[Dan Rentea]

I'm assuming most pros use FF cameras?

To be honest, I've never seen a crop camera being used by Pro photographers at sport events. And I go quite often to soccer games, tennis tournaments, skating champiinships. If there are crop cameras outhere, I think that is under 3% the percentage of them.

Action and sports is rarely about pixel peeping.

This is true. I talked to a few pro photographers at some sport events and they are interested in speed, precision and durability when comes to cameras and lenses. They use fast cameras like 1Dx Mark II or D5 to be sure they get the best possible images given the shooting condition. But, they also use a high resolution camera like D850 or 5D Mark IV from time to time because some of their images end up on stock agencies like Getty.

[ThorSanchez]

To be honest, I've never seen a crop camera being used by Pro photographers at sport events. And I go quite often to soccer games, tennis tournaments, skating champiinships. If there are crop cameras outhere, I think that is under 3% the percentage of them.



This is true. I talked to a few pro photographers at some sport events and they are interested in speed, precision and durability when comes to cameras and lenses. They use fast cameras like 1Dx Mark II or D5 to be sure they get the best possible images given the shooting condition. But, they also use a high resolution camera like D850 or 5D Mark IV from time to time because some of their images end up on stock agencies like Getty.

Interesting, thanks. Have you ever seen a pro sports photographer using Pentax? Has anyone?

[Dan Rentea]

More important, the 'accelerator' provides serious Dynamic Range at higher ISO. The chart below shows that the Pentax KP nearly matches the Canon 1DXii as far out as 25600.

That's why charts are for people who don't take into consideration the shooting conditions (the available light, the quality of it, etc.) and they think that a chart represents a valid argument to a photographer. A chart is as valid as the fuel consumption written on cars specifications (you know that on paper your car will take you 6l from the gas tank for every 100km, but you need to drive on a flat road, without AC, you have to be alone in the car, without luggages and you have to drive with constant speed in order to achieve those 6l/100km).

---------- Post added 10-08-19 at 12:08 PM ----------

Interesting, thanks. Have you ever seen a pro sports photographer using Pentax? Has anyone?

I saw one, in Romania. He is a pro given the fact that he is living from photography, but he shots only local events in a small town and his main income comes from weddings.

I don't think I saw more than 3 Sony A9 either this year at some international sport events I was attending despite the marketing behind Sony and despite the fact that Sony has some Pro lenses (the f2.8 trinity, the 400mm f2.8 and a 600mm f4) for the A9 which is a very capable sport camera.

[bobmaxja]

I meet also a professional sport photograph for a major newspaper who cover the Montreal Canadian hockey team, and they use JPEG to take photos and send to their sports desk. The newspaper is now 100% online and dont print anymore, speed is very important as they update their website and app as game progress.

[ThorSanchez]

I meet also a professional sport photograph for a major newspaper who cover the Montreal Canadian hockey team, and they use JPEG to take photos and send to their sports desk. The newspaper is now 100% online and dont print anymore, speed is very important as they update their website and app as game progress.

How do they get the pictures off camera and to the sports desk? Wifi -> Phone -> auto-upload to a server?

It seems like since there is a market for a sports DSLR, a built-in 4G (soon to be 5G) cell connection would be a big selling feature. Unless the phone tethering and apps are already really good.

I have no experience with that since my K-3ii and K-30 have no Wifi capabilities outside of the (IIRC) now unsupported and clunky Flucard.

[reh321]

That's why charts are for people who don't take into consideration the shooting conditions (the available light, the quality of it, etc.) and they think that a chart represents a valid argument to a photographer. A chart is as valid as the fuel consumption written on cars specifications (you know that on paper your car will take you 6l from the gas tank for every 100km, but you need to drive on a flat road, without AC, you have to be alone in the car, without luggages and you have to drive with constant speed in order to achieve those 6l/100km).

The chart simply encapsulates and reinforces my own experience, and is especially useful to those who have never used the camera in question. I have been using the KP for nearly a year now, and every time I venture into higher ISO values, I am amazed at the grace with which it handles the image. Those who do not have an ‘accelerator’ can take or leave the results, but I feel for those who have never had the experience.

[Serkevan]

That's why charts are for people who don't take into consideration the shooting conditions (the available light, the quality of it, etc.) and they think that a chart represents a valid argument to a photographer. A chart is as valid as the fuel consumption written on cars specifications (you know that on paper your car will take you 6l from the gas tank for every 100km, but you need to drive on a flat road, without AC, you have to be alone in the car, without luggages and you have to drive with constant speed in order to achieve those 6l/100km).

Spec sheets are a great way to see how something performs at its best, but I absolutely agree with you there...

I don't think I saw more than 3 Sony A9 either this year at some international sport events I was attending despite the marketing behind Sony and despite the fact that Sony has some Pro lenses (the f2.8 trinity, the 400mm f2.8 and a 600mm f4) for the A9 which is a very capable sport camera.

Aren't the 400/2.8 and the 600/4 like 12000€ each? I would assume that only dedicated sports photographers covering major events for major agencies (or sponsored with loaner lenses) will be able to field that kind of gear. I would say that there is no sound financial reason for a working photographer to buy the A9 instead of, say, the A7iii unless there is a tangible reduction in the number or jobs you can get (or an increase in the money you can charge for said shots...)

[Dan Rentea]

The chart simply encapsulates and reinforces my own experience, and is especially useful to those who have never used the camera in question. I have been using the KP for nearly a year now, and every time I venture into higher ISO values, I am amazed at the grace with which it handles the image. Those who do not have an ‘accelerator’ can take or leave the results, but I feel for those who have never had the experience.

Then why don't you post some images side by side taken with KP and 1Dx instead of charts? I'm sure that KP has great ISO capabilities, but 1Dx or D5 are completly different animals... both fail in test charts but shine in the field.

[luftfluss]

The chart simply encapsulates and reinforces my own experience, and is especially useful to those who have never used the camera in question. I have been using the KP for nearly a year now, and every time I venture into higher ISO values, I am amazed at the grace with which it handles the image. Those who do not have an ‘accelerator’ can take or leave the results, but I feel for those who have never had the experience.

Keep in mind that much of the goodness in the KP's high-ISO output is also attributable to using a newer, better sensor than found in the K-3.

Users of the most recent Nikon and Fuji APS-C cameras would not see as much of an improvement.

[Dan Rentea]

Aren't the 400/2.8 and the 600/4 like 12000€ each? I would assume that only dedicated sports photographers covering major events for major agencies (or sponsored with loaner lenses) will be able to field that kind of gear. I would say that there is no sound financial reason for a working photographer to buy the A9 instead of, say, the A7iii unless there is a tangible reduction in the number or jobs you can get (or an increase in the money you can charge for said shots...)

Yes, the lenses I've mentioned are expensive. So are the cameras used with these lenses. When reviewers or marketing people say about a camera like A7 III that it has the same af as A9, they forget to say about what's behind the focus system. My 5D Mark IV has the same af as 1Dx, but there is a big difference in performance due to the processing power of 1Dx, due to different metering, etc.

[reh321]

Then why don't you post some images side by side taken with KP and 1Dx instead of charts? I'm sure that KP has great ISO capabilities, but 1Dx or D5 are completly different animals... both fail in test charts but shine in the field.

Because I can't afford a 1DXii - the point is that the KP tests just as well, but is a lot cheaper; I have posted images taken at ISO 25600 {at other sites as well as this one} and those who use other cameras are surprised at the Dynamic Range and color fidelity demonstrated at this ISO setting. If I am satisfied with a camera that cost me a mere $700, why would I purchase a whole new system in which the body costs over $5000??

[MossyRocks]

Aren't the 400/2.8 and the 600/4 like 12000€ each?

Lenses like that for any manufactures are all up in that same range. Even old and used the pentax ones still command a fairly substantial price.

[reh321]

Everyone seems to have forgotten that this thread is about the new body about to be introduced by Pentax - not about bodies from other companies - certainly not about lenses. The only reference to lenses is that the new bodies make less expensive lenses more useful because they make higher ISO values more usable. The only reference to bodies from other companies is that they are a form of comparison.

[Kunzite]

I had seen what the accelerator-enabled APS-C cameras can do (besides my own FF K-1), and yes, whatever the cause there's a visible improvement on low light high ISO images.
Which camera beats which in some synthetic benchmark is less important.

[gatorguy]

Everyone seems to have forgotten that this thread is about the new body about to be introduced by Pentax - not about bodies from other companies - certainly not about lenses. The only reference to lenses is that the new bodies make less expensive lenses more useful because they make higher ISO values more usable. The only reference to bodies from other companies is that they are a form of comparison.

Very timely reminder. Thanks for bringing it up