[monochrome]

Comment: "What do you think Duncan? You're one of those Pentax Muppets."

[shardulm]

That review is lame at best. Lamer if you will.

it takes 2 equal images taken under similar conditions to compare cameras

exactly.

I am feeling their discomfort with the K-1's release. Canikonyians are experiencing chills down their spine. They know its an equal or better D810 sensor and they also know Pentax squeezes out every ounce of image quality out of the sensors as it is. And Pixel Shift is another example of it. I am kind of getting used to these kind of misguiding reviews as they are becoming more and more frequent.

[Digitalis]

The only people who always find exactly what they are looking for are the fault finders.

"this lens is too heavy, the camera is too small, The sensor is old, why isn't it mirrorless, I must have HIGH ISO!, why is the video capability so limited"...etc, etc so on and so forth.

[monochrome]

It will be fun to watch them backtrack and eat their words when the big, reputable reviewers post actual, well, reviews. I sense frequent use of 'grudgingly' and 'good, but Pentax' as if that says everything.

[ffking]

The only people who always find exactly what they are looking for are the fault finders.

I like that - should work it up into a poster

[RonHendriks1966]

Let's be honest. They don't have the camera. They only have official images from Ricoh. Those are not the best in the World. Ricoh Imaging choose to publish images that even fanboys go say "mehhhh" and that doesn't help the K-1 make an impression.

[jatrax]

Let's be honest. They don't have the camera. They only have official images from Ricoh. Those are not the best in the World. Ricoh Imaging choose to publish images that even fanboys go say "mehhhh" and that doesn't help the K-1 make an impression.

Ricoh is getting better in a lot of their marketing. But they really, really should hire a photographer to supply their published images. Most I've seen look as if an intern from the marketing department was told to run out and grab some snaps for the next web blurb.

But, based on what I have seen Ricoh does pay attention and improves. So maybe they will learn this lesson as well. There is a difference between an image taken to show the camera actually takes pictures and one that grabs the viewer's attention and says "I need to buy this camera".

Ever see a car company ad with a picture of a car with dirt on it, taken on a gray day without a gorgeous model? Of course not. So why is Ricoh publishing blah images?

[normhead]

My guess is Canon marketing took off when they got Andre Agassi and Maria Sharapova wiggling around in front of the camera. I'm not sure it had much to do with professional images, but ya, they would help.

[micromacro]

I don't care any more about all those "pro" reviews. They want to make fun of themselves- it's their problem.
Where are more reviews from actual K1 testers?

[jatrax]

Where are more reviews from actual K1 testers?

As always: Those who actually know anything are not talking, and those that are talking know little.

[Na Horuk]

That looks like a hit piece, an "article" that only points out all the worst case scenarios and negatives about the PS technology. Its nothing new, Pentax is used to get everything shot down, not matter the reality.
-Of course a telephoto of a far away landscape in a desert environment will not be super impressive in terms of sharpness. Hot air, atmospheric haze, loss of contrast due to distance.. That said, I doubt any other camera would do better. And of course, this is the image they view at 100%, the worst case
-Of course PS is useless if you scale down the photo to 670pixels. But pretty much any DSLR is overkill for that. Why would a D810 be better? You would get no more detail in the downscaled images, but you would spend much more money on the gear. And of course this is the image they will show scaled down, because the PS shows how powerful it is exactly in this scenario - still life, product photos.. Anyway, if all your photos will be resized to 670pixels, then just buy a K200D or ist* and save a bunch of money.
-Ok, so now they show the 100% crop of the previous image, which is truly impressive. And they immediately say how that is actually not good at all because it takes sooooo much time oh my god, it takes yeaars. Come on! Just putting the flowers on the table and setting up lights takes longer. And its frankly amazing that a camera at that price point can give such stunning detail. Not to mention that people have been doing some sort of stacking for years now, be it aperture stacking, NR stacking, focus stacking, HDR bracketing, panorama stitching, and combinations of all the things I just listed, like HDR panoramas.. and all of those things have very limited use and take a lot of time, but they are still used. In this case it is better than all-manual stacking, because the camera does it for you, and it does a good, precise job of it. Why wouldn't a photographer welcome a feature, that does a lot of the work for them?

Basically, that article is designed to crap all over the PS feature and once again claim that Nikon is so much better. "because it has more MP! Oh but in the next example MP are useless anyway" - article is juts one big contradiction. Its basically like a political ad. Safe to ignore.

Also, yes, not everyone will use PS. Not every kind of photo will allow PS. Of course. Just like HDR or any other special technique. You can't use flash in every photo, you can't use astrotracker in daylight photos, you can't use long exposure in bright light and expect crisp results.. photography is all about having tools, understanding them, and using them correctly. PS is just another tool, and it is a good one. It is one I would rather have than not have, even if I only use it a couple times a year. Somebody else might use it for every photo.

Let's be honest. They don't have the camera. They only have official images from Ricoh. Those are not the best in the World. Ricoh Imaging choose to publish images that even fanboys go say "mehhhh" and that doesn't help the K-1 make an impression.

True, Ricoh could do a better job advertising this. Though, the flowers photo is pretty good.
I wonder if the review site even has Ricoh's permission to use those photos..

[RonHendriks1966]

True, Ricoh could do a better job advertising this. Though, the flowers photo is pretty good.
I wonder if the review site even has Ricoh's permission to use those photos..

I have written a few reviews, but never looked at any flower images for that. I would ignore them too.


I hope and think that people are allowed to use these images. If not........then Ricoh should Sue one of these sites. Resulting in never ever going to be quoted again online on any site...... I think images presented like these are for open use. If someone knows differently I would like to read that.

[str8talk83]

In the real world the results should be similar to the d810. There is even the possibility of subtle improvements due to the k-1 being newer. People get too caught up looking for small differences.

If you have essentially the same sensor (to my knowledge) in a newer camera, how could it be noticeably worse? I've never heard a legitimate complaint about image quality from a modern Pentax.

[Na Horuk]

If you have essentially the same sensor (to my knowledge) in a newer camera, how could it be noticeably worse? I've never heard a legitimate complaint about image quality from a modern Pentax.

Yes, and on top of that you add PS technology which can potentially increase IQ

[dreamfoto]

Pentax is offering the Pixel Shift even on K1?

Well done Pentax/Ricoh! A breathtaking color and contrast using PS in the still image of the flowers - it reminds me the magic of the Sigma Foveon!

Absolutely outstanding work from Pentax/Ricoh!