[biz-engineer]

In this video, the Z6 doesn‘t miss focus.It is in wide area auto AF and half of the image is in focus, as the highlighted focus points tell you.

In the video, the Z6 focuses on the brighter background, the subject closer to the camera is out of focus. Normally, when lens aperture and focal length are such that it produces shallow DoF, the multipoint AF algorithm should focus on the part of the image that is closest to the camera, the most common case of photographing people. All cameras work this way (focus on area closest to camera body when in multipoint AF), Nikon D8xx, Canon 5Dxx, Pentax K1x, Sony Ax and EOS R. The Z focusing on the bright part of the image has been a known issue, and Z customers are hopping for a firmware fix which haven't come yet.

[Kunzite]

Nikon did something similiar, with the D610. Didn‘t become most disappointing launch indeed.

To me it means that Pentax does still matter to Chris and Jordan and that they hoped better from Pentax. Pentax is important enough to be on the list after all ...

And yes, there is a difference between worst camera and most disappointing launch. Without further context. But further context was provided. And this is no official award, not to be takes as serious as is done here. It is sort of a joke and it would be better for the image of Pentaxians to take it as that.

Nikon's D610 was far from similar: Pentax upgraded the K-1 to include their newly developed accelerator (it is their belief that this improves image quality), and offered to upgrade the existing K-1s - which was an industry first.
Nikon OTOH "fixed" the D600 oil spots issues by releasing a "new" model.

Yes, Pentax and Pentaxians still matter to Chris and Jordan... they need a brand to mock and bash, and an user base to insult.
It's called Othering (I believe monochrome first used this term around here). Without Pentax, they'd need to find another brand (and user base), and that's difficult... as they would be eaten alive. With Pentax... we're few and divided, the perfect subject.

Most annoying, of course, is not the "second worst" title given to the K-1 II - it's their patronizing attitude. For Pete's sake, DPR made so many idiotic mistakes it's not even funny calling on us for correcting them.

[Mistral75]

Are you quoting only Japanese based shipments? RICOH has other regional centers too....you have to look at the whole imaging department, because Pentax also has opticals, microscopes, medical/professional divisions too. All are included in the division itself...Statistics can be misleading if you use only raw numbers....

As for Smart Vision sales I am quoting Ricoh's consolidated accounts so everything is included here.

Pentax-branded medical products belong to Hoya and shan't be added. The microscope business doesn't belong to Ricoh either. Spotting scopes are included in Smart Vision.

Concerning the denominator: indeed shipments reported by CIPA are only those of Japanese companies and total shipments should be higher (add Hasselblad, Leica, Phase One, Yi, lenses sold by Korean and Chinese companies, compact cameras sold by Chinese companies and more).

Doing so would further reduce the calculated market share of Pentax and Ricoh Imaging.

[Kunzite]

I know that you want to help Pentaxians to not ruin their image (if that's possible ).

The only way for us to not "ruin our image" is to keep heads down, in shame. Or better - to give up on the brand and "see the light".

Otherwise, people like Chris and the random troll on the DPR can simply make up something even if they don't have reasons to complain. After all, we're the Others, the convenient "bad boys" to feel superior against.
You know, we (the two of us) were just arguing about the effect of the accelerator on the image quality; we're (as an user base) also divided about which lenses should be done first and if a particular order is or isn't a mistake. The one thing most of us probably agree on is that Ricoh Imaging is way too slow.
This translates into not accepting anything but "uncritically gushing praise".

Isn't this about them not being able to accept their own bias and mistakes? The easiest way of doing that is to attack the messenger, and you wouldn't believe how far people are willing to go about that... Honesty is the first victim.

[rullrich]

The only way for us to not "ruin our image" is to keep heads down, in shame. Or better - to give up on the brand and "see the light".

Otherwise, people like Chris and the random troll on the DPR can simply make up something even if they don't have reasons to complain. After all, we're the Others, the convenient "bad boys" to feel superior against.
You know, we (the two of us) were just arguing about the effect of the accelerator on the image quality; we're (as an user base) also divided about which lenses should be done first and if a particular order is or isn't a mistake. The one thing most of us probably agree on is that Ricoh Imaging is way too slow.
This translates into not accepting anything but "uncritically gushing praise".

Isn't this about them not being able to accept their own bias and mistakes? The easiest way of doing that is to attack the messenger, and you wouldn't believe how far people are willing to go about that... Honesty is the first victim.

No offence meant, but now you really start exaggerating! Who exactly is "we"? Defined by whom? Keep heads down, feel inferior (as feeling superior needs the other to feel inferior) ? Please speak for yourself only. And just for the record and for not being accused of bashing: I use Pentax for almost 40 years, don't have a plan to jump ship and even want to buy the k-1 II (or it's successor) despite whatever DPR says or does. Let's go back to talk about photography with pentax instead of playing the downtrotten soul.

[BigMackCam]

I have no data also. But other members of this thread keep posting that the Pentax market share as a whole is 2%. I'm not about to call them misinformed. But as this would be all Pentax product. It could easily be assumed the K1 or K1 II hasnt sold in big numbers.

By all accounts, the K-1 was a success for Ricoh. The K-1II, as an upgrade model, anecdotally less so. I believe the same could be said about the K-3 and K-3II respectively. It's understandable that an upgraded version of the same camera isn't going experience the same spike of demand as the original, yet it makes sense from the manufacturer's point of view, as it's a relatively inexpensive way to extend the life of the original product and gain additional return on the original development cost.

When Ricoh releases its next "all new" (rather than "upgrade") Pentax camera - be it APS-C, full-frame or medium format - I'd expect that to sell well in the same way the original K-1 did.

Has it been announced that Pixel shift can be used hand held yet...? I thought that to be a translation issue. By the way I love the K1. I own two. Just want to see a fair and balanced discussion.. Though I didnt upgrade either of them..

Yes, the K-1II has "Dynamic Pixel-Shift" which is intended for hand-held use. It's not actually the same thing as real pixel-shift, but instead captures multiple frames that rely on the natural small movements of the photographer to result in several very slightly different perspectives. Those images are then combined into one very high resolution image. It's basically an in-camera implementation of a method people have used for some time to produce super-resolution photos.

[falconeye]

Hi falconeye, what a delight to see you posting at pentaxforums. I missed you and will be missing you again, once you disappear again.

Hi Class A, thanks for the nice words.
There‘s always something to learn here. Like the term Othering

In retrospect, it is surprising the video was released at all. I‘ve seen a bit of the flak they received from Nikon friends for making the Nikon 50/1.8Z worst lens...

Interesting they retracted their Nikon opinion, but not their Pentax one. Could be that Nikon US got involved. Would mean that Pentax US is a more relaxed company which I would consider a good sign. I.e., that Nikon really feels like they must win with the Z or die.

---

Last edited by falconeye; 01-10-2019 at 06:39 AM.

[Kunzite]

No offence meant, but now you really start exaggerating! Who exactly is "we"? Defined by whom? Keep heads down, feel inferior (as feeling superior needs the other to feel inferior) ? Please speak for yourself only. And just for the record and for not being accused of bashing: I use Pentax for almost 40 years, don't have a plan to jump ship and even want to buy the k-1 II (or it's successor) despite whatever DPR says or does. Let's go back to talk about photography with pentax instead of playing the downtrotten soul.

That is an interesting reaction.

Not every use of the plural is stating an opinion on behalf of a group. Like it or not, we are targeted by statements like "zealous", pretending we're a lynching mob, that we're demanding "uncritically gushing praise".
Of course, I could keep my head down and ignore that

Oh, yes, feeling superior works best if you have Others to favorably compare against. "We're not zealous like they are!". "We're objective, not demanding uncritically gushing praise!". "We're such a wonderful group, because we're not Pentaxians!" Works great, and raise the post/page hits count

---------- Post added 10-01-19 at 01:08 PM ----------

By all accounts, the K-1 was a success for Ricoh. The K-1II, as an upgrade model, anecdotally less so. I believe the same could be said about the K-3 and K-3II respectively. It's understandable that an upgraded version of the same camera isn't going experience the same spike of demand as the original, yet it makes sense from the manufacturer's point of view, as it's a relatively inexpensive way to extend the life of the original product and gain additional return on the original development cost.

We should also consider the upgrades - this is still anecdotal, but it looks like the requests vastly surpassed the expectation. Some of us were waiting after the service for months.

[D1N0]

Nikon really feels like they must win with the Z or die.

Ricoh have of course already thrown in the towel where pr pressure is concerned. They have no advertising budget to impress with.

[ThorSanchez]

Yes, the K-1II has "Dynamic Pixel-Shift" which is intended for hand-held use. It's not actually the same thing as real pixel-shift, but instead captures multiple frames that rely on the natural small movements of the photographer to result in several very slightly different perspectives. Those images are then combined into one very high resolution image. It's basically an in-camera implementation of a method people have used for some time to produce super-resolution photos.

It's basically computational photography, on a small scale. I'm hopeful they'll continue to expand this capability. An APS-C or Full Frame camera that has even some of the processing power of a modern cell phone dedicated to frame stacking and similar concepts could be a very powerful tool. Cell phones will never catch ILCs if the ILCs are doing the same things on a much larger scale.

[Rondec]

Thanks. I’ll be doing my own tests to see myself but your sample only shows minor magenta casting overall, which I would expect all cameras to produce in those circumstances.

For what it is worth, I uploaded a little larger size to Flickr and tried to brighten it a bit more. Nothing very impressive and certainly pushing the file a lot more than I normally would.

[Ash]

For what it is worth, I uploaded a little larger size to Flickr and tried to brighten it a bit more. Nothing very impressive and certainly pushing the file a lot more than I normally would.

I figured as much. Even with gross underexposure there isn’t much magenta casting in the image. But how it was demonstrated was in a scene that was lit but had a dark subject in it, then pushing that EV+5 he was able to show a lot of that cast that wasn’t evident on the K-1. Thanks again Vincent.

[clackers]

I figured as much. Even with gross underexposure there isn’t much magenta casting in the image. But how it was demonstrated was in a scene that was lit but had a dark subject in it, then pushing that EV+5 he was able to show a lot of that cast that wasn’t evident on the K-1. Thanks again Vincent.

Post-processing error, if it's not reproducible.

[Kunzite]

I'm quoting from another thread:

I submitted my K1 upgrade online form to Precision on 9-25. At the time I called Precision and they said to NOT send in the body...today I finally received this first communication below. I guess there is light at the end of the tunnel.

TSSC - RIAC (Camera Support) <tsscRicohImaging@ricoh-usa.com>
To:XXXX


Dec 19 at 2:36 PM

Hi XXXX, thank you for your email. Due to the overwhelming success of the K-1 upgrade we did run out of parts, but we will have more parts available in January to finish the orders that have already been placed. You will receive an email from Precision once they have the parts ready for your upgrade. We do truly appreciate your patience throughout this process.


Sherrone Mitchell
Technical Spec, Tech Supp.Customer Support Services

RICOH USA, INC.

tsscRicohImaging@ricoh-usa.com

[biz-engineer]

Secondly, it should be pointed out that a 36 megapixel sensor does not resolve 36 million RGB pixels.

Not really. There is a reason why the 36Mpixel sensors don't require an optical anti-alias filter, and the Tamron 24-70 VC resolves the equivalent of 21Mpixels on the D810. Currently, the only recent prime lens in the DFA lineup if the DFA*50, and it's the only lens that may out-resolve the K1 / K1 II. My take is that Ricoh engineer do have their lenses measured, and the accelerator filtering is set to be at the edge of those transfer functions, that's why finding a little loss of detail of the K1 II vs K1 is something to look at with 100% magnification. My experience of pixel shift on the K1 with zooms and the DFA100 macro indicates that the DFA100 macro resolve more than the zooms: I can see a sharpness increase with pixel shift and the DFA100 marco , but I don't see any increase of sharpness at all when I use either the DFA28-105 or DFA24-70. For those reasons, I don't believe the K1 sensor outresolve the lenses, and if so it's not by a big amount (we would see a lot more aliasing if the lenses were outresolving the sensor).

It only resolves 18 million green, 9 million blue and 9 million red pixels. As a consequence, lenses are not as often outresolved as some may think.

This statement is only true is the color of the image matches exactly only one or two colors of the filter array, this is approximately the case for the green patch you have chosen from the DPR scene to compare the difference between the Pentax K1 and K1 II, one cannot draw a general conclusion from a very specific color only. For the balanced color mixes, the contributions of each of the RGB filter array increases the effective bandwidth of the sensor.