[Uluru]

That using 3D TSV (Through Silicon Vias) [ Through-silicon via - Wikipedia ],.. Sony already having implemented in the A9, it's possible that Nikon and Pentax will have it first, and Canon may struggle a bit longer.

Is Sony willing to share with its clients, or keep it for itself for a longer while?

[surfar]

Is Sony willing to share

Probably not for a while, especially if its holding stock of other inferior sensors....but for a price???

[mee]

6 FPS in 1.2x crop mode, and 7fps in DX mode with the grip, yes. The K-1 can do 6.5 fps in "DX" mode without a grip - and of course, it's not built to benefit in such a way.
Indeed, the cameras are on the same speed class; there's no reason to assume the K-1 is intentionally limited.

I did not assume the K-1 is intentionally limited.

[Uluru]

6 FPS in 1.2x crop mode, and 7fps in DX mode with the grip, yes. The K-1 can do 6.5 fps in "DX" mode without a grip - and of course, it's not built to benefit in such a way.
Indeed, the cameras are on the same speed class; there's no reason to assume the K-1 is intentionally limited.

My complaint was this: crippled depth of buffer and writing / reading speed, caused by lack of RAM and lack of support for fast cards.

KP suffers from same problem, and I think it is bad marketing decision — to make a camera that is already 4 years back in time. Both K1 and KP are behind K3's level.

I think that such decisions are really, really bad. I would fire such project manager asap. If a dedicated, serious camera cannot sustain operation under duress, and yet lesser devices can do a much better job, what's the point in making dedicated cameras then? Who needs a "serious camera" that freezes up after 8 or 12 RAWs are taken? It is ridiculous.

IMHO, the level of memory and I/O performance we see in D500 or D5 should be the norm for all DSLRs produced as of last year (regardless of other legitimate limitations, like fps or AF speed). Data stream and operation should not suffer. And that is far more critical than the number of AF dots; I have lost more shots because of camera slowness / freezing up in operation because of inadequate speed than from AF performance. And I think this goes for most DSLR users.

---

Last edited by Uluru; 05-15-2017 at 10:38 PM.

[Biro]

That's nice. For landscape shooters, the K-1 is about the best you can do. Even for wedding photography, it is a really high end camera. The dynamic range, smoothness of transition all look better than you can get with smaller format. Frame rate is fine as a reason to buy a camera and certainly the Olympus wipes up the floor with the K-1 in that respect, but for stunning landscape photos, I feel like you can't beat K-1 with pixel shift unless you go medium format.

That's lovely work. I have no doubts about the quality of the K-1's output. For me, the Olympus E-M1 Mark II made sense because I already own a number of other micro four-thirds lenses. If I bought a K-1, I'd have to begin buying Pentax full-frame lenses. Since I'd require more than just one, I couldn't stretch that far financially.

Also, I plan to shoot wildlife with the Olympus. With the Leica-branded 100-400mm zoom, I have a full-frame FOV equivalent of 200-800mm. That's optical zoom before any cropping. That's the kind of focal range you need when shooting animals. And it's all in a hand-holdable package with weather resistance.

Then there's size and weight. One can't call the E-M1 line tiny within the world of micro four-thirds. But it's still smaller and lighter than equivalent full-frame or APS-C gear. A few years ago, I thought seriously about buying the Sigma 50-500mm "Bigma" for my K-5. That was one heavy package. Even the slightly smaller 150-500mm was a serious proposition in terms of size and weight.

While the K-1's full-frame sensor is certainly superior in some ways, the very latest 20mp micro four-thirds sensor surprises many people with its image quality, dynamic range, etc. So it's not like it's a bust. And I have high-res mode as well for when I want to shoot non-moving subjects. If I need to shoot video, Olympus quality is now up to competitive levels.

I will, however, keep my eye out for the new Pentax APS-C flagship. Here's hoping it'll be enough of a leap over the K-3 to make it a "must have" item. Then, if I can't swing it even after perhaps selling my K-5 and K-5IIs (I'd keep my K-3), then I'll wait until prices fall later in its product life.

[biz-engineer]

I think that such decisions are really, really bad. I would fire such project manager asap.

If I was product manager, I'd make a KP Uluru limited edition, with very deep buffers and I'll charge you 2 grands for it :-)

[Kunzite]

I did not assume the K-1 is intentionally limited.

Rondec thought this was a possibility:

I wonder. The K-1 can shoot 6 fps in crop mode, so certainly the shutter should be OK to that speed and probably the sensor as well. It has always felt to me more like Pentax just didn't want the buffer to fill up too quickly and so they limited the frame rate in full frame mode.

[iheiramo]

Who needs a "serious camera" that freezes up after 8 or 12 RAWs are taken? It is ridiculous.

I don't understand. Where do you need more? 8 or 12 is more than I have ever needed to get the shot I want.

[Kunzite]

8 or 12 RAWs? You are lucky to have 8 or 12 RAWs! In them days, the camera could do only one RAW, which you had to spend an hour to develop with nasty smelling chemicals.
When I say camera, I really mean a cardboard shoebox, but it was a camera to us!

[Dan Rentea]

I don't understand. Where do you need more? 8 or 12 is more than I have ever needed to get the shot I want.

It's not that you would want more from such a high resolution camera, but take a look of the numbers regarding the time needed to clear the buffer. After 5 images taken in burst mode, K1 needs some time to clear the buffer...

1. K1 - 36mp ; shoots a total of 17 RAW frames; it needs 31 seconds to clear the buffer
2. 5D Mark IV - 30mp ; shoots a total of 19 RAW frames; it needs 5 seconds to clear the buffer
3. 5DsR - 50mp ; shoots a total of 15 RAW frames; it needs 12 seconds to clear the buffer

[ffking]

It's not that you would want more from such a high resolution camera, but take a look of the numbers regarding the time needed to clear the buffer. After 5 images taken in burst mode, K1 needs some time to clear the buffer...

1. K1 - 36mp ; shoots a total of 17 RAW frames; it needs 31 seconds to clear the buffer
2. 5D Mark IV - 30mp ; shoots a total of 19 RAW frames; it needs 5 seconds to clear the buffer
3. 5DsR - 50mp ; shoots a total of 15 RAW frames; it needs 12 seconds to clear the buffer

At a price - the thing is that the K-1 isn't Pentax's flagship FF, it's Pentax's only FF - it had to be affordable, and maybe we should see the high end features as being a bonus in a low mid-range camera, not the weaknesses being weaknesses in a high end camera.

[surfar]

it's Pentax's only FF

Its the entry level FF Pentax, the top gun is coming!

[x4rd]

It's not that you would want more from such a high resolution camera, but take a look of the numbers regarding the time needed to clear the buffer. After 5 images taken in burst mode, K1 needs some time to clear the buffer... 1. K1 - 36mp ; shoots a total of 17 RAW frames; it needs 31 seconds to clear the buffer 2. 5D Mark IV - 30mp ; shoots a total of 19 RAW frames; it needs 5 seconds to clear the buffer 3. 5DsR - 50mp ; shoots a total of 15 RAW frames; it needs 12 seconds to clear the buffer

It is because Canon uses CFast cards with much higher write-read capacity than SDs

[redpit]

It's funny that some people in here comment that they own(?) and use(?) a K-1 and they find it insufficient!

I'm a bit scared but also happy that professional photographers of such a great caliber that the superb K-1 seems to confine them, are members of the PF and are so humble that waste some of their time to reply to our posts...

OTOH I can't help it and I confess that I sometimes think that some people have never lay their hands on the equipment they growl about and these threads end up being so irrelevant with the truth that it becomes disturbing...

PS1: I shoot action photography with the K-1 (I knew her strengths and weaknesses beforehand and upgrading to the K-1 was a consious choice) and never felt I miss something in comparison to the SAME CATEGORY cameras from the competition...

PS2: For the record (not that it matters much) the K-1 can still capture pictures while the buffer clears (in a slower pace of course).

PS3: I suggest to those people who have taken pictures with the K-1, the next time they will use it to put an SD card in one of the slots and then go home and open up their pictures on a 4K monitor... When they get over their surprise we can talk again about the weaknesses.

[Kunzite]

@x4rd:
And because the K-1's controller doesn't support even SDR-104 speeds. UHS-II can give you similar performance with those Canons.

Which means Ricoh Imaging won't have to switch to another card format, but "only" to upgrade the card controller. Hopefully, with both slots working at the faster speed.

P.S. For me, the K-1 buffer limitation is just something I have to be aware of. But then, losing some of my pics isn't such a big deal