[cristigj]

i agree. I use the k-01 in the manner described above. 'thumb/palm" easier to navigate.

[Docrwm]

There is no way a manual lens is going to "function" the same on a viewfinder camera, as it does on one that doesn't have one. I like the above images, but the K-01 requires a different technique to focus. I would expect disappointment getting used to the K-01, but it has nothing to do with the camera per se. The K-01 is a "thumb/palm" camera more than an "index/trigger" camera. I think the K-01 is a fine camera and compares favorably to the K30 images I have seen and in situations where contrast focusing works well. I really like my K-01, but it's tough to use considering my K5s and Q are with me more. Besides, I am comfortable with the "index/trigger" method of camera usage.

Lauren,
After you got your K-01 I had to do something......

[southlander]

A few thoughts:

(1) Assuming your are using JPEGs, there may well be differences in the JPEG processing engines between the two cameras, either in the settings in the cameras or as a result of changes Pentax has made over time. Maybe experiment with different settings. A quick way is to take a single RAW image, then convert in camera to a number of JPEGs, each using different processing settings. Or do the dame in the Pentax DCU software which seeks to mimic the in-camera processing engine. That way the image is held constant and only the processing changes.

Also, in your posted K-01 shot, the lady's face seems just a little soft to me, so:

(2) Maybe you are still getting used to using an LCD screen to focus accurately with manual lenses, or
(3) By having to hold the K-01 away from your body like a P&S, you are inducing a very small amount of motion blur?

[Jamey777]

My FA 20 f/2 is incredibly better on the k-01 than it was on the k-10d.

The exposure and white balance are dead on, and the lens looks as punchy as ever.

Portrait mode is *really* nice for some extra colors / contrast...

[Jamey777]

erm... make that FA 35 f/2 dunno how 20 got in my brain....

[post_eos]

I received a new K-01 a few days ago. Since then, I have shot several hundred photos, and I have to say I am unhappy with the images I am getting.

I got mine a couple weeks ago and I'm finding the same thing. I went from a K10D to the K-01. My images are not as sharp and seemed flat. Here's what I've found so far. The lack of sharpness seems to be caused by the way I hold the K-01 as opposed to a (D)SLR. I'm also no where near as good manual focusing on the viewfinder. If I put both cameras on a tripod with the same auto focus lens they come out with similar sharpness. As for being flat, I shot almost exclusively RAW in the K10D. I shoot more JPEG on the K-01 to get the higher frame rate. I've found that the natural setting for JPEGs is rather flat. In RAW the K-01 performs fine. My biggest hurdle is going to be learning how to hold the K-01 properly. I can shoot down to an 1/8 second on an SLR pretty consistently. I'm getting blur at 1/125 with K-01. I think the manual focusing will come with usage. I'm not using the K-01 for any one time opportunity shots right now.

By the way, I'm doing great with the Q. Must be the weight difference?

[LaurenOE]

Lauren,
After you got your K-01 I had to do something......

LOL! Looks familiar!

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

No doubt about it that some older lenses will appear sharper with greater color depth on a 6 mp CCD as opposed to the 16 mp CMOS. It varies a lot with different lenses. For instance, the Pentax m50 f/1.4 does very well on the 6 mp, still good on the 16 mp CMOS, but was a poorer performer for me on the K20D (14 mp CMOS). The Tokina 24-40 f/2.8 was very good on the 6 mp and even 14 mp sensor, but it just isn't sharp enough to achieve the same appearance on the 16 mp sensor.

As for the original poster's lens collection, most of these lenses will struggle a bit with high resolution sensors. Having sold the Tokina 28 manual lenses for years (some of them were 5-element, others had 7), they were mediocre to average in sharpness and contrast - so expect little from the Promaster version (probably a 5 element lens). I think using a 3x loupe will help a great deal in getting better focus consistency. I also think using RAW, with saturation and sharpening set manually will help. Finally, do some comparisons with both bodies (the K100D and K-01) on the same scene, and compare them at the same amount of screen magnification; I think you will find that the sharpness difference is pretty marginal in reality - but you get into trouble comparing at the pixel level because the newer sensors have much smaller pixels.

Finally, it wouldn't surprise me that the 6 mp sensors (I have the *istD) would hold up quite well at 200 ISO compared to any of the cameras with the 16 mp sensor, given the weighting toward high-ISO performance on those bodies. However, from 800 ISO on up, it would be no competition. Given the slight smoothing involved at high ISOs, those softer old lenses might look pretty good in low light situations.

[regor]

Onless the exact same 2 images are shown side-by-dide for both cameras, I think it's pretty much impossible to acertain if the censor and treatment results in a noticably different feeling.

[zbrueningsen]

Your problem is not the difference in sensors and megapixels. The K-01 out of the box has it set on a specific settings that adjust how the colors render once the photo is taken. It is on the front page of the menu. There are settings like bright, or portrait and many others. Try using different settings like that (portrait for portraits) and see how that comes out. My K-01 is taking identical pictures as my K-5. Next to each other you can't tell the difference - same lens, manual focus. It isn't a manual focus issue, it is your settings. I had this same problem with my K-X. The settings were dull, and that seems to be what you are lacking.

[sajah]

Anyone else find that their "magic" lens doesn't shine on the K-01?

On the contrary, I found my magic lenses perform better with my K-01. The reason is the accurate AF. My most recent lens, FA 24 is quite soft wide open and the AF is somewhat erratic with my K-5. I did AF adjustment more than once but I was still not satisfied. Then came K-01. Given enough light so it doesn't fail to AF, the AF is always spot on. Also, perhaps because of the more accurate AF or because of less thick AA filter (or combination of both), the images taken wide open (or close to) also appear sharper compare to my K-5. Since then I started to use my other fast AF lenses with my K-01 and I feel more confident using them wide open.

[Na Horuk]

Don't worry about the magic, it'll come

[Pheo]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resolution.shtml

Increased diffraction and aberrations caused by the decrease in individual sensor size / micro lens size?