM	#44
awscreo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,722	Originally posted by Rondec Megapixels aren't the be all, end all of photography. I doubt very much that folks shooting medium format will switch, even if they manage to get 100 megapixels in a full frame sensor. There is a different look about medium format and certainly just adding megapixels to smaller sensors won't change that. It isn't as though the medium format market is that big anyway and most medium format photographers have other cameras that they shoot as well (if this forum is any judge of things). The whole "medium format killer" idea was more a tag line that websites broke out when the D800 was released. But of course it really didn't affect the medium format market much either way. Yup, especially since canon 5dr/s has been out for years, and I don't see 645z people flocking that way I dream of someday in future building a nice medium frame kit for landscapes, but so far it's entirely out of my price range There's definitely a special look to mf photos, something ff can't quite capture (whether it's tonal, amount of detail, can't quite put it myself).

11-26-2018, 03:06 PM	#45
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by punkrachmaninov lol oh my goodness... you guys are all missing the mirrorless boat, aren't you? Some of us have the k-01 so no boats were missed. Mirror fearing vampire pentaxians were happy as well or not.