[surfar]

the 645z just fall into Pentax's lap

Its good they took advantage when they did but theres real competition coming in that sector quite soon.

[biz-engineer]

With all the positive comments, Pentax execs might file for sick leave for the duration of CP+ to avoid confrontation with angry customers.

[Rico]

Release dates, according to Amazon. These may be pre-sale dates but I know for sure the 150-450 was available in August 2015 because I played with one on my trip to B&H in that month.

150-450: February 2, 2015
24-70: September 24, 2015
15-30: February 17, 2016
28-105: February 17, 2016

K-1: early May 2016

The 70-200 I can't be sure of; it was supposed to come out in 2015 but it got delayed a few times. I think it actually was available for purchase before the K-1, however.

So, no, I'm not wrong. All of these lenses were either released at the same time as or before the K-1. Reading is tech.... "since the K-1 came out, we've gotten no new lenses."

They still released 5 new lenses for the K-1. It's irrelevant when they were released.

Besides what more does one need than the FA LTD's in their bag?

[clackers]

They still released 5 new lenses for the K-1. It's irrelevant when they were released.

Besides what more does one need than the FA LTD's in their bag?

Yep, modern DFAs cover every focal length from 15mm to 450mm.

And there are K-mount lenses of all kinds going back to 1975, we love the way you can just put 'em on and use 'em straight away. In particular, I enjoy the K series and the FA Limiteds.

I'm sure the new DFA primes will be high quality, high price, bulky and worth the wait, but let's be honest ... there's something badly wrong with our technique and subject ideas if we can't take great photos right now without them.

---

Last edited by clackers; 02-15-2018 at 06:15 PM.

[Rico]

Yep, modern DFAs cover every focal length from 15mm to 450mm.

And there are K-mount lenses of all kinds going back to 1975, we love the way you can just put 'em on and use 'em straight away. In particular, I enjoy the K series and the FA Limiteds.

I'm sure the new DFA primes will be high quality, high price, bulky and worth the wait, but let's be honest ... there's something badly wrong with our technique and subject ideas if we can't take great photos right now without them.

Totally agree Clackers.

I enjoy using the A series lenses. They don't drain any power.

[1434]

That's a long time to realize that Pentax isn't the Canikon express,

Oh, I think we're all quite aware, pal.

[Fenwoodian]

Seriously, it is a one hundred dollar update (from what I've read). .

This looks like it might be $100 for a "FIRMWARE UPGRADE". I assume they're tweaking the ISO and Pixel Shift through a firmware update. Other manufacturers provide firmware updates for free. If the pixel shift upgrade is via a firmware upgrade, and Pentax does not provide it free to current K1 owners it will be a shame.

I don't expect the pixel shift upgrade to amount to much. My first Pentax purchase was a new K3ii right when it came out. Bought it for just one reason - pixel shift. I was quite disappointed when I discovered that pixel shift doesn't work in the wind. Then they advertised their new K1 camera as having upgraded pixel shift (PS) with a motion compensating feature. As we all know, the K1 is no better at shooting PS images in the wind than was the K3ii.

---

Last edited by Fenwoodian; 02-15-2018 at 11:03 PM.

[kenspo]

So much whining NO ONE of you know 100% what they have done with this camera yet! Just sayin'...Its an improvement of the first edition, not a new camera all over.


Im looking forward to continue shooting the biggest rockstars with it

[Fenwoodian]

So much whining NO ONE of you know 100% what they have done with this camera yet! Just sayin'...Its an improvement of the first edition, not a new camera all over.


Im looking forward to continue shooting the biggest rockstars with it

Kenspo, will the improved pixel shift in the new K1 camera be good enough for you to use pixel shift when shooting your "moving/jumping" rockstars?

[kenspo]

Kenspo, will the improved pixel shift in the new K1 camera be good enough for you to use pixel shift when shooting your "moving/jumping" rockstars?

Wont know before I've tested it But would surprise me a lot if so!

[Fenwoodian]

Wont know before I've tested it But would surprise me a lot if so!

Kenspo, thank you for your prompt and candid answer!


If by adding 5-Axis In-Body Shake Reduction to pixel shift (like the rumors claim) the new K1 is able to shoot moving objects in the pixel shift mode (while handholding the camera) it would be revolutionary! This would be a unique pixel shift capability that only Pentax would have. Many photographers would be very excited about the new K1 camera if it could do that.

[redpit]

The image quality of the K-1 is quite good.

Sorry my friend but I've never read any more despicable characterization about the K-1 IQ! After that I didn't bother to read your other comments as we are living in two totally different worlds.

From pure curiosity though I would like you to indicate me cameras of any brand that have good, very good and excellent IQ. Maybe I'm living on the dark side and have never seen the light up to now...

[Sandy Hancock]

Kenspo, will the improved pixel shift in the new K1 camera be good enough for you to use pixel shift when shooting your "moving/jumping" rockstars?

Why would anyone think that is even possible?

[joergens.mi]

This looks like it might be $100 for a "FIRMWARE UPGRADE". I assume they're tweaking the ISO and Pixel Shift through a firmware update. Other manufacturers provide firmware updates for free. If the pixel shift upgrade is via a firmware upgrade, and Pentax does not provide it free to current K1 owners it will be a shame.

It's more than a simple firmware update, because they changed the mainboard, they added the Accellerator Unit which is used in the KP.

The Framerate is "restricted" by the used Sensor, which can't deliver "only" 5 frames/sec in FF mode, therefore a faster shutter wouldn't help. The K1 shutter itself is faster because there are 6.4 f/sec in apsc mode.

This is nothing more than a mid life time update of the camera, the reason for that may be obsolescence of some electronic Parts, a new release of the motherboard. Maybe that the additional processor wasn't in the actual one, because of HW-Isuuses which are solved now (after testing in the KP). (By other brands this would have given a new name)

[Class A]

incorporating the noise reduction from the K-70/KP is very good and did require a hardware upgrade.

What is your insider knowledge on this?

What hardware was upgraded?

I understand that the same Sony sensor is used, which means that nominal noise performance will be identical. Modern Sony sensors include the A/D stage and there is nothing (not even ultra-stable analogue voltage supply) a camera manufacturer can do to influence the nominal sensor noise.

It is, of course, possible and customary to bake RAW data in order to eliminate noise, trying to do it in a manner to be not called out by DxOmark (who measure unnatural correlation in order to uncover noise reduction on RAW data which ultimately decreases image detail as well).

In my view, RAW data should not be manipulated and I don't see the point in providing any new/changed processing of RAW data. Let's not even consider talking about JPEGs for a camera of the calibre of the K-1. High ISO numbers like 819,200 don't mean anything, really as IQ at that level will be abysmal. If quoting such numbers helps selling cameras, that's fine by me, but any serious photographer will not be impressed by a change from 204,800 to 819,200, given that the sensor is (apparently) unchanged.

I have no idea what the new "Pixel Shift Resolution (SR II)" is about, but apparently it does not provide super resolution, as there are no additional options mentioned in the specs. Was there anything wrong about the Pixel Shift technology in the K-1?

Anyhow, I'm happy if a new model gets Ricoh some exposure again, but it would have been nice if some modest changes (say improved USB/card speed) had created more incentive for existing K-1 users to upgrade.

N.B., I keep hearing the argument that the K-5 II upgrades were minor/cosmetic as well. That's absolutely not true. The K-5 had a flawed AF system that was sensitive to colour shifts. The K-5 II fixed that with an entirely new AF design. The K-5 defect did not manifest itself in every AF situation, but nevertheless fixing its inherent disadvantage required a major development and the K-5 II (+ K-5 IIs) were all but practically unchanged versions of their predecessor.