[Nicolas06]

When someone wants to buy a house and has a $300k budget, is really into photography and absolutely gear addicted...
i guess none...?
The person will more likely buy a $180000k house... Shell out about 2000 on some good glass, 4000 on a D850 body with some gear added,
and than go and buy him/herself an LS911 camera for the ridiculous amount of 104.000 US Dollars.
(or they may wait for the second version that offers 4k and higher framerates) LOL

The typical gear head will spend a few thousand dollards of gear every year. Photography but likely not only. Smartphones, cars, musical instruments, whatever. Over the course of the mortage for the house, the guy has likely spend 100K or 200K$ on gear without necessarily having something much better than what other have. He just replaced it 3-5X time more and got maybe more option for the car or a more fancy lens for his camera.

But the additional money is spent. Would have it been better on the house. Not necessarily. But there clearly some people that we hear from time to time that suddenly have to sell all their gear for money issue or whatever they would have been better just spending less on the thing. In the end what matter is that he maximized the return on investment. Not in gear that has barely more value than what others have anyway as the old one is sold and depreciate extremely fast, but in enjoyment of getting a new toy and playing with it.

Is it a better or worse way to spend money... That for everybody to decide what they prefer for themselves. For sure when I spend money on trip to visit the world, the money is also spent and I only get the memory. People that spend a lot on fancy restaurant and wines this is the same...

The good thing is that if you like real estate even if the price drop, once you finished to pay for it after many year it has still some significant residual value. That can't really be said for many consumers goods. So by basic capitalism principle buying real estates or shares and other things like that make you richer and is sure a better investment over time but that may be only beneficial for your grand children the time you and your child created your empire. And while it nice to know that your grandchilds will be quite wealthy, the diet you lived with is not always fun.

---

Last edited by Nicolas06; 09-07-2017 at 11:58 AM.

[Dan Rentea]

I'm sure that was a joke from a Canon camera owner. Pentax isn't much of a competitor for both Canon and Nikon. But both Canon and Nikon shoot at themselves, and I find that funny.

It is one of many. There are a lot of upset D750 owners and they kind of joke about Nikon products. Canon shooters have a lot of good words regarding D850. If mirrorless cameras didn't put too much pressure on Canon, this camera (D850) will put a lot of pressure on Canon. Let's face it, Nikon released a monster. It looks excelent on every aspect.

I'm waiting to see 5DsR Mark II. Rummors are saying that it will have 61mp. I don't know where Canon is going with this increase in mp... But I'm not in the market for a new camera for the next 4-5 years because a few hours ago my 5D Mark IV arrived at my door. So, I will just sit back and enjoy whatewer 2018 will bring from every manufacturer. I love to shoot with different cameras because it makes you think different due to their particularities and as long as I have a store to rent cameras/lenses, I will have a lot of fun next year.

[Belnan]

To me the K1 is more a D800 lite than D810. Well SR and pixel shift are on the side of K1, like the AF is on the side of D800. But only the D810 offer the extended dynamic range and go with a more modern sensor.

I'm not to sure about that, I think the sensors are pretty much the same except one was made with Pentax Juice and one Nikon Juice. The D810 has a marginal improvement in DR at base ISO which goes to 50 as opposed to base 100 of the K-1. The K-1 however offers improved signal to noise ratio which is much more practical than iso 50 in real world shooting. Since the Pentax K-1 is newer than the D810 it seems more likely that it has the newer sensor. The K-1 actually has better DR at every ISO except ISO 50.

The excellent IQ of the K-1 is exactly why some photogs are changing.

Pentax K-1 vs Nikon D810 vs Nikon D800

check out the DR measurements of the comparison

[Kunzite]

Agree but if you are honest the D850 is the ultimate DSLR. It has everything you could ever dream for stills without any weaknesses. It has incredibly high level of details with 45MP, the best dynamic range of the whole FF market, fast enough burst rate and the best AF system currently availe for ultimate performance for action/sports, the most advanced sensor except maybe the one Sony put on the A9... To me the D850 is clearly a game changer nobody before offered a camera like that.

I am always honest and yes, as I said on another thread, the D850 is the most impressive camera I won't buy. Still, the D800 was itself very impressive back in 2012 - with the highest resolution sensor bar medium format, and what was then Nikon's best AF. I have no doubt the D850 will sell very well, but the time for breaking sales records had passed IMO.

Uhh... did anyone measure its dynamic range?

---------- Post added 07-09-17 at 10:26 PM ----------

Source ? The K1 sold well for a few months. Current results as per Ricoh repport are terrible currently and I didn't see personally any increase in market share for Pentax be it from K1 or any other reason.

Do you have source that show a significant market share increase for Pentax since K1 was out ?

How about this thread? Read it's title.
The K-1 sold well "for a few months" and it's still selling. The "current results" looks terrible because you're comparing the peak of K-1's initial sales with a period of relative quietness... yet every K-1 sold counts in support of my statement.
And no matter how I look at it, a different camera - be it 24MP, postponed another year to offer a somewhat improved AF, much more expensive and with 4K video, etc. - would've been a worse choice. The K-1 is here, and it worked for them (and it works for me!)

[biz-engineer]

if you are honest the D850 is the ultimate DSLR

In Spring , the Sony A9 was the ultimate camera, with ultimate price and ultimate banding.
Until announced the D850 was nothing but rumors, the D810 was the kill of the hill, and Pentax K1 was also the king of the hill but the smaller hill.
In less than 4 weeks, the world changed, when D850 was announced ! In July , we could take photos with the K1 and we were super happy with the photos, but now, it's the end.

---------- Post added 07-09-17 at 21:39 ----------

The K-1 however offers improved signal to noise ratio which is much more practical than iso 50 in real world shooting.

That's about right, last year I shot the same photos together with a guy owning a D810, we could not tell the difference between images, except that camera exposure parameter values are different on K1 and D810 because D810 ISO is not quite the actual ISO. For autofocus, D810 is a bit better but still get a number of shots out of focus. Online it seems like a world of difference between Pentax and Nikon because online is cultivating a view of the mind on things , and that has nothing to do with the real world results.

[surfar]

The K1 sold well for a few months. Current results as per Ricoh repport are terrible

Can you point out exactly in the RI report that it says what you said?

[Nicolas06]

Can you point out exactly in the RI report that it says what you said?

Lastest financial reports they a very long thread about that already: Financial Results:FY2018/03 - PentaxForums.com

[Nicolas06]

In Spring , the Sony A9 was the ultimate camera, with ultimate price and ultimate banding.
Until announced the D850 was nothing but rumors, the D810 was the kill of the hill, and Pentax K1 was also the king of the hill but the smaller hill.
In less than 4 weeks, the world changed, when D850 was announced ! In July , we could take photos with the K1 and we were super happy with the photos, but now, it's the end.

---------- Post added 07-09-17 at 21:39 ----------


That's about right, last year I shot the same photos together with a guy owning a D810, we could not tell the difference between images, except that camera exposure parameter values are different on K1 and D810 because D810 ISO is not quite the actual ISO. For autofocus, D810 is a bit better but still get a number of shots out of focus. Online it seems like a world of difference between Pentax and Nikon because online is cultivating a view of the mind on things , and that has nothing to do with the real world results.

A way to see it. Before for Nikon it was D5 to me, surely not D810. D850 doesn't match the FPS of D5 sure, but the FPS now good enough. Camera like D810 or D5 were specialized. D850 has all it take (on paper sure) to do everything related to stills extremely well. Exactly like the D5 just before but the D850 does it for haft the price and with twice the resolution. The D810 was always limited due to its more basic AF and slow burst rate.

For Sony the A9 is nice but different. it is a specialized body like D5. Sure it is overall the best Sony but it can't replace the A7RII for example and the matching lenses do not exist anyway so it can't be used fully for ultimate sport/action performance... Not until Sony has released the missing lenses. Nikon doesn't have this problem.

[Rondec]

To me the K1 is more a D800 lite than D810. Well SR and pixel shift are on the side of K1, like the AF is on the side of D800. But only the D810 offer the extended dynamic range and go with a more modern sensor.

Interesting. If you look at DXO Mark measurements of dynamic range, you find that there is 0.2 EV difference at base iso dynamic range between the D810 and K-1, the K-1 actually has better dynamic range at every single iso from 100 on and has measured sports iso that is better than the D810. It is hard for me to say that the sensor in the D810 is significantly different than the one in the K-1 in terms of real world shooting regardless of the presence of iso 64 on the D810.

Clearly the K-1 does add a few features like pixel shift and astro tracer and GPS, but isn't quite as good at tracking auto focus.

The K-1 is a little slower frame rate (4.6 versus 5) and has a smaller buffer ( 17 versus 28 -- using lossless compressed 14 bit NEF files). These are the sorts of things that make me say that it is the D810 lite. If you are going to compare the K-1 to the D800, you will have to say that the K-1 is actually better in most respects -- better frame rate, buffer size, dynamic range, and additional specifications. In addition to which, the K-1 foregoes the AA filter which the D800 retains. So, if you want to say that the K-1 is a better specified D800, I guess I am OK with that assessment too.

[surfar]

Lastest financial reports

Yes, theres a thread....but i'd like you to show WHERE in that report it says what you said?

[Nicolas06]

Interesting. If you look at DXO Mark measurements of dynamic range, you find that there is 0.2 EV difference at base iso dynamic range between the D810 and K-1, the K-1 actually has better dynamic range at every single iso from 100 on and has measured sports iso that is better than the D810. It is hard for me to say that the sensor in the D810 is significantly different than the one in the K-1 in terms of real world shooting regardless of the presence of iso 64 on the D810.

Clearly the K-1 does add a few features like pixel shift and astro tracer and GPS, but isn't quite as good at tracking auto focus.

The K-1 is a little slower frame rate (4.6 versus 5) and has a smaller buffer ( 17 versus 28 -- using lossless compressed 14 bit NEF files). These are the sorts of things that make me say that it is the D810 lite. If you are going to compare the K-1 to the D800, you will have to say that the K-1 is actually better in most respects -- better frame rate, buffer size, dynamic range, and additional specifications. In addition to which, the K-1 foregoes the AA filter which the D800 retains. So, if you want to say that the K-1 is a better specified D800, I guess I am OK with that assessment too.

Checking again it is true there isn't much difference. The K1 is in middle between D800 and D810. As I would expect to shot at base iso in most cases, I would still think the D810 as the one with the best dynamic range. For most of the day, iso 64 isn't an issue.

I know that it appear stupid and maybe it is useless for most shots (like an APSC is anyway enough for most shots and 24MP is also enough), but this lower base iso require a quite different sensor. The capacity of each photosite is much greater and that quite costly to make. That's why Pentax didn't go for it. Like they didn't go for BSI for the same kind of reason.

Would be nice to get iso 10 or better iso 1 sensor to remove the need for any ND filter and get single shot HDR, but this isn't easy to make and so likely not worth it with today technology.

[Rondec]

Checking again it is true there isn't much difference. The K1 is in middle between D800 and D810. As I would expect to shot at base iso in most cases, I would still think the D810 as the one with the best dynamic range. For most of the day, iso 64 isn't an issue.

I know that it appear stupid and maybe it is useless for most shots (like an APSC is anyway enough for most shots and 24MP is also enough), but this lower base iso require a quite different sensor. The capacity of each photosite is much greater and that quite costly to make. That's why Pentax didn't go for it. Like they didn't go for BSI for the same kind of reason.

Would be nice to get iso 10 or better iso 1 sensor to remove the need for any ND filter and get single shot HDR, but this isn't easy to make and so likely not worth it with today technology.

It is tough for me to see a situation where you could use iso 64 and not use pixel shift. If the point is to get better dynamic range, then you don't get much -- not enough to really impact a final image. If the whole point is to get a longer exposure without having to stop your aperture to the point that diffraction sets in then you are probably better off using an ND filter.

Regardless, I still think the K-1 meets criteria to be D810 lite. DXO Mark gives sensor scores to them both of 96 and 97 and state that a difference of less than 5 points is unlikely to be seen in real world shooting. To me that says that they are awfully close in terms of image quality, assuming similar quality glass.

[monochrome]

read my words, because i cant read yours since its always the same nay sayin

words:

ignore,
list

LOL

Not a bad idea. Thanks!

Preemptive de-viewing invoked.

[camyum]

To keep it simple: Not looking at the AF, i would say the K-1 is way better than either D800 or D810.
Not only when it comes to dynamic range but also when talking _DETAILS

I recently read the following article:
(Scroll down to Details Comparison)
Fuji’s X-Trans sensor sucks? (Part 1 – Moiré and Details) – Adrian Evans Photography

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

It is tough for me to see a situation where you could use iso 64 and not use pixel shift

I would love to have iso 64 on my D80o and is one of my biggest complaints.

Many times in direct sunlight for moving subjects when panning to exaggerate motion I am often left shooting f/11-f22 to keep the shutter speed below 1/320 and doing so I always left with the risk of blowing out any of the chrome highlights found in the photograph. It would be nice to use a DOF that is not f/16-f/22 as this adds to the blurring of the OOF areas or at the very least some more headroom for chrome highlights is always welcome.

A lot of my handheld wildlife and marco work again I would love having the extra latitude of iso 64, this becomes even more evident when any cropping is needed in HDR light and any pushing is needed.