Originally posted by colodion We are preparing a comparison of the k1 with the zum Pentax 28-105 to balance the result of the Canon 24-105.
A scoop made with the 28-105 to 6400 ISO and f22
Interesting. I'm looking forward to see the comparation, but please, use real subjects in real shooting conditions. I'm certain that K1 has a little advantage when comes to details due to the lack of AA filter and also due to the little extra resolution, but no one is photographing at f22...
I will have another corporate shooting in 2 weeks and I think I will have the chance to do another test with K1 and 5D Mark IV. This time I will use my friend (and assistant at the same time) for some shots with both cameras so that I don't have to ask client's permission to use the images.
Here is another "example" where you can see that both cameras (5D Mark IV and K1) are quite close in terms of image quality, at least for portrait work.
Left image: 5D Mark IV with 70-200mm f4L IS USM @ 78mm, f7.1, ISO 200, 1/100s
Right image: K1, DFA 24-70mm f2.8 @ 70mm, f7.1, ISO 200, 1/100s
The image from bellow: 6D, 70-200mm f4L IS USM @ 70mm, f7.1, ISO 200, 1/100s
There are a little more details in K1's image, but the difference is small and visible just when you zoom on both images by 100%, as I did in my example.
Even my 6D did a very good job, but the lack of details becomes visible when you see the images from above. The client didn't had a clue that there have been used 3 different cameras, so as far as I'm concern, even with a K5 the results had been the same in the client's eyes.
We are the ones interested in seeing those tiny differences at 100% magnification, but for most of the clients any DSLR/mirrorless released in the last 4 years can get the job done, at least for portrait work. If you work for agencies and they often need to print large, then K1, 5DsR, D810 can be handy (if you don't have the money to buy medium format).
post images