[Class A]

I can't help but wonder how many of the images in your present photo collection would have looked better if the K1 II did not have the accelerator.

None, because I don't use a K-1 II.

Why would this stop me making factually true observations about the K-1 II's design?

What is the relevance of whether or not the photos of one particular user would be affected?

I'm sure you'll find users that will never be affected by the striping and banding occurring in some on-sensor PDAF implementations. Should that stop me from observing that I prefer sensors that do not carry the potential for causing these issues?

[beholder3]

Then you realize how junk bad uncalibrated screen are.

I did not advocate using the worst possible setup. I just said that 90% of the discussion here are unrealistic and esoteric and mostly overstated by people who have no grasp of the concepts themselves.

#1: Windows is able to offer some basic calibration without anything else required other than the hardware screen adjustments. That can improve this already quite a lot.

#2: as PCs nowadays all offer HDMI output to TVs any middle class TV is fine as computer screen and can be calibrated pretty nicely with a Spyder or similar. No need special computer screens at all.

---------- Post added 1st Nov 2020 at 11:40 ----------

Canon does that on the R5 and R6 already... and, surprising no-one, the pitchforking they got was a "eh, we'd prefer if they didn't", in classical DPR fashion of "it's only bad when Pentax does it".

Relative to the appeasement policy versus poor Sony and Nikon products Canon did receive some pitchforking - just not on the ridiculous level of Pentax hate.

Look at the tabloid's A7C advertising:

the viewfinder experience is adequate but not amazing

When talking about a 2,100 EUR FF camera with the worst viewfinder in the industry for current models (worse than a 2007 APSC K10D).
Go wait for the day that they find some feature in a Pentax camera which is significantly worse than 2007 level in a much cheaper camera and then call it "adequate but not amazing".

[muso83]

cant wait to have it

[RobSpain]

The specs for this new camera look quite impressive, but the tilt screen is finally missing! I use mine on my K-70 extensively and couldn't do without it. So as much as I may like this camera when it finally arrives and once having read in-depth reviews, I can't see how I could warrant spending the suggested price. I might as well go with a new K1 Mark II.

[Finchj]

Can't wait to see the first reviews to see just how much of an improvement this camera is over the original K-3 and perhaps how it compares to other APS-C cameras in the same price range.

I'm willing to pay 2000€ for a camera that'll last 7-10 years like my K-3. But it needs to be a significant improvement. Gaining a few more stops of quality ISO, much better continuous autofocus, and passable video. That's what I'm looking for in particular. I can already tell the usability have been improved by the addition of a joystick, which was one of my biggest gripes regarding my K-3.

So let's see! I hope we don't need to wait until next year to see some preliminary reviews at least.

[Serkevan]

I did not advocate using the worst possible setup. I just said that 90% of the discussion here are unrealistic and esoteric and mostly overstated by people who have no grasp of the concepts themselves.

#1: Windows is able to offer some basic calibration without anything else required other than the hardware screen adjustments. That can improve this already quite a lot.

#2: as PCs nowadays all offer HDMI output to TVs any middle class TV is fine as computer screen and can be calibrated pretty nicely with a Spyder or similar. No need special computer screens at all.

---------- Post added 1st Nov 2020 at 11:40 ----------



Relative to the appeasement policy versus poor Sony and Nikon products Canon did receive some pitchforking - just not on the ridiculous level of Pentax hate.

Look at the tabloid's A7C advertising:


When talking about a 2,100 EUR FF camera with the worst viewfinder in the industry for current models (worse than a 2007 APSC K10D).
Go wait for the day that they find some feature in a Pentax camera which is significantly worse than 2007 level in a much cheaper camera and then call it "adequate but not amazing".

Oh yes, I'm still waiting for the day they slam the baking of the Sony and Nikon raws to fix the terrible vignetting and corner distortion of some of their lenses.

And the A7C is a joke. It's too small to be comfortable with anything not pancake, the same price of the A7iii and... It doesn't even have a front dial, which is *preposterous*. And that's it. It's Sony prodding the water to see how much they can get away with.

[someasiancameraguy]

Can't wait to see the first reviews to see just how much of an improvement this camera is over the original K-3 and perhaps how it compares to other APS-C cameras in the same price range.

I'm willing to pay 2000€ for a camera that'll last 7-10 years like my K-3. But it needs to be a significant improvement. Gaining a few more stops of quality ISO, much better continuous autofocus, and passable video. That's what I'm looking for in particular. I can already tell the usability have been improved by the addition of a joystick, which was one of my biggest gripes regarding my K-3.

So let's see! I hope we don't need to wait until next year to see some preliminary reviews at least.

I really want decent video too. Hopefully more specs come out soon or a dedicated video body.

[SharkyCA]

Aaaand... guess who opened this discussion on the DPR's Pentax SLR Talk Forum, effectively handing them ammunition to bash the K-3 Mark III in the upcoming review!

Come on, don't you think it's past time to move on?

It's not my favourite subject and we might be able to leave it if you could drop it.


Such nonsense; just read their review of the K-1 II again and let me know where they point to users (on pentaxforums.com or elsewhere) making claims about image degradation or users "bashing the accelerator". You'll only find their own analysis (most of it hopelessly exaggerated). They comment on sample images they took and the image analyses by Bill Claff; they are clearly not driven by what any users have to say.


Please don't put words into my mouth.

Please point me to any of my posts where I supposedly bash Pentax image quality. I provided some examples -- some might say "exotic examples" because they don't do deep sky stacking, for instance, or they never develop RAW images again, once they have processed them -- where the use of in-camera image processing is counter indicated. These statements are factually true and have nothing to do with doing any injustice to Pentax image quality.

I love my K-1 and could work with the K-1 II as well; I'd just prefer the latter gave me the option to forgo the image processing. FWIW, that would be easy to do. The "accelerator unit" does not process "signals", it crunches numbers. Simply leaving the numbers untouched would forgo the processing. It is as simple as that. Anyone who wants to claim a complicated scheme where engineers somehow moved some PRIME engine processing to the "accelerator unit" and have convoluted the computations such that the regular processing and the "accelerator unit" image processing are now inextricably interwoven (but only starting with ISO 640; not before) should provide some evidence. In the absence of such evidence, Occam's razor tells you that the straightforward engineering approach ("accelerator unit" is a digital signal processor which can optionally perform image manipulations) is the preferred assumption.

Indeed. I also think so. Class A, your intentions may be noble, but do you really think you have any impact on the development of imaging technology that engineers at Ricoh choose to put into their cameras?
Keeping this topic vivid especially with the mythical narrative of "pure RAW" is just , sorry, naive. The only solution that would give you an opportunity to accept that would be an explicit exclusion of an integral part of a fine tuned and well tested system by those who have all the specifications and real raw data at hand and whose decisions are taken with best image quality in mind that can be provided by hard and software. I doubt this will happen, what will you do then? Criticise it, out of fear that others might criticise it? How about insisting on proof beyond a gut feeling? "Stareater on steroids" - how about calling out someone who is claiming that to prove it?

After having seen comparisons of the latest srnsors in FF(mirrorless) cameras with the good old K1(II) in 2020: it still wins on so many levels that any discussion on that detail seems pathetic.

I didn't start discussing it on DPR. I'm not responsible for what you are doing.


All they needed was Bill Claff's chart, to claim "Star Eater on steroids"; there was nothing in the actual images. What do you think will happen, when users are making claims about image degradation, when they keep saying, "look, they're doing the same but from ISO 100"?
The camera's design is final. What are you trying to accomplish, by shedding doubt on its image quality without seeing even one image?

I won't continue this as we're way too close to a thread closure. I hope you'll reevaluate your approach, but I'm afraid you won't.
Have a nice evening.

Settle down, folks. Play nicely.
There's plenty of room in the naughty corner for those who can't....

As Sandy said above, let's lose the arguing and keep the discussion friendly!

[surfar]

And the A7C is a joke.

A 1799 joke?...I'll think $ony will be laughing all the way to the bank.Its a new niche for M/L FF which they developed and made popular.For every sale they make its a big profit because the tech is A73 with A7S3 flippy screen and AF.So nothing new except the form factor which is their crop body.

It's too small to be comfortable with anything not pancake

Well,they have stated they will be bringing some small lenses to pair with it.Also IF,the new adapter works out ok,then the Pentax Limited lenses should do pretty well.

It's Sony prodding the water to see how much they can get away with.

Hmmm,introducing a new camera line is always a risk(K-01)so if it goes that path its good for the consumer.It would be nice to get it for half price!

[thibs]

I did not advocate using the worst possible setup. I just said that 90% of the discussion here are unrealistic and esoteric and mostly overstated by people who have no grasp of the concepts themselves.

#1: Windows is able to offer some basic calibration without anything else required other than the hardware screen adjustments. That can improve this already quite a lot.

#2: as PCs nowadays all offer HDMI output to TVs any middle class TV is fine as computer screen and can be calibrated pretty nicely with a Spyder or similar. No need special computer screens at all.

---------- Post added 1st Nov 2020 at 11:40 ----------



Relative to the appeasement policy versus poor Sony and Nikon products Canon did receive some pitchforking - just not on the ridiculous level of Pentax hate.

Look at the tabloid's A7C advertising:


When talking about a 2,100 EUR FF camera with the worst viewfinder in the industry for current models (worse than a 2007 APSC K10D).
Go wait for the day that they find some feature in a Pentax camera which is significantly worse than 2007 level in a much cheaper camera and then call it "adequate but not amazing".

Your only alternative is to hook the PC to a TV? You must be joking.
As for the TV themselves they are NOT optimized at all to be used as screens unfortunately.
IMO this is a very bad idea unless budget dictates otherwise.

[surfar]

It's too small to be comfortable with anything not pancake,

My Sony FE 200-600mm G OSS Lens Review using Sony A6600 – SonyAlphaLab

Here is one of those white pancakes with the A7c size body!

[Serkevan]

A 1799 joke?...I'll think $ony will be laughing all the way to the bank.Its a new niche for M/L FF which they developed and made popular.For every sale they make its a big profit because the tech is A73 with A7S3 flippy screen and AF.So nothing new except the form factor which is their crop body.

Well,they have stated they will be bringing some small lenses to pair with it.Also IF,the new adapter works out ok,then the Pentax Limited lenses should do pretty well.

Hmmm,introducing a new camera line is always a risk(K-01)so if it goes that path its good for the consumer.It would be nice to get it for half price!

Yeah, I know, and that's the thing: the camera is overpriced (come on, it's the RP equivalent) by several hundreds... but it probably will still sell.

---------- Post added 11-01-20 at 06:02 AM ----------

My Sony FE 200-600mm G OSS Lens Review using Sony A6600 – SonyAlphaLab

Here is one of those white pancakes with the A7c size body!

PFT . That's ridiculous, but then again it's a lens that can barely be used away from a tripod regardless of camera body... so it's more or less acceptable . It crosses the size line twice, so to speak.

[surfar]

come on, it's the RP equivalent)

Not quite, there isnt a RP equivalent.The RP has a slow frame rate,much shorter battery life and cropped 4K contrast detect AF video.Around the same weight but 20% bigger.
Yes, the $ony is a bit overpriced@1799.With the Nikons(5/6) at 1399 and 1699,the $ony should be 1499.

That's ridiculous,

So is putting FF lenses on the Pentax Q series which is THE extreme.But the images are ok.

[Mani]

nothing wrong with putting long lenses on the Q. Same with the sony .

[normhead]

nothing wrong with putting long lenses on the Q. Same with the sony .

You have to watch the aperture though. The diffraction on my Q with the 60-250 was distracting. I'm guessing ƒ2.8 would be needed for a nice crisp image.