[swanlefitte]

According to Kenspo who switched to the 5div for needed features, "
I had to take a loss in high ISO and DR to have it easier totally. So it wasn't an easy choice. "
Photophique says, "Obviously, image quality is every photographer’s primary consideration when choosing a camera. "
How do you say features are bragging rights but image quality isn't highest priority? I'm lost. For those who want image quality the k1ii is at the top.

[Frater]

I also see that DPR attempt to be as fair and balanced as at all possible.

It isn't so that the "pros" summary column of the K-1 II was totally empty. They made sure that this is populated to a reasonable amount which balances the "cons" column.

They leave it to each individual to have a closer look, whether the personal heavy-weight arguments sit in the pros or in the cons column.

So I still don't get, why DPR is accused of being biased. They just tell you what needs to be highlighted, and let you enough room for your own conclusions.

And if someone clicks on the affiliated link to purchase this K-1 II, DPR gets the same amount of margin as if someone clicked on a Sony link. Neither to DPR nor Amazon, the purchase decision would make any difference on their earnings.

[clackers]

It is actually the forum members and the public, which generate income for DPR. By clicking affiliated Amazon links. Which then automatically generates a small margin for DPR. Same as almost every Youtube camera gear vlog gets its income.

This is why DPR is so keen on providing good content and state-of-art reviews, and why they evolve getting better continually. They want their funders, the public people, to visit them for decision making. THEY trigger the income. Amazon is totally passive with their links. No clicking users, no income.

Frater, I don't think you understand the industry.

You seem to be unaware across all three of your posts that Amazon owns DPR.

It has done for eleven years, not eleven months. You should know this.

The DPR editors are all Jeff Bezos' employees.

DPR is just a glorified Amazon catalogue.

It is aimed at triggering purchases. That is its raison d'etre, not objective reviews, not journalism, not science.

[Frater]

According to Kenspo who switched to the 5div for needed features, "
I had to take a loss in high ISO and DR to have it easier totally. So it wasn't an easy choice. "
Photophique says, "Obviously, image quality is every photographer’s primary consideration when choosing a camera. "
How do you say features are bragging rights but image quality isn't highest priority? I'm lost. For those who want image quality the k1ii is at the top.

For Sensor quality, the K-1 II with its aging sensor (same as Nikon D800) starts to fall behind.
Others moved on (Nikon, Sony) with advanced sensor technology, mainly
- BSI back side illumination
- dual gain pixel amplifiers
which would put such Nikon and Sony cameras at the top, with regards to image quality.


For professionals like Kenspo (not a landscape hobbyist), image quality is mainly achieved by three top-prio items:
- auto focus
- auto focus
- auto focus
and maybe frame rate of course, and good and reliable lenses (where Tamron got really good in the past years admittedly, which is the reason why the two most important Pentax K-1 lenses are relabeled older Tamron zooms).

So it shouldn't suprise that he gave up on pentax, should it? It would be just because of image quality for his subject domain (stage photography).

---

Last edited by Frater; 11-26-2018 at 04:45 PM.

[reh321]

For Sensor quality, the K-1 II with its aging sensor (same as Nikon D800) starts to fall behind.
Others moved on (Nikon, Sony) with advanced sensor technology, mainly
- BSI back side illumination
- dual gain pixel amplifiers
which would put such Nikon and Sony cameras at the top, with regards to image quality.

For professionals like Kenspo (not a landscape hobbyist), image quality is mainly achieved by three top-prio items:
- auto focus
- auto focus
- auto focus
and maybe frame rate of course, and good and reliable lenses (where Tamron got really good in the past years admittedly, which is the reason why the two most important Pentax K-1 lenses are relabeled older Tamron zooms).

So it shouldn't suprise that he gave up on pentax, should it? It would be just because of image quality for his subject domain (stage photography).

Kenspo went from Pentax to Canon.
I hope you didn't go from Pentax to Nikon on the expectation that you were getting better quality at the same price.

Camera Database - DxOMark

But if you did, @Adam has a Nikon Forum where you would be more comfortable.

[Frater]

Amazon owns DPR [...] for eleven years, not eleven months

But then, this should put all your "everyone hates Pentax there" conspiration theory to an end.

Because I'm pretty sure, that during the past eleven years, there were Pentax cameras which got a "highly recommended" from them

---------- Post added 27-11-18 at 01:46 ----------

Kenspo went from Pentax to Canon.

Interesting. Because when Kenspo was financially independent, spending his own money (rather than being bribed with free access to Pentax hardware), he had elected Nikon as the system best suitable for his type of Photography.

I'm not a stage photographer, but obviously there must be something special to Canon for that domain. My best guess: Canon sensors are said to be tolerant against clipping highlights, which would be something VERY useful for image quality at stage photography obvously. But I'm speculating. Dynamic range is relatively unimportant, because black stays black in the final image. You would never want to brighten up blacks to gray, for example.

The Canon autofocus is surely state of art, but the Nikon would be either. So this is probably a tie.

Does he use professional flash? Another good reason for having to leave Pentax, but probably a tie between Canon and Nikon.

So let it be image quality (of highlights) and sharpness (of best autofocus in this tricky stage situations) which drove him to Canon, and he may have been fallen in love with overall handling, controls, menus, color science, white balance reliability, or whatever?

[swanlefitte]

Or just buffer size and fps of canon was the reason as he said.

Edit and video so he didn't need 2 systems.

[clackers]

But then, this should put all your "everyone hates Pentax there" conspiration theory to an end.

Well, I didn't say that in this thread, but I'll agree with somebody who says that now (IIRC they had to bring Richard Butler back to do a second article on the K-1 after all the complaints), and I'll add 'bunch of incompetents' too.

Because I'm pretty sure, that during the past eleven years, there were Pentax cameras which got a "highly recommended" from them

Who said there was a blanket ban on praising minor brands, Frater?

The game is to sell Amazon cameras (and they do sell Pentax), to provide reviews that can't all be positive otherwise you don't take them seriously, and to not annoy the major companies that provide the biggest revenue and give DPR staff the best junkets.

So, you praise products from Canon, Nikon and Sony, and you're allowed to do unbalanced or negative reviews of minor players, because you don't earn much from them anyway, and you're agitating only a small group of people. Do you actually go to DPR and read their stuff?

Then look at their review of arguably the best 50mm lens in the world, the Pentax DFA*50 f1.4.

[clackers]

For Sensor quality, the K-1 II with its aging sensor (same as Nikon D800) starts to fall behind.
Others moved on (Nikon, Sony) with advanced sensor technology, mainly
- BSI back side illumination
- dual gain pixel amplifiers
which would put such Nikon and Sony cameras at the top, with regards to image quality.

If we are to treat DxOMark at all seriously, the bargain priced K-1 is better performing than the Sony A7 III, Sony A9, Nikon D750, Nikon D5, Canon 5D MkIV, Canon 5DS, et al.

So it shouldn't suprise that he gave up on pentax, should it? It would be just because of image quality for his subject domain (stage photography).

Pros go with the money. Tamron were willing to take him on. He has not been paid by Pentax since the days of the K-3.

My guess is ideally he'd be with Nikon again, but the market and promotion budgets are not what they used to be.

[beholder3]

Because it says good things about Pentax, I'd guess.

Say hello to someone using the username "dpthoughts" on another tabloid forum.

[rod_grant]

I refuse to read arguments for arguments sake.
@Frater; boriscletoed (and only my 2nd one - perhaps there will be more.)

[Kunzite]

Because when Kenspo was financially independent, spending his own money (rather than being bribed with free access to Pentax hardware), he had elected Nikon as the system best suitable for his type of Photography.

HEY! Don't use Kenspo in your anti-Pentax crusade!

[agukha]

For professionals like Kenspo (not a landscape hobbyist), image quality is mainly achieved by three top-prio items:
- auto focus
- auto focus
- auto focus
and maybe frame rate of course, and good and reliable lenses (where Tamron got really good in the past years admittedly, which is the reason why the two most important Pentax K-1 lenses are relabeled older Tamron zooms).

Does that mean that medium format cameras are not bought by professionals, but only by rich enthusiasts ?

[Rondec]

For Sensor quality, the K-1 II with its aging sensor (same as Nikon D800) starts to fall behind.
Others moved on (Nikon, Sony) with advanced sensor technology, mainly
- BSI back side illumination
- dual gain pixel amplifiers
which would put such Nikon and Sony cameras at the top, with regards to image quality.


For professionals like Kenspo (not a landscape hobbyist), image quality is mainly achieved by three top-prio items:
- auto focus
- auto focus
- auto focus
and maybe frame rate of course, and good and reliable lenses (where Tamron got really good in the past years admittedly, which is the reason why the two most important Pentax K-1 lenses are relabeled older Tamron zooms).

So it shouldn't suprise that he gave up on pentax, should it? It would be just because of image quality for his subject domain (stage photography).

With all of the BSI back side illumination, etc, the K-1 actually gives better noise performance and similar dynamic range performance compared to the D850. DXO Mark gives a sports iso score of 3280 to the K-1 and only 2660 to the D850.

What a lot of the improvements have done is to allow for faster frame rates with relatively equal image quality. Which is fine if you need faster frame rates, but it certainly doesn't put the Nikon and Sony sensors "on top." At the same time, in situations where it is usable, pixel shift gives a large performance boost over anything Nikon or Canon currently offers.

[clickclick]

Kinda nutty seeing threads where one argues a cell phone is a pro tool and another argues that a K-1 is not. Some people seem to like to create churn for churn's sake. I'd prefer to go take some pictures.