[Matthew Saville]

there are many options why that could be...

1st ... maybe this also has to do something with the fact that promotional fees were paid.
(believe it or not, we live in this world. that is just how things work today... good morning. otherwise one could not explain why a destined sigma lens should have the double effective optical resolution when there is a nikon mount on it, than PK mount though it is the same glass-pfff... FYI:-ffd diff. is marginal) - if things have to get sold, they get sold... think.

2nd ... despite that, i have no idea to where such a comparison should lead, when you leave out the fact, that there are differences in magnification. and optics --->

3rd ... detail is also dependent to a lens that "resolves" very good optical/physical.
if you dont believe it mount an old 35mm varexon lens(the odd one wih the silver aperture ring--M42) on your K-5 or whatever and afterwards compare it to something like the DA 35mm 2.4 which should be very sharp...) both pictures will look very crisp and clear but if you zoom in you will see the missing details on the varexon lens.

4th ... this can not be a 100% crop on both sides, if it would, you would see what i mean.(it comes to ones mind that you just dont want to)-
A N D: IF I HAVE TO SCALE DOWN COSTY SUPER RESOLUTION SENSOR PICTURES SO THEY CAN COMPETE WITH THE LOWER RES.
---> then I CONSIDER IT POINTLESS HAVING A HIGHER RESOLUTION SENSOR.
really! where is the point in having a higher resolution when i have to scale down to gain the impression of detail and sharp borders?
answer: there is none...

and when not at high ISO -- the lower resolution beats up the higher resolution when it comes to clarity to see that, i dont need forum users to post "their" pictures...
where neither they are both 100%crop nor the magnification got balanced out between the comparison pictures... ??

as i mentioned before, if i want to see something alike I just go to:

Welcome to our studio test scene: Digital Photography Review

and have a look for myself..
thank you.

Conclusion: Try it out in real life. You will see. (if you want to)

I'm sorry, but you are truly mistaken, and possibly even delusional, to argue those things.

Try to avoid getting bogged down in comparable magnifications, or scaling, or whatever laws of physics you think are supporting your arguments. They're probably not. Here are a few simple FACTS:

1.) At the same sensor size, using a sharp enough lens, 36-42 megapixels will SEE AND CAPTURE more detail than 12-16 megapixels. Period.

2.) All of the champions of dynamic range are high-res sensors. Both Nikon and Canon flagship 16-18 MP sensors fall short of the 24, 36, and 42 MP sensors from Sony, both in lab tests AND IN THE REAL WORLD. Simply put, dynamic range appears to be almost completely independent of pixel density. (However it has EVERYTHING to do with whose technology is in the sensor! *cough* You know who I'm talking about *cough*)

Yes, the K-5II had an amazing sensor. So did the Nikon D7000, which shared its sensor. That was a result of its specific generational design. The K-3 falling a bit short of the K-5II in some regards is only a small part in the whole picture, though. Newer 24 MP APS-C sensors on the market have indeed beat their 16 MP ancestors. In other words, you'd be singing a very different tune today if Pentax had gotten the Nikon D7200 sensor for the K-3 II.

3.) To see the difference in noise levels between a high-res and low-res sensor, you have to really, really look hard. You have to be at insanely high ISOs, looking at blank detail-less test swatches. Otherwise, the medium and high-res sensors perform almost identically in every respect, including color and clarity too by the way.

Simply put, sensor technology has gotten extremely efficient at collecting photons. We're not "throwing away" many photons at all. And when we create huge pixels, all we're doing is marginally improving the signal-to-noise ratio, noticeable mainly just at absurd ISOs. Other than that, photons are being collected with incredible efficiency at all pixel densities, and it is in the analong-digital conversion and processing of those photons that we will be able to improve things like color and dynamic range and whatnot.

TLDR: as of yet there is no magical, significant BUMP left for new light-gathering technology to unlock. We're at the edge of the envelope, in all directions...

In conclusion: whether this new full-frame camera has 16, 24, 36, or 42 megapixels, it will come down to the generation of sensor, whose technology is behind it, and the processing of its data. These things, not resolution, will be what truly make or break the sensor's overall performance. And I'd rather have a cutting-edge ~36 MP sensor than an aging, hand-me-down 16-24 MP one.

---

Last edited by Matthew Saville; 10-24-2015 at 01:33 PM.

[Tom S.]

My K1 is on it's way to me! I got an email yesterday from a prince in Nigeria who received one as a gift from Pentax, and he said he wanted me to have it as he doesn't take photographs. All I had to do was send him a Western Union money gram to cover shipping and insurance!

I'm so excited!!!

[Matthew Saville]

My K1 is on it's way to me! I got an email yesterday from a prince in Nigeria who received one as a gift from Pentax, and he said he wanted me to have it as he doesn't take photographs. All I had to do was send him a Western Union money gram to cover shipping and insurance!

I'm so excited!!!

I'd send a Nigerian Prince a $3K cashier's check right now, if he could get a K-1 in my hands FIRST.

[Tesla]

I didn't look through all the pages in this thread to see if this was posted, but someone over at DPReview took some nice photos with a polarizer.
Life in a glass case: We peer at new Pentax full-frame DSLR: Digital Photography Review

I know RH not popular here, but he has a good photo that shows that the FF may be called K-1.

[Alizarine]

"K" and number "1"?

times like this I wanna sneak in to the Pentax plant to get a better look... But it's on another island, the storms are still coming and prolly would end up in jail before I even see the assembly line. What if it's not a 1 but a stylized capital L?

so I'll just go by waiting for kenspo's or mr. Kanarek's sample shots with it

[stillshot2]

I know RH not popular here, but he has a good photo that shows that the FF may be called K-1.

It's either the greatest coincidence that the label is peeling back just enough to see there is a K followed by what could be a number 1, 2, or just about anything the mind can imagine, or perhaps this label was placed so strategically by Ricoh so they could laugh at us speculating all day long about what it might be revealing, and perhaps the bottom half of the model number was never even printed at all!

[Matthew Saville]

It's either the greatest coincidence that the label is peeling back just enough to see there is a K followed by what could be a number 1, 2, or just about anything the mind can imagine, or perhaps this label was placed so strategically by Ricoh so they could laugh at us speculating all day long about what it might be revealing, and perhaps the bottom half of the model number was never even printed at all!

That's exactly what I was thinking as I photoshopped the image to reveal the shadow detail.

1.) I hope the execs are getting a good laugh out of this, and

2.) I hope that nobody lost their job over any of this, because it's probably the best thing that has happened and apparently will continue to be for a few more months. It'd be a shame for someone to get fired over the one thing that keeps us going.

[Sandy Hancock]

What if it's not a 1 but a stylized capital L?

Or a Z??

so I'll just go by waiting for kenspo's or mr. Kanarek's sample shots with it

Ben's back with Pentax? First I've heard of it, but good news if true.

[mee]

That is the logical solution, yes. And logically I should have only the 24~70, 70~200 and the 150~400. Of course then I'd also have an empty chest of drawers and just 2 Domke bags.

But where's the fun in that?

That seems like a lot of fun. Ideally, that is the way I'd go too.. well with the 15-30 also. But I think size is prohibitive for carrying around.. the weight of these might not be so much fun.

[monochrome]

It's either the greatest coincidence that the label is peeling back just enough to see there is a K followed by what could be a number 1, 2, or just about anything the mind can imagine, or perhaps this label was placed so strategically by Ricoh so they could laugh at us speculating all day long about what it might be revealing, and perhaps the bottom half of the model number was never even printed at all!

That's exactly what I was thinking as I photoshopped the image to reveal the shadow detail.

1.) I hope the execs are getting a good laugh out of this, and

2.) I hope that nobody lost their job over any of this, because it's probably the best thing that has happened and apparently will continue to be for a few more months. It'd be a shame for someone to get fired over the one thing that keeps us going.

Or a Z??

This reminds me of the viral marketing for the K-7.

[monochrome]

That seems like a lot of fun. Ideally, that is the way I'd go too.. well with the 15-30 also. But I think size is prohibitive for carrying around.. the weight of these might not be so much fun.

I thought about including the 15~30 - but the reality is I like to collect more than I like to take photographs and for some silly reason I'm addicted to these K-series lenses.

I'll prolly sell off a bunch of marginal stuff but selling the entire lot wouldn't give enough money to buy a fully modern kit of FF and the zooms.

I'll get the 24~70 and the body and keep the best manual primes (for now).

[rawr]

Interestingly, Pentax Russia have carried one of those FF images from PhotoPlus on their FaceBook page, but in their commentary they describe it as a 'prototype':
[Google translated] "In the meantime, the exhibition of photographic equipment Photo Plus 2015 in New York shows a prototype of a full-frame camera.."

However the 'PP' on the sticker on the camera makes me think, as others have suggested, that 'pre-production' would be a better description. 'Prototype' seems much further back along the camera making spectrum than the object that was displayed at PhotoPlus.

[mee]

I thought about including the 15~30 - but the reality is I like to collect more than I like to take photographs and for some silly reason I'm addicted to these K-series lenses.

I'll prolly sell off a bunch of marginal stuff but selling the entire lot wouldn't give enough money to buy a fully modern kit of FF and the zooms.

I'll get the 24~70 and the body and keep the best manual primes (for now).

When I came back to reality I thought the same.. 24-70, the FF body, and my assortment of crop lenses (minus the wide ones).

I'm really interested in knowing the crop modes and just how well various DA lenses perform. I'm hoping many work well at 1.2x (should we get a 1.2x mode).

---------- Post added 10-24-15 at 05:08 PM ----------

Interestingly, Pentax Russia have carried one of those FF images from PhotoPlus on their FaceBook page, but in their commentary they describe it as a 'prototype':
[Google translated] "In the meantime, the exhibition of photographic equipment Photo Plus 2015 in New York shows a prototype of a full-frame camera.."

However the 'PP' on the sticker on the camera makes me think, as others have suggested, that 'pre-production' would be a better description. 'Prototype' seems much further back along the camera making spectrum than the object we are seeing in PhotoPlus.

I wouldn't read too much into it.. I think they are more covering their butts than anything.

[Not a Number]

However the 'PP' on the sticker on the camera makes me think, as others have suggested, that 'pre-production' would be a better description. 'Prototype' seems much further back along the camera making spectrum than the object that was displayed at PhotoPlus.

Or PP = PhotoPlus...

[rawr]

Or PP = PhotoPlus...

Too obvious.