Pentax K-1 Mark II DSLR camera detailed specifications leaked

Racer X 69 · 02-17-2018, 08:33 AM - **1 Like**

All this fuss about the impending release of the new full frame camera and not one post about low ISO. Indeed, the spec shows 100 as the lowest you can go.

What happened to 80, like the K5 has?

And why can't we get even lower, say 50.

Or 25.

Sharpness gets better when the speed gets lower.

Colors get better.

Tonality.

To me, the lower the ISO in the images I make with my cameras, the better the photo overall.

I want a camera that has a lower ISO base setting.

And I don't mind longer exposure times as a result. That's what tripods are for.

ogl · 02-17-2018, 08:47 AM

Real ISO50 or 64 are really good...I hope we can see someday in any camera... I can't dream about ISO25. But 50 or 64 are really good.

SimplyCreativePhotography · 02-17-2018, 08:55 AM

So I've been paying attention to this with some interest. I'm a part-time stock photographer and also enjoy photography for... well for the pure joy of it. My Pentax journey started with a Cosina film camera in 1983 that the had the selling feature of utilizing a Pentax K-mount. Later upgraded to an MZ-7. When I finally made the jump to digital, it just made sense to buy the K10D since I already had some lenses. My stock hobby started to pay for new gear so I upgraded as new models came out. First the K20D, then the K-7 (because I had hoped for more on the video side of things, I'm still waiting...) and finally a K-5.

I've been relatively happy with the K-5 (yes better AF would be nice but it was a much better camera in my opinion than the K-7) but as the stock photography market became saturated and less profitable, I couldn't quite justify the K-3. When the K-1 was announced thought I'd wait until it matured a bit. I assumed Pentax would come out with a second version that would improve on the initial FF, to give Pentaxians a reason to upgrade rather than simply finally having a FF.

So my question: I know a K1-II will be an improvement. I'm curious from existing K-1 users who also have had a K-5, what are the core enhancements that I might expect that will make a hands-on difference?

beholder3 · 02-17-2018, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

To me, the lower the ISO in the images I make with my cameras, the better the photo overall.

Sadly that is not the case at very low ISO.

1) Manufacturers lie about ISO values. Basically everyone lies about them much more than Pentax. Check this at DxO: Sony A7R III vs Sony a9 vs Pentax K-1
2) The gain by even lower ISO values for example in DR is questionable, even if some number sites/blogs want to makes us believe differently.
Look at the images with your own eyes: Image comparison: Digital Photography Review. They K-1 ISO 100 should look worse than the ISO 64 images. Does it? I personally would not say so.

biz-engineer · 02-17-2018, 08:57 AM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

And why can't we get even lower, say 50.

Because base ISO come with the sensor+filters and can't be changed in software?

ogl · 02-17-2018, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by biz-engineer

Because base ISO come with the sensor+filters and can't be changed in software?

It could be changed by software, but it's not real ISO.
Check DXO data. D850, for example.

Nikon D850 : Measurements - DxOMark

We can see that ISO64 is not software's, it's real sensor ISO = ISO44 measured in reality

BUT....ISO32 is the same ISO44. It's software's ISO.

ogl · 02-17-2018, 09:34 AM

Other story -
Nikon D800E : Measurements - DxOMark

Nikon D800E's ISO50 is not real. It's the same manufacturer ISO100 (measured as ISO73).

biz-engineer · 02-17-2018, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by ogl

We can see that ISO64 is not software's, it's real sensor ISO = ISO44 measured in reality

If not software, lower ISO comes from sensor then? How can K1 have lower than 100 ISO if not changed by software and the sensor is the same as K1?

---------- Post added 17-02-18 at 17:37 ----------

Originally posted by beholder3

Look at the images with your own eyes: Image comparison: Digital Photography Review.

If DR is the best at ISO 100, why some people want ISO lower than 100 ?

ogl · 02-17-2018, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

All this fuss about the impending release of the new full frame camera and not one post about low ISO. Indeed, the spec shows 100 as the lowest you can go.

What happened to 80, like the K5 has?

.

Good news

Nikon D850 has real ISO64 (measured ISO44) and D810 (measured as ISO47)

Winder · 02-17-2018, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Racer X 69

All this fuss about the impending release of the new full frame camera and not one post about low ISO. Indeed, the spec shows 100 as the lowest you can go.
What happened to 80, like the K5 has?
And why can't we get even lower, say 50.
Or 25.
Sharpness gets better when the speed gets lower.
Colors get better.
Tonality.
to me, the lower the ISO in the images I make with my cameras, the better the photo overall.
I want a camera that has a lower ISO base setting.
And I don't mind longer exposure times as a result. That's what tripods are for.

Digital sensors are not like film. Sensors don't have variable sensitivity. You have a base ISO and everything else done by simply applying more digital gain to an image to achieve a defined brightness level.

ISO 12232:2006
The Recommended Exposure Index (REI) technique, new in the 2006 version of the standard, allows the manufacturer to specify a camera model’s EI choices arbitrarily . The choices are based solely on the manufacturer’s opinion of what EI values produce well-exposed sRGB images at the various sensor sensitivity settings. This is the only technique available under the standard for output formats that are not in the sRGB color space. This is also the only technique available under the standard when multi-zone metering (also called pattern metering) is used.

This is why ISO varies from manufacturer to manufacturer.

ogl · 02-17-2018, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by biz-engineer

If not software, lower ISO comes from sensor then? How can K1 have lower than 100 ISO if not changed by software and the sensor is the same as K1?[COLOR="Silver"]

No way and no any sense. The sensor must be ordered and produce under technical task of camera maker.
If Ricoh orders sensor with ISO50, Sony produce it. I think.

biz-engineer · 02-17-2018, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Nikon D850 has real ISO64

Nikon is better.

ogl · 02-17-2018, 09:51 AM

Originally posted by Winder

Digital sensors are not like film. Sensors don't have variable sensitivity. You have a base ISO and everything else done by simply applying more digital gain to an image to achieve a defined brightness level.

Yes! But ISO64 is real in Nikon's cameras.

ogl · 02-17-2018, 09:52 AM

Originally posted by biz-engineer

Nikon is better.

It means Nikon ordered such sensor for high-end cameras.

biz-engineer · 02-17-2018, 09:55 AM

Originally posted by ogl

It means Nikon ordered such sensor for high-end cameras.

But if we add a 1 stop ND filter in front of the lens, at ISO100 we get shutter speed twice as long, so it's like having ISO50?

02-17-2018, 09:31 AM	#291
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by biz-engineer Because base ISO come with the sensor+filters and can't be changed in software? It could be changed by software, but it's not real ISO. Check DXO data. D850, for example. Nikon D850 : Measurements - DxOMark We can see that ISO64 is not software's, it's real sensor ISO = ISO44 measured in reality BUT....ISO32 is the same ISO44. It's software's ISO. Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ricoh Theta SC camera specifications leaked online（No 4K）	OoKU	Pentax News and Rumors	20	10-23-2016 11:45 AM
Pentax K-70 Specifications Leaked	PF Staff	Homepage & Official Pentax News	0	06-06-2016 12:30 PM
Pentax K3 ii vs Canon 5D mark ii	mogge	Welcomes and Introductions	49	03-27-2016 02:39 AM
Pentax KS-1 Specifications Leaked	Adam	Homepage & Official Pentax News	0	08-21-2014 11:16 PM

02-17-2018, 08:33 AM - 1 Like	#286
Racer X 69 Moderator Man With A Camera Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: The Great Pacific Northwet, in the Land Between Canada and Mexico Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,073	All this fuss about the impending release of the new full frame camera and not one post about low ISO. Indeed, the spec shows 100 as the lowest you can go. What happened to 80, like the K5 has? And why can't we get even lower, say 50. Or 25. Sharpness gets better when the speed gets lower. Colors get better. Tonality. To me, the lower the ISO in the images I make with my cameras, the better the photo overall. I want a camera that has a lower ISO base setting. And I don't mind longer exposure times as a result. That's what tripods are for.

02-17-2018, 08:47 AM	#287
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Real ISO50 or 64 are really good...I hope we can see someday in any camera... I can't dream about ISO25. But 50 or 64 are really good.

02-17-2018, 08:55 AM	#288
SimplyCreativePhotography Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Drayton, Ontario, Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 264	So I've been paying attention to this with some interest. I'm a part-time stock photographer and also enjoy photography for... well for the pure joy of it. My Pentax journey started with a Cosina film camera in 1983 that the had the selling feature of utilizing a Pentax K-mount. Later upgraded to an MZ-7. When I finally made the jump to digital, it just made sense to buy the K10D since I already had some lenses. My stock hobby started to pay for new gear so I upgraded as new models came out. First the K20D, then the K-7 (because I had hoped for more on the video side of things, I'm still waiting...) and finally a K-5. I've been relatively happy with the K-5 (yes better AF would be nice but it was a much better camera in my opinion than the K-7) but as the stock photography market became saturated and less profitable, I couldn't quite justify the K-3. When the K-1 was announced thought I'd wait until it matured a bit. I assumed Pentax would come out with a second version that would improve on the initial FF, to give Pentaxians a reason to upgrade rather than simply finally having a FF. So my question: I know a K1-II will be an improvement. I'm curious from existing K-1 users who also have had a K-5, what are the core enhancements that I might expect that will make a hands-on difference?

02-17-2018, 08:56 AM	#289
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112	Originally posted by Racer X 69 To me, the lower the ISO in the images I make with my cameras, the better the photo overall. Sadly that is not the case at very low ISO. 1) Manufacturers lie about ISO values. Basically everyone lies about them much more than Pentax. Check this at DxO: Sony A7R III vs Sony a9 vs Pentax K-1 2) The gain by even lower ISO values for example in DR is questionable, even if some number sites/blogs want to makes us believe differently. Look at the images with your own eyes: Image comparison: Digital Photography Review. They K-1 ISO 100 should look worse than the ISO 64 images. Does it? I personally would not say so.

02-17-2018, 08:57 AM	#290
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,237	Originally posted by Racer X 69 And why can't we get even lower, say 50. Because base ISO come with the sensor+filters and can't be changed in software?

02-17-2018, 09:34 AM	#292
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Other story - Nikon D800E : Measurements - DxOMark Nikon D800E's ISO50 is not real. It's the same manufacturer ISO100 (measured as ISO73).

02-17-2018, 09:35 AM	#293
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,237	Originally posted by ogl We can see that ISO64 is not software's, it's real sensor ISO = ISO44 measured in reality If not software, lower ISO comes from sensor then? How can K1 have lower than 100 ISO if not changed by software and the sensor is the same as K1? ---------- Post added 17-02-18 at 17:37 ---------- Originally posted by beholder3 Look at the images with your own eyes: Image comparison: Digital Photography Review. If DR is the best at ISO 100, why some people want ISO lower than 100 ?

02-17-2018, 09:45 AM	#294
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Racer X 69 All this fuss about the impending release of the new full frame camera and not one post about low ISO. Indeed, the spec shows 100 as the lowest you can go. What happened to 80, like the K5 has? . Good news Nikon D850 has real ISO64 (measured ISO44) and D810 (measured as ISO47)

02-17-2018, 09:49 AM	#295
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by Racer X 69 All this fuss about the impending release of the new full frame camera and not one post about low ISO. Indeed, the spec shows 100 as the lowest you can go. What happened to 80, like the K5 has? And why can't we get even lower, say 50. Or 25. Sharpness gets better when the speed gets lower. Colors get better. Tonality. to me, the lower the ISO in the images I make with my cameras, the better the photo overall. I want a camera that has a lower ISO base setting. And I don't mind longer exposure times as a result. That's what tripods are for. Digital sensors are not like film. Sensors don't have variable sensitivity. You have a base ISO and everything else done by simply applying more digital gain to an image to achieve a defined brightness level. ISO 12232:2006 The Recommended Exposure Index (REI) technique, new in the 2006 version of the standard, allows the manufacturer to specify a camera model’s EI choices arbitrarily . The choices are based solely on the manufacturer’s opinion of what EI values produce well-exposed sRGB images at the various sensor sensitivity settings. This is the only technique available under the standard for output formats that are not in the sRGB color space. This is also the only technique available under the standard when multi-zone metering (also called pattern metering) is used. This is why ISO varies from manufacturer to manufacturer.

02-17-2018, 09:49 AM	#296
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by biz-engineer If not software, lower ISO comes from sensor then? How can K1 have lower than 100 ISO if not changed by software and the sensor is the same as K1?[COLOR="Silver"] No way and no any sense. The sensor must be ordered and produce under technical task of camera maker. If Ricoh orders sensor with ISO50, Sony produce it. I think.

02-17-2018, 09:51 AM	#297
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,237	Originally posted by ogl Nikon D850 has real ISO64 Nikon is better.

02-17-2018, 09:51 AM	#298
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Winder Digital sensors are not like film. Sensors don't have variable sensitivity. You have a base ISO and everything else done by simply applying more digital gain to an image to achieve a defined brightness level. Yes! But ISO64 is real in Nikon's cameras.

02-17-2018, 09:52 AM	#299
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by biz-engineer Nikon is better. It means Nikon ordered such sensor for high-end cameras.

02-17-2018, 09:55 AM	#300
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,237	Originally posted by ogl It means Nikon ordered such sensor for high-end cameras. But if we add a 1 stop ND filter in front of the lens, at ISO100 we get shutter speed twice as long, so it's like having ISO50?