[Parallax]

The 810 doesn't belong with the other three based on those samples.

Yeah, but some people will find some way to spin it.

[BigMackCam]

Yeah, but some people will find some way to spin it.

"D810 users will mourn the loss of it's beautiful and vibrant colour noise when switching to the K-1"...

[clackers]

Yeah, but some people will find some way to spin it.

Sad, but true.

[Nicolas06]

I may be stupid, I get the improvement without PS, but for the test with PS, how offen do you guy plan to use pixel shift at iso 51200 when you already need tripod and stationnary subject ?

This make only sense on review and test to show how impressive this is. In everyday shooting, you will use pixel shift at iso 100. In theses conditions, D810 users are going to use their lower base iso at advantage meaning it is basically a draw for noise. Sure we still gain sharpness, for thoses 100" print were you stare with a manifying glass but the rest of the time? D810 is 300dpi at A2 (16x24") and 150dpi at A0 (32x48")... Except if you crop (and that defeat the idea of pixel shift carefully taken on tripod...) you will not really need it.

I still would appreciate the gain without pixel shift stated here. I didn't find it honestly when dowloading the raw from imaging resources and comparing so... I guess we need more comparison, more feedback from users before we can conclude.

Not that I care much to compare K1 to D810, it is more interresting to compare it to 645Z and K3 as I don't get why I should buy a D810 ???

---

Last edited by Nicolas06; 05-09-2016 at 11:58 PM.

[gazonk]

I may be stupid, I get the improvement without PS, but for the test with PS, how offen do you guy plan to use pixel shift at iso 51200 when you already need tripod and stationnary subject ?

My first thought too.

[redpit]

Do we know what is the the (1) biggest and (2) fastest SD card that can be used with the K-1?

[Simen1]

I may be stupid, I get the improvement without PS, but for the test with PS, how offen do you guy plan to use pixel shift at iso 51200 when you already need tripod and stationnary subject ?

If I had a stationary subject and a tripod, then I wouldn't have to use ISO 51200. I would rather use ISO100 and pixel shift for a number of reasons. 1. Better resolution means more room for cropping. For instance I may choose a lightweight wide angle prime in stead of a slower and heavier normal zoom. At short focal distances I may "zoom" with my feet. At longer distances I may crop slightly more and still get good results. Leaving heavy zooms at home (or not buy them in the first place) makes the trip lighter and more pleasant to hold the camera for longer periods. 2. Having the ability to print larger is also an advantage. I may not do that often, but I want to be able to. If I knew I would never print large I would probably buy a compact camera in stead. 3. Another reason is that my tele lenses will "reach longer". My longest tele are a 2,5 kg 300mm and there may be times where I would rather have a 400mm, but if PS does that for free, I will be glad not to pay for that 400mm and carry its weight. The 300mm are sometimes left home because of weight and I would just be happy if my lighter lenses "reach longer". Even if its just by a small factor (1,2x or so)

ISO 51200 is for those times when I shoot moving subjects in dim light and don't have a tripod. For example indoor sports from a standing position in the crowd. PS may still be useful to reduce noise in the stationary background, but I don't plan to use it in such conditions because of low shooting rate and huge files.

In other words I agree that the ISO 51200 PS comparisons have limited practical use, but I don't agree that rare 100" prints are the only situations that PS are useful.

[beholder3]

Most features are seldomly used.

The most direct comparison to pixelshift is using tilt/shift lenses.
They have practically minimal value for 99% of use cases are clumsy, slow, expensive, manual and need a tripod to use properly.

Still there are use cases.

Same with pixelshift. All kind of art reproduction photography and products photography can make use of the extra 20% resolution if used properly - that means not with a single $10 flash but with professional permanent lighting.
Let's not oversee that pro LED lighting with good spectra are becoming more and more common in pro studios.

[Rondec]

I don't know about pixel shift as such, but camera companies (I think Sony for one) have had the ability to combine multiple shots together and average them to reduce noise in situations where you were hand holding and couldn't lengthen your shutter speed any more to shoot a lower iso. Assuming you are shooting something stationary, it can reduce noise.

On the APS-H subject, I am pleasantly surprised how well lenses like the DA 40 and DA *55 do on full frame. The number of Pentax lenses that would cover an APS-H sensor well, but not a full frame sensor is actually relatively small. Lenses like the DA 15 and the DA *16-50 wouldn't cover either -- at least not on the wide end. You are left with a couple of lenses -- maybe the DA 35 limited and the 50-135 -- certainly not enough to make APS-H a particularly worth while format size at this juncture.

[Parallax]

I may be stupid, I get the improvement without PS, but for the test with PS, how offen do you guy plan to use pixel shift at iso 51200 when you already need tripod and stationnary subject ?

This make only sense on review and test to show how impressive this is. In everyday shooting, you will use pixel shift at iso 100. In theses conditions, D810 users are going to use their lower base iso at advantage meaning it is basically a draw for noise. Sure we still gain sharpness, for thoses 100" print were you stare with a manifying glass but the rest of the time? D810 is 300dpi at A2 (16x24") and 150dpi at A0 (32x48")... Except if you crop (and that defeat the idea of pixel shift carefully taken on tripod...) you will not really need it.

I still would appreciate the gain without pixel shift stated here. I didn't find it honestly when dowloading the raw from imaging resources and comparing so... I guess we need more comparison, more feedback from users before we can conclude.

Not that I care much to compare K1 to D810, it is more interresting to compare it to 645Z and K3 as I don't get why I should buy a D810 ???

See, I was right.


https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/314224-pentax-k-1-o...ml#post3635880

[Winder]

Most features are seldomly used.

The most direct comparison to pixelshift is using tilt/shift lenses.
They have practically minimal value for 99% of use cases are clumsy, slow, expensive, manual and need a tripod to use properly.

Still there are use cases.

Same with pixelshift. All kind of art reproduction photography and products photography can make use of the extra 20% resolution if used properly - that means not with a single $10 flash but with professional permanent lighting.
Let's not oversee that pro LED lighting with good spectra are becoming more and more common in pro studios.

There is a large number of photographers who work in architectural photography. Interior designers, architects, home builders, and commercial contractors all hire architectural photographers to create images. Pixel shift is the perfect feature for this type of photography. Ricoh just need to release the right lens for this type of work.

[sculptormic]

There is a large number of photographers who work in architectural photography. Interior designers, architects, home builders, and commercial contractors all hire architectural photographers to create images. Pixel shift is the perfect feature for this type of photography. Ricoh just need to release the right lens for this type of work.

If I buy the camera I would try the Samyang 24 TS lens on it. Seems to be good stopped down.

[Winder]

If I buy the camera I would try the Samyang 24 TS lens on it. Seems to be good stopped down.

I have read mixed reviews about image quality. Seem that there is some variation in quality from lens to lens. I hope that Ricoh brings the ultra-wide that they have on the roadmap to market very soon. That said, the 15-30mm looks like a great lens for this type of work. At F/8-f/11 it is very good.

[RonHendriks1966]

I may be stupid, I get the improvement without PS, but for the test with PS, how offen do you guy plan to use pixel shift at iso 51200 when you already need tripod and stationnary subject ?

This make only sense on review and test to show how impressive this is. In everyday shooting, you will use pixel shift at iso 100. In theses conditions, D810 users are going to use their lower base iso at advantage meaning it is basically a draw for noise. Sure we still gain sharpness, for thoses 100" print were you stare with a manifying glass but the rest of the time? D810 is 300dpi at A2 (16x24") and 150dpi at A0 (32x48")... Except if you crop (and that defeat the idea of pixel shift carefully taken on tripod...) you will not really need it.

I still would appreciate the gain without pixel shift stated here. I didn't find it honestly when dowloading the raw from imaging resources and comparing so... I guess we need more comparison, more feedback from users before we can conclude.

Not that I care much to compare K1 to D810, it is more interresting to compare it to 645Z and K3 as I don't get why I should buy a D810 ???

Pixelshift is something that will be rarely used by most K-1 owners I think. It was a gimmick to the K-3ii.

[sculptormic]

I have read mixed reviews about image quality. Seem that there is some variation in quality from lens to lens. I hope that Ricoh brings the ultra-wide that they have on the roadmap to market very soon. That said, the 15-30mm looks like a great lens for this type of work. At F/8-f/11 it is very good.

They/we need a TS lens for architecture. The Samyang is stopped down quiet good on the A7rII according to Forum member at getdpi who's judgement I trust. I will ask him for a file.
In deed the 15-30 is a must have lens for the K-1.

BTW There is some Built in rise and fall and shift, albeit very minimal 1.5 mm

Built in rise and fall and shift
Pentax calls this Composition Adjustment. Using the anti-shake mechanism, the sensor can be moved up or down (rise and fall) or left or right (shift). While the amount of movement is limited to only 1.5mm, this can be quite helpful with a wide angle lens or with closeups. In theory, if there is 3mm of range (1.5mm up and 1.5mm down), it should be possible to make 36 X 27mm images with no parallax issues (or 39 X 24mm images), Odd that Pentax doesn’t automate this, stitching the images automatically into one raw file, ideally also in SuperResolution mode.

---------- Post added 05-10-16 at 06:41 AM ----------

Pixelshift is something that will be rarely used by most K-1 owners I think. It was a gimmick to the K-3ii.

Yes but the K-1 is in a different and more serious FF territory. For architectural photographers this is quiet interesting to have this extra level in sharpness.