[Rondec]

A little better? This entire post is madness. The D750 has a full stop better DR at lowest ISO (50 vs 100) and maintains that advantage right through the available ISO range. That's not a trivial difference at all. The K1 barely bests the D750 at lower ISOs and is identical after ISO1600.

Their "sports" measure is almost a stop and a half better. That's the difference between a K3ii and a K10D. Not at all trivial. The D750 is only fractionally worse than the K1.

There's no comparison between a K3ii and a D750 - exactly as you'd expect when putting a 24mp APS-C against a 24mp FF.

You are incorrect. The D750 has max dynamic range of 14.5 and the K-1 of 14.6 (minimal difference to me), sports iso comparison between D750 and K-1 shows D750 at 2956 and K-1 at 3280 (once again not a big difference), and the K-1 has 0.6 bits more color depth. I'm not sure what webiste you were looking at because DXO Mark shows them being roughly the same throughout -- gives K-1 3 point victory of the D750 (this does not take into account differences in resolution between the two cameras).

Anyway, I think I would check which cameras you compared because my guess is you picked the wrong one in the camera comparison screens.

[AyeYo]

You are incorrect. The D750 has max dynamic range of 14.5 and the K-1 of 14.6 (minimal difference to me), sports iso comparison between D750 and K-1 shows D750 at 2956 and K-1 at 3280 (once again not a big difference), and the K-1 has 0.6 bits more color depth. I'm not sure what webiste you were looking at because DXO Mark shows them being roughly the same throughout -- gives K-1 3 point victory of the D750 (this does not take into account differences in resolution between the two cameras).

Anyway, I think I would check which cameras you compared because my guess is you picked the wrong one in the camera comparison screens.

His entire post was comparing the D750 to the K3ii, not the K1, on the premise that the the D750 is

little better than a K-3

That's an absurd statement.

In reality, the K1 is a little better than the D750. The D750 is leaps and bounds better than the K3.

[MMVIII]

His entire post was comparing the D750 to the K3ii, not the K1, on the premise that the the D750 is



That's an absurd statement.

In reality, the K1 is a little better than the D750. The D750 is leaps and bounds better than the K3.

Well, the KP has not been tested yet by DXO, but if I look at the images at dpr, I have the impression it holds its ground against the FF. At least I don't see such a difference as I would have expected. In this case this generation of APS-C seems to be quite close to the 750-generation FF. Maybe the NR has reduced some detail, but the noise is no issue.
Comparison tool at dpr, RAW, 6400 ISO

[WillWeaverRVA]

This is absolutely disappointing. It doesn't even have native KAF4 lens support (the original K-1 needed a firmware update for this)! I understand this is a FF camera at a low price point, but as a sports photographer I would probably even take a Nikon D610 over this if I had the money.

[reh321]

This is absolutely disappointing. It doesn't even have native KAF4 lens support (the original K-1 needed a firmware update for this)! I understand this is a FF camera at a low price point, but as a sports photographer I would probably even take a Nikon D610 over this if I had the money.

That is absolutely false. The leaked specs have two lines:

Lens mount: KAF2

Compatible lens: KAF4, KAF3, KAF2, KAF, KA

[AyeYo]

Well, the KP has not been tested yet by DXO, but if I look at the images at dpr, I have the impression it holds its ground against the FF. At least I don't see such a difference as I would have expected. In this case this generation of APS-C seems to be quite close to the 750-generation FF. Maybe the NR has reduced some detail, but the noise is no issue.
Comparison tool at dpr, RAW, 6400 ISO

The KP has lower noise at high ISO, likely due to baking of the RAW files and not any hardware advancement that actually results in less noise. That's not the same thing as better low-light performance through increased DR and increased tonality in low light, which is where a 24mp FF like the D750 is going to excel with lower pixel density (hence larger pixels). High ISO performance is nice, but if you're shooting landscapes (which is supposedly Pentax's target market), then it's not terribly relevant and dynamic range matters a lot more.

[MMVIII]

The KP has lower noise at high ISO, likely due to baking of the RAW files and not any hardware advancement that actually results in less noise. That's not the same thing as better low-light performance through increased DR and increased tonality in low light, which is where a 24mp FF like the D750 is going to excel with lower pixel density (hence larger pixels). High ISO performance is nice, but if you're shooting landscapes (which is supposedly Pentax's target market), then it's not terribly relevant and dynamic range matters a lot more.

Well, and despite the lower pixel density it does score lower than the K1. On paper, probably not relevant in 99% of all cases. As the difference (to be determined by tests) to the KP will also not be visible most of the time.
And still, if you want to compare it for the landscape target market then KP is coming even closer, there are advantages with pixel shift.
I think this is very remarkable and tells a lot about maturity of this sensor generation and processing pipelines of cameras of this generation.

For illustration I will do, what I normally don't value very high, but since we are talking about numbers, here are the only one available to me which compare the KP's sensor, and maybe shows what the accellerator is capable of:

See Attachment.

I compiled this from German Colorfoto 2017/12, which tested the RAW quality of some cameras (with different LR settings, but this is not the topic).
The numbers derived shov the calculated DR at different ISO in aperture values. The derived resolution of the images at ISO 100 and 1600 is in column 2 and 3. Additionally there are values for a Dead-Leaves cross (contrast), Noise, Dynamic, Color Accuracy, in both columns also for ISO 100 and 1600.

Anyhow. The KP does a good job, especially at higher ISO, where also the DR holds well. The Canons seem to have most limited sensors there.
According to the D750, I wuld assume it would have held well against that, as between the D850 (here with 10,4) DXO measures scores of 14,8 EVs and the D750 14,5 EVs.

Disclaimer: this is all useless in the end, I agree with everyone that going out and taking pictures is the only way to use a camera properly.

Attached Images

 

---

Last edited by MMVIII; 02-14-2018 at 03:27 PM. Reason: Added data

[normhead]

The selling point of the K3ii over the D750 is that it's half the price (when the D750 isn't on sale for $1500) - so performance per dollar it might beat it, but in absolutely image quality, not even close.

At high ISO for sure, at 100 ISO they are very similar. At 100 ISO a even one inch sensor Lumix DZ 1000 competes with a D750.

[AyeYo]

At high ISO for sure, at 100 ISO they are very similar. At 100 ISO a even one inch sensor Lumix DZ 1000 competes with a D750.

At what??

Even an M43 GH5 has a 1.5 stops lower DR at ISO100. An RX100iii with a 1" sensor has a over two full stops less DR at ISO100 and 2.5 stops lower high ISO performance.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

The KP has lower noise at high ISO, likely due to baking of the RAW files

It is more than likely the lower noise found in the KP files have more to do with the improvements in sensor evolution. 2017 and 2018 we are seeing these advancements trickling down to other sensors from Sony

[reh321]

High ISO performance is nice, but if you're shooting landscapes (which is supposedly Pentax's target market), then it's not terribly relevant and dynamic range matters a lot more.

To you perhaps,to me NO!

At another photo forum I was told by someone that he wouldn't even consider Pentax because of all the negative talk he hears here.

[jatrax]

At another photo forum I was told by someone that he wouldn't even consider Pentax because of all the negative talk he hears here.

Post of the year?

Astonishingly sad when the people who use a brand spend more time trashing it than supporting it. Why would anyone doing research ever buy something where the fans do nothing but trash it.

[surfar]

Why would anyone doing research ever buy something where the fans do nothing but trash it.

Its the same on a few of the "other" brands forums...just human nature.Some lottery winners complain the prize wasnt enough!

[Kunzite]

The same? There's more doom&gloom here than on the Samsung forums.

[JPT]

Just wait to see what happens when it transpires that Ricoh's Other CP+ announcement is the Pentax KP Limited Wooden Grip edition. There will be a lot of toys thrown out of prams then.