[colodion]

Some tests that we have done, to see the behavior of the sensors of last generation of the different marks.
Very clear evidence

Nitidez Pentax K1-Nikon D810-D750-D7200-Canon 5DmarkIV-Olympus OMD E-M1 mark II - Pentaxeros.com

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[awscreo]

Interesting tests, seems K-1 is ahead of pretty much every camera in that test. 5D IV looks pretty bad for such a new camera...

[biz-engineer]

Interesting tests, seems K-1 is ahead of pretty much every camera in that test. 5D IV looks pretty bad for such a new camera...

When you use a single camera, the quality of the photos you get is pretty much related to your personal belief that you have a good camera. Anyway, due to the cost of those digital cameras, very few of us use two of more camera brands at the same time. Some of us switch from one system to another so we can't do a backward comparison. For the Canon guy who just purchased a 5DIV and never used anything but Canon, the 5DIV is the best camera. Pentax is still a company of engineers, they still believe that maxing out camera quality (from a technical standpoint) is what triggers sales. A lot of people buy a Canon camera because it's the most obvious everywhere. Tell me a single camera shelf when Canon is not... A couple of years ago, someone compared the K3 to a Canon DSLR of the same price, he tried the K3 and he came to the conclusion that the K3 was the better offer, but he still was skeptical about Pentax brand. Couple of days later, in his office was a Canonian, so he bought the Canon.

[Na Horuk]

A couple of years ago, someone compared the K3 to a Canon DSLR of the same price, he tried the K3 and he came to the conclusion that the K3 was the better offer, but he still was skeptical about Pentax brand. Couple of days later, in his office was a Canonian, so he bought the Canon.

Yes, this is definitely a problem for Pentax - advertisments, pushing sales, rentals and service shops. I see Nikon, Canon, sometimes even Sony adverts in so many stores. Photography stores advertise those, and also Oly, Fuji... but very rarely Pentax. Only time I see Pentax adverts is when a new line is coming and they have to clear old stock. Meanwhile, any photo event you go to, you see Canon and Nikon adverts, people with their gear, their hats and vests, lens rentals and service shops with their brands, every superstore has some P&S Canikon stuff..

Still, the reviews of the K-1 have been stellar. Nobody can deny that. And the KP now is pretty great. I hope once Ricoh gets money from these products, they will start advertising. Quality is there, awareness is missing; but it is improving.

[clackers]

they will start advertising..

It'd be nice, but I doubt they'd get their money back.

Their marketing department would have already done modelling on what happens when you do mass advertising to try to reach the Canikon crowd, hire professional photographers to endorse, run promotional events, pay for floor space in retail stores, etc.

[dagoban]

Thanks Colodión, Mayor and other Spanish pentaxians for so detailed test. The k1 is a beast!.

[Na Horuk]

Their marketing department would have already done modelling on what happens when you do mass advertising to try to reach the Canikon crowd, hire professional photographers to endorse, run promotional events, pay for floor space in retail stores, etc.

In the past few years we have seen many blunders in the Pentax marketing, though. Websites that didn't work well or had false information, poor communication with dealers around the world, even printed pamphlets with false information, really bad "sample photos" of from new cameras,... let's just fix this first, pay a little for online advertising, maybe pay the bribes that DXo and similar websites (apparently) want...

[clackers]

In the past few years we have seen many blunders in the Pentax marketing, though. Websites that didn't work well or had false information, poor communication with dealers around the world, even printed pamphlets with false information, really bad "sample photos" of from new cameras,... let's just fix this first, pay a little for online advertising, maybe pay the bribes that DXo and similar websites (apparently) want...

I agree with much of what you say, NH.

Expensive business ... Nikon, the number two players in the industry, are laying off their sponsored pros. They're obviously finding the economics doesn't work.

[monochrome]

The economics of advertising, which has to be constant, repetitive and multi-medium to be effective, requires a much larger unit volume than Pentax sells to be profitable. Paid professionals, direct sales reps, sponsored workshops, professional service, lockers full of loaner gear at Olympics, liberal Dealer Agreements, swag - everything costs money. You pay for all that jazz, not the next person to buy the camera - because the next guy never buys the camera. You are always the marginal buyer.

[Dan Rentea]

As I said in another thread, I'm able to play with my friend's K1. I had a corporate shooting session the other day and I had the chance to test K1 against 5D Mark IV in an improvised studio at the client's office. I have to ask the client if I can publish the images in order to put the RAW files here and compare for yourself. For now, I put here just a crop from both cameras.

Left image: 5D Mark IV with 70-200mm f4 @ 70mm, f7.1, ISO 200, 1/125s
Right image: K1, DFA 24-70mm f2.8 @ 70mm, f7.1, ISO 200, 1/125s

Lightning:
1 deep octa (120cm) on my left as main light with Godox AD360 as flash
1 large reflective umbrella on my right for fill (with AD360 as flash)
2 60x60cm softboxes for backgroung (left and right) with 2 AD180 flashes

Triggered both cameras with Godox FT-16 (I had the trigger since I had K-3 II).

K1 has an small advantage when comes to details (which I was expecting) beacuse of the resolution and the lack of AA filter. If Pentax will improve the tethering options, K1 is a very good camera for this kind of photography.


image sharing sites

[mee]

The OP's test is interesting, yet the K-1 was shot at f/16 while all other compared cameras are shot at f/22. Why?

[normhead]

The OP's test is interesting, yet the K-1 was shot at f/16 while all other compared cameras are shot at f/22. Why?

Ya, that's a bummer. Thanks for investigating. I kept thinking, "there shouldn't be that much difference, and even the K-1 image looks soft compared to some of my results" . ƒ16 and ƒ22 would explain both those things.

[awscreo]

Ya, that's a bummer. Thanks for investigating. I kept thinking, "there shouldn't be that much difference, and even the K-1 image looks soft compared to some of my results" . ƒ16 and ƒ22 would explain both those things.

not sure which lens they used, maybe it doesn't go past f16? Although diffraction at f22 would be heavier I'd imagine.. So I guess test is not very precise, although it does show less noise in any rate (I'm guessing diffraction would only attribute to fine detail and overall softness?)

[beholder3]

Well, those comparisons have been available long enough, so everybody can be aware of non of the other bodies delivering the same image quality as the Pentax K-1:

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

Given the old sensors and AA filters used its also not really surprising that The Canon 5D4 and Nikon D750 images appear as soft as shot using an 1980s kit lens.

More interesting than the above meh results is that the 50 Mpx Canon and 42 Mpx Sonys also have no edge at all (they should be at least as much better than the K-1 as the K-1 leads versus the D750):

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

even at ISO 100:

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

I would not expect the 77 limited to be so far ahead in simple resolution of more modern/current Canon/Sony glass to be the main reason for their somewhat underwhelming performance.
The 77 limited surely is the better glass overall, but bokeh and rendering here are not in focus.

The image processing of the K-1 just seems one generation in front of the rest.

[normhead]

More interesting than the above meh results is that the 50 Mpx Canon and 42 Mpx Sonys also have no edge at all (they should be at least as much better than the K-1 as the K-1 leads versus the D750):

The Canon 50 is not really thought very highly of as far as I can tell, and 42MP compared to 36 MP is not much of an increase. D750 to K-1, the K-1 is 50% more pixels. The 42 Mp senosr has 17% more pixels. That's not worth buying a camera for unless it was part of a regular upgrade and you're just buying it as part of the package..