[micromacro]

Hello all, thanks for taking the time to read through my writeup over at DPR!

Carey, thanks for your review. There are two helpful things for me from your report: the screen will be very helpful to change the angle (and finally I can focus with LV often!), and F50mm f1.7 will rock on FF

[Carey Rose]

Hello again, everyone! Quick update - Ricoh has gotten back to us, and has said we can use samples up to 2000px on the longest side. We've still done processing through ACR to full-size JPEGs, then resampled them down to 2000px for the longest side in Photoshop with Bicubic (sharper).

Enjoy!

[JinDesu]

Hello again, everyone! Quick update - Ricoh has gotten back to us, and has said we can use samples up to 2000px on the longest side. We've still done processing through ACR to full-size JPEGs, then resampled them down to 2000px for the longest side in Photoshop with Bicubic (sharper).

Enjoy!

I find it very nice of Ricoh to respond, and very awesome of you guys to ask and deliver

[zapp]

Got to agree with you, the opening photos of the K1 were not even sharp, so it has to make you wonder what was going on. The only sharp photo is the motorbike in the foreground.

Edit, he does explain some of the problem posting these photo at 640 pix in the comments section below review. So even these journo's have problems with posting in forums.

He clearly stated that he was not allowed to publish full resolution samples - so what does sharp mean.

[bertwert]

Hello again, everyone! Quick update - Ricoh has gotten back to us, and has said we can use samples up to 2000px on the longest side. We've still done processing through ACR to full-size JPEGs, then resampled them down to 2000px for the longest side in Photoshop with Bicubic (sharper).

Enjoy!

Hey Carey, does Ricoh allow to rather than resize an image to crop it to the dimensions?
So we only see part of the photo but we get a better idea on sharpness.

[Carey Rose]

Hey Carey, does Ricoh allow to rather than resize an image to crop it to the dimensions?
So we only see part of the photo but we get a better idea on sharpness.

That would make perfect sense to me, but unfortunately, I don't think Ricoh would go for it - they were very specific about only the samples that we published already at VGA resolution being sized higher. Sorry about that!

[monochrome]

It's OK. RICOH No doubt wants to be first to show full-resolution images, and do it with FW1.0. Perfectly understandable.

[Winder]

I have no doubt the IQ will be phenomenal. It is the AF that I think will be the big question. All modern sensors/cameras have excellent IQ.

[abdalian]

Carey just posted the updated images on the post:

UPDATED: CP+ 2016: shooting the Pentax K-1 in Yokohama: Digital Photography Review

[Marktax]

The fa 31mm has a 49mm filter size?

Good catch. I was thinking only of the DA Limiteds, but yes, among the FA Limiteds, the 31mm has a 58mm filter thread, the other two 49mm. Among all the Limiteds, FA and DA, only the 31mm and the zoom have a filter thread other than 49mm. The zoom is 55mm.

[Pentaxis]

Official old timer here, The shallow depth of field is easily controllable by adjusting the f-stop. And as that is how I have always worked, not an issue. What I do not like about the current lenses is the lack of a aperture ring. The lack of a simple dedicated DOF preview button on any modern Pentax cameras is annoying to me too.

I think that the modern cameras are simply way to complex. The perfect DLSR for me would have lenses with aperture rings, a dial to adjust shutter speed and a depth of field preview button so I can easily see results and a simple needle moving up and down to let me know when the exposure is right. Just press the DOF button and spin the aperture and focus rings to get the shot you want. All without having to take you eye away from the viewfinder. Spot and averageing meters too. I don't need 15 user modes etc. etc. etc.

If it had a PHD (push here dummy) mode that would be okay too, but these are not snapshot cameras. These are tools that should require a bit a thought as to what you are trying to accomplish with the image you are making.

I do plan on getting a full frame camera becasue of the shallow depth of field and the better viewfinder. I will probably have to get a different focus screen. If one from one of my SLR's with a micro prism focus aid fit it would be awesome. A 45 degree angle split screen in the middle would be nice too.

Even with my auto focus lenses I find myself using manual forcus for a high percentage of my shots. And in cold weather lenses like my Sigma 17-70mm lens simply won't auto focus at all once it gets to 20F or so. Almost all of my winter shots are manual focus.

Thank you, I do so agree with your sentiments.

As someone who has only a tiny toe in the digital photography water, (via a tiny Point and Shoot camera) and has the rest of my ageing torso (and mentality!) in the film era (via formerly Russian Zenith E and Pentax ME Super cameras), I would like a simple FF digital camera, preferably with the suave demeanour of the ME Super or MX. This would allow me to use my Pentax-M lenses and their manual focussing capability. The ME Super does not allow depth of field preview but the MX does, I think. The Zenith E had a manual depth of field preview ring, too.
Sometimes I feel like I am the only person with such a low technical aspirations.

[rawr]

The perfect DLSR for me would have ... a depth of field preview button

With the K-3, you can assign optical DOF preview to the RAW/Fx button ... No doubt the K-1 will inherit this capability. Even with the K-x you could also assign optical DOF to the Green button.

On cameras like the K-3 or K-5, however, I've found that turning the main On/Off/Preview switch to the existing optical preview position is so easy that using a separate button for the function does not provide any usability advantage.

[noelpolar]

worth a look. My Camera Travels » First impressions with the Pentax full frame K-1, a hands on experience

[Jonathan Mac]

@Carey Rose:

The DPR posts have been pretty fair and accurate recently. It is kind of their reviewer to JOIN the Forum (New Member) and post in one of our threads, so we can understand the process he used (and know he understands the shortcomings). It's particularly refreshing that one of our members reached out to him to explain a fine detail of the Pentax files and jpeg conversions - and the writer actually reprocessed the images and re-posted them. That is, I think, unprecedented. In all my time on these fora . . . .

The over-rating in the Review database has been discussed often over the years, from many perspectives. The way to use the ratings is to accept the standard here is different than an independent database, then compare the rating of a reference lens that you own yourself to the ratings of the other lenses.

The absolute rating number doesn't matter - it is just an index. What matters is the relative rating of each lens, when compared to the others. So an M28/2 at 9.33 is clearly preferred over an M28/2.8 at 8.22. And a K28/2 at 9.69 is preferred to the M28/2 at 9.33. And a K28/3.5 at 9.31 is about equivalent to the M28/2 at 9.33. I own all four of those lenses. The relative ratings accurately describe the relative attractiveness of these 4 28's. The absolute numbers don't really matter.

Secondly, we all know in a non-scientific, open, subjective rating system, one poster with a curly hair in his . . . Is perfectly free to rate a lens 1 or 2, bringing down the average number. As a matter of habit I throw out the highest and lowest rating and calculate my own average number.

Thirdly, the number itself doesn't matter one whit. What matters is the comments the poster makes, and any sample images the poster uploads.

I hope these observations ease your tension and make your evening a bit more pleasant.

Courtesy and common sense on a discussion forum??

I suspect that a lot of people, DPR reviewers or not, may be joining or at least reading our forum over the next few months. Most of them will be far more familiar with the workings and peculiarities of other systems than they are with those of Pentax and I hope they find this forum a pleasant and informative place.

As for the DPR article and the lens reviews, I think most people would learn a great deal by paying more attention to this kind of article (which doesn't attempt to put a star rating on everything) and the comments in the reviews, rather than focusing on numbers (especially ones which are based on opinion). Our desire to put a rating on everything and ignore everything else causes a lot of problems.

Having said that, and aware that I'm going against what I just said (to some degree), with the lens reviews I generally regard a seven as a zero, meaning anything less than that is not worth owning (for me). If I'm out and find a lens for sale and want a quick check to see if it may be worthwhile buying then this is the first thing I assess, But I'll read the comments to look for specific pluses and minuses and to spot users who I suspect aren't using the lens/camera correctly, are being unreasonable in their assessment or who appear to have had the bad luck to get a bad copy.

Something about the DPR coverage in general (though not in this article) of the K-1 that I don't like is the repeated statement that it is really only for existing Pentax users and won't tempt people away from other systems. I know Ricoh themselves have stated as much but it's obviously untrue - a company which doesn't want to expand it's user base? Come on. It's something which has punctuated Pentax reviews on DPR for many years, long before the K-1 came along, and has always seemed at odds with the generally good impressions of the gear. Many Pentax reviews or articles state how nice a product is but then comes the unjustified disclaimer "but of course it won't make people switch systems". This re-inforces the impression that DPR is in the pocket of the big two, an impression that I think has diminished over the last couple of years due to their interest in mirrorless formats and their recognition that they are the future, but in the case of Pentax this attitude persists.

[Zygonyx]

Totally agree, and not only DPR have this suspect "tradition"...