Originally posted by HopelessTogger We all know ridiculous ISO numbers are just that, so it ain't a selling poin
Well, actually we don't know what that means. IN every camera that has gone into ridiculous high ISO numbers before, there has been a noticeable increase in high ISO performance. The 645z had ridiculous numbers but real world, you could get clean 6400 ISO images from it . DIto the K-1, ridiculous high numbers but you can get clean images to 3200. IN your haste to declare the camera a disaster you've overlooked some things. APS-c with Prime IV and second with the accelerator unit. If the image quality turns out to be as good as it could , this could be a huge improvement over a K-3.
Quote: I think Pentax is going to struggle with this thing regardless. Nothing stands out for me as a Pentaxian,
Yawn. I wonder what the temperature in London is right now? Not every camera is made for you, and it can still be successful even if it isn't.
Hope the KP doesn't test well. If it goes beyond the DxO mark of 87 currently held by the D7200 a lot of folks are going to look like fools. The K-5 was at 82. It's not like they have to improve much in IQ and performance to get to the top of APS-c.
Me, I like to keep my mouth shut until I see the numbers, and the test images from a few sites. I won't go declaring it a bust, especially since if DR and high ISO are top notch, Tess and folks like her won't care about all the crap you guys are whining about.
The market for the Kp is folks like my Tess. She's happy with her K-5, but it's not going to last forever. She's happy with the AF. I'm sure she'd enjoy K-5 high ISO noise behaviour and dynamic range with a 24 MP camera, She's never shot a video and doesn't care to start. People like her buy cameras. That is an irrefutable fact.
All you imagined hot shots preaching gloom and doom.... it makes me shake my head.
You don't see how this camera can sell. That's on you. Your imagination is extremely limited. A bit of life experience would no doubt help. Instead of seeing what the camera doesn't have, look at what it has. Then you'll understand who would buy it.
Someone concerned with APS-c image quality and high ISO functions. Look at the Nikon D500 we all seem to think is the top of the line for AF. They have a frame rate of 10 FPS, but they had to go with a 20 MP sensor to get it. And the ISO is less than average.So in other words, they traded IQ for speed. It has a pro tracking system, but that doesn't make a captured image any better. IN fact unless you have rigorous AF demands, it doesn't help at all. If you're just composing and snapping a landscape, you're better off with a KP, and there are a lot of people who actually compose before they shoot. DxO rates the D500 as a sensor 2 points higher than a K-5. Is that really what you want?
I get really tired of folks, like the above who simply mis-represent the truth, and ignore the obvious, and simply don't have the intellectual ability to see that there are other circumstances than their own. Try and keep an open mind about things.
Just because some one somewhere thinks the camera won't sell, doesn't make it true. Just because you own some model of Pentax camera doesn't make you a genius, or give you predictive powers. The simple fact is, even the improvement of Prime IV plus the accelerator unit, may make the camera interesting to some. Especially those concerned with the end product, (the image for those of you who don't seem to understand what it is) not the frills that help you get there.