[rawr]

I'll try again tomorrow with better light.

If you can, take a ColorCheckr Passport colour chart (or similar) with you.

[SamuelDixon]

indeed. i know nikon shot at the same iso (and everything else being equal) is quite a bit darker than canon, guess pentax is similar to nikon in that regard.

the canon does look more saturated than the k1. both processed in lightroom? colour rendition etc will vary between canon, nikon, pentax etc.

the 5dmk2 is still a very good camera. had a video shoot with one a few weeks ago as we couldnt get hold of a mk3 in time.

Yeah the 5Dii has served me well for many years, I've shot around 50 weddings with it along with countless other events and portrait shoots. I honestly don't NEED to switch (was waiting out the mark iv) but this K1 has so many cool bells and whistles and seemed like a better landscape camera for an upcoming trip to Iceland (weather sealing in particular) so I gave up on waiting on Canon and pulled the trigger. Switching eco systems after so many years is a little nerve racking, still not totally sold...

I'll probably still use the 5D for weddings because the auto focus is significantly faster. I really hope Pentax is able to improve that with a firmware update, it's an issue. But for landscape shooting it won't bother me too much.

---------- Post added 07-18-16 at 10:08 PM ----------

If you can, take a ColorCheckr Passport colour chart (or similar) with you.

Hmmm, never seen that before, you had good results with it?

[biz-engineer]

Both images are underexposed a bit. And the difference between Canon and Pentax is a classic. Pentax is has always been more conservation to protect the highlights in terms of exposure. If you'd compensate for exposure on both cameras, Canon 5DII +0.3ev and Pentax K1 +0.7ev. That means noise will be even lower on the K1. As for the colors, there is not reason why they can't be the same because color test charts show very accurate color test points in both Canon 5DII and Pentax, so, it's only a matter of adjusting color saturation and hue during the raw conversion to match your taste. I agree, Canon have brighter images by default but more sensitive to blowing high lights in high DR scenes.

---------- Post added 19-07-16 at 07:34 ----------

I'll probably still use the 5D for weddings because the auto focus is significantly faster. I really hope Pentax is able to improve that with a firmware update, it's an issue. But for landscape shooting it won't bother me too much.

I'm really surprised here. The 5DII AF in dim lighting is pretty bad, so fast yes but also out of focus... The K5II/K5IIs were already better than the 5DII at focusing in low lighting. The 5DII is known to have poor AF in low light situations, and that was a reason for a number of Canon shooter to upgrade to a 5DIII.

[zestoi]

Yeah the 5Dii has served me well for many years, I've shot around 50 weddings with it along with countless other events and portrait shoots. I honestly don't NEED to switch (was waiting out the mark iv) but this K1 has so many cool bells and whistles and seemed like a better landscape camera for an upcoming trip to Iceland (weather sealing in particular) so I gave up on waiting on Canon and pulled the trigger. Switching eco systems after so many years is a little nerve racking, still not totally sold...

I'll probably still use the 5D for weddings because the auto focus is significantly faster. I really hope Pentax is able to improve that with a firmware update, it's an issue. But for landscape shooting it won't bother me too much.

i was lucky as when i switched to pentax the only previous dslr i had was a canon 400d and a 350d but that was just bought so i could hack the firmware.

i wasnt shooting with the 5dmk2 on that shoot so can't comment about the auto focus speed. my k3 with the da* 50-135 is certainly pretty speedy tho at auto focussing so guess it's as much down to the glass attached. i do realise you were testing with the same model of sigma lens on both canon and pentax though so i'm surprised the mk2 is so much faster.

[rawr]

Hmmm, never seen that before, you had good results with it?

I have a similar colour chart (DataColor SpyderChekr) that I do use sometimes, usually indoors in situations when colour fidelity is important, but I find it a bit too big to use in the field (eg at events). I might pick up a Passport (or something the same size) for field use sometime. Normally I rely on camera WB, and use a small grey/white/black card, just to help tune colour in post-processing.

[Gimbal]

I guess it's either different Lightroom presets, or one or both cameras iso 1600 isn't really iso1600, or the light used in the scene is flickering.

[biz-engineer]

Yeah the 5Dii has served me well for many years, I've shot around 50 weddings with it along with countless other events and portrait shoots. I honestly don't NEED to switch (was waiting out the mark iv) but this K1 has so many cool bells and whistles and seemed like a better landscape camera for an upcoming trip to Iceland (weather sealing in particular) so I gave up on waiting on Canon and pulled the trigger. Switching eco systems after so many years is a little nerve racking, still not totally sold...

You aren't convinced that Sony sensor 36Mpixels used in the D800/D810 is better than a Canon 21Mp sensor. All lab tests have shown that Sony sensors are way ahead of Canon sensors. And raw conversion allow to adjust the final image look according to your taste. Usually if you aren't convinced it is a feeling and photography contains a great deal of subjectivity, Pentax community isn't going to change your mind about your subjective feeling. You don't need to buy a Pentax. Switching full frame gear for a trip to Iceland, that's rather expensive. For the remaining photography, you can keep shooting with Canon 5DII and it'll cost you nothing. If you need occasional more resolution and DR for doing landscape in Iceland, just rent or use the K1 and sell it back at a discount, someone will be glad to buy it.

[Alex645]

In general I have found and seen that both Nikon and Pentax RAW images coming from the Sony sensor are always about 2/3 EV darker than Canon RAW images. I believe this helps to prevent blown out highlights as the Sony sensor has a distinct advantage in dynamic range over Canonʻs sensors. With correct adjustment of even your underexposed image samples, it should not look like the results you posted.

The assumption with anyone shooting RAW is that the photographer knows how to PP better than the cameraʻs jpeg processor.

[Tesla]

Welcome to the forum! I would give the K-1 a chance.. use it awhile and you may end up liking it better than the 5DII.

[Imp]

The first thing that strikes me is how much brighter iso 1600 is on the canon than it is on the K1. Anyone know why this is?

Tony Northrup said that Pentax's ISO 100 is really ISO 50 on the K-1. He said that because the Nikon D810 iso 64 is same as the Pentax K-1 iso 100.

[SamuelDixon]

Both images are underexposed a bit. And the difference between Canon and Pentax is a classic. Pentax is has always been more conservation to protect the highlights in terms of exposure. If you'd compensate for exposure on both cameras, Canon 5DII +0.3ev and Pentax K1 +0.7ev. That means noise will be even lower on the K1. As for the colors, there is not reason why they can't be the same because color test charts show very accurate color test points in both Canon 5DII and Pentax, so, it's only a matter of adjusting color saturation and hue during the raw conversion to match your taste. I agree, Canon have brighter images by default but more sensitive to blowing high lights in high DR scenes.

---------- Post added 19-07-16 at 07:34 ----------



I'm really surprised here. The 5DII AF in dim lighting is pretty bad, so fast yes but also out of focus... The K5II/K5IIs were already better than the 5DII at focusing in low lighting. The 5DII is known to have poor AF in low light situations, and that was a reason for a number of Canon shooter to upgrade to a 5DIII.

Yeah I'm surprised and disappointed as well. I've tested it in pretty low light and the 5Dii takes about 1/2 the time to acquire focus. I have both only using the center focus point and on AFS. Both using the same sigma 35mm lens as well.

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 04:52 AM ----------

I guess it's either different Lightroom presets, or one or both cameras iso 1600 isn't really iso1600, or the light used in the scene is flickering.

Again, cut and paste the presets. Everything is exactly the same.

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 04:54 AM ----------

Tony Northrup said that Pentax's ISO 100 is really ISO 50 on the K-1. He said that because the Nikon D810 iso 64 is same as the Pentax K-1 iso 100.

I saw that and thought it might be the issue. I guess it's a little off (from the canon anyways) all the way up? These were shot at iso 1600.

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 04:54 AM ----------

Welcome to the forum! I would give the K-1 a chance.. use it awhile and you may end up liking it better than the 5DII.

Yeah not giving up quite yet, there are a lot of things about this camera I really like. It may just be a workflow issue.

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 04:58 AM ----------

In general I have found and seen that both Nikon and Pentax RAW images coming from the Sony sensor are always about 2/3 EV darker than Canon RAW images. I believe this helps to prevent blown out highlights as the Sony sensor has a distinct advantage in dynamic range over Canonʻs sensors. With correct adjustment of even your underexposed image samples, it should not look like the results you posted.

The assumption with anyone shooting RAW is that the photographer knows how to PP better than the cameraʻs jpeg processor.

Thanks, this is super helpful. The increased dynamic range is a big reason I bought this camera. Canon definitely lags there.

---------- Post added 07-19-16 at 05:01 AM ----------

Another random question re my switching, has anyone had experience with both the Sigma 85mm 1.4 and the Pentax 77mm 1.8?

That 85mm was a go to for me on the 5D, I ordered the 77mm that I know people love, just hoping it holds it's own.

[house]

Most raw developing software apply a camera specific base curve "before" you do any pp yourself. Comparing raw files with the same settings is meningless because the files are different.

[k5astro]

Yeah, I would expect the same brightness. That's why they have standards like ISO and F number. If you were using a light meter that gave you those settings. You would expect both images to come out exactly the same exposure. As for saturation, that seems to be company dependent. I always thought Nikon images were a little over saturated. I guess the same goes for Canon. However, how can you be sure your post processing is exactly the same. I don't think you can use lightroom or you have to control its raw processor, which as I understand it adjusts for each camera, DNG or not. Maybe you could try processing with another software like Gimp or Silkypix, etc. Also, if the K-1 has higher dynamic range, I'm sure this will affect how its converted for viewing - i.e. you also need to control the output converter - perceptual or relative colorimetric.

[VoiceOfReason]

I have noticed that compared to a friend with a Canon my RAW files are more neutral, but I can pull more shadows and highlights out. Do a RAW+ and adjust the JPEG settings, then see what happens when you have one adjusted just in camera.

[fromunderthebridge]

[/COLOR]Another random question re my switching, has anyone had experience with both the Sigma 85mm 1.4 and the Pentax 77mm 1.8?

That 85mm was a go to for me on the 5D, I ordered the 77mm that I know people love, just hoping it holds it's own.

The 77mm has beautiful rendition for portraiture in my opinion. It uses screwdrive AF so that may be a downside depending on use. The coatings (?) may also be a tad old compared to newer Ricoh releases.

Again though, if you don't require lightning fast AF, the rendition on FF is really sweet...

EDIT:
Have to admit I have no experience on the sigma 85mm though...