[poseidonstouch]

Surely "the best" is the one you get most enjoyment out of? My idea of "the best" will be different from yours and everyone else different from that.

[biz-engineer]

What is the best Pentax camera body?

Pentax 6x7

The sharpest focus?

The plane of focus

The most professional equipment?

An invoice book

[UncleVanya]

But it's not ok to think a "pro camera" will make you a "pro photographer". A "pro photographer" will take "pro" pictures with ANY equipment.

I came across this article a while ago, and it's still a great read on the subject (and it involves the Best Deal in Photography™, the lowly Pentax 50 1.7 lens): I Got Tired Of People Giving My Camera The Credit For My Photos, So I Bought The Cheapest Camera And Lens I Could Find To Prove Them Wrong | Bored Panda

The cheap camera challenge videos on digital rev were classic examples of this:
cheap camera challenge digital rev - Google Search

[c.a.m]

What is the best Pentax camera body? The sharpest focus? The most professional equipment?

Not intending to offend, I think it's a difficult question to answer. I would say that "best" depends on your comparison criteria.

If cost is critically important, then a lower-priced camera would satisfy the requirement, regardless of its specifications or features. For example, a Pentax K-70. If a high frame rate is desired, then a K-3 Mark III might be the best. Best optical viewfinder in an APS-C camera? K-3 Mark III. Best Pentax DSLR camera for portability? Perhaps the KP. Best film SLR? Some would say the Pentax LX.

For me, the best digital Pentax camera is in the APS-C line, partly because I favour relatively lightweight, compact gear. My K-3 II hit a sweet-spot for price, performance, optical quality, and portability. The K-3 Mark III brings a significant advancement in features and performance, albeit at a premium price.

- Craig

[UncleVanya]

I failed to mention the 645z which as someone else pointed out can be the appropriate camera for certain pro users.

---------- Post added 09-14-21 at 04:14 PM ----------

What is the best Pentax camera body? The sharpest focus? The most professional equipment?

I went back and looked and you already own the k1ii and some fine full frame gear. I’ll tackle the question with a different angle than before:

Best Camera - as many have said it is the one you have with you. But in more conventional terms I’d say the most advanced camera available from Pentax is the K3iii. The K1ii is probably next and then the KP. Remember that’s changing the focus from “best” to most advanced. If you want pure image quality I’d say 645z, k1/k1ii, then K3iii but the order could vary depending on what the expectations are. The noise reduction accelerator can be negatively viewed by some. I think it’s a toss up. If the criteria is sports then the k3iii wins.

The sharpest focus - as someone else said that’s more about the lens. Manual focus is always an option! To be fair I’d like to change the emphasis from sharpness to something else. But I’ll give it a go as is. The 645z probably is slower and focus might be less accurate in tracking etc. but manually adjusted fine focus is probably going to be the best for a couple of reasons: 1) viewfinder size and magnification 2) image pixels. Taking the “sharpest” to mean most accurate - the k3iii seems like a no brainer.

The most professional camera - in Pentax I would say if the question is what Pentax camera is most often used professionally I would make a guess it is the k1/k1ii series. The 645z certainly might be a camera that has perhaps more pro level pricing but I think that’s a misread as pro level support is lacking in the entire lineup top to bottom. Pros using Pentax - like those using other Brands without pro level support make their own contingency plans and backup plans. It can and does happen that pros shoot Pentax but I don’t know that anyone has reliable data on what models are most used by pros.

[bickie]

The most professional piece of equipment is a tripod and lighting kit (flashes, reflectors, backdrops), because it is the piece of equipment that enable professional photographic results even with a bad camera and a mediocre lens. Historically, professionals have always been seen with tripods and lighting tools, whether it was in a studio, indoors, historical places and in outdoors landscape photography context, regardless what camera and lenses were used. Autofocus has never been a professional requirement, Pros have shot weddings, portraits and journalism with manual focus camera and lens.

Now I know why I leave mine up getting in the way. Inspiring to have a new rationalization for my bad habits. Not sure I will get to the 'professional' bit.

[Markpszk]

OK!

Maybe I asked the wrong question or should come more to the point.
I was basically wondering if the technical aspects of certain camera bodies are better.


The fact is this: For business purposes, I need to purchase let's say around $15,000 on additional equipment.

I have a K-1 markii
HD Pentax-DFA 2.8/ 24-70mm ED SDM WR
HD Pentax-DFA* 2.8 / 70-200mm ED DC AW
HD Pentax-DFA* 1.4/ 50mm SDM AW

ME FOTO PMU60 tripod

I'd like to be well rounded with the equipment to explore.

What would you add? and why?

I do appreciate your comments and expertise!

Thanks!

[Sandy Hancock]

Use the K-1 Mark II body you have. Buy a second one for backup.

Buy the DFA15-30/2.8 and a Lee filter system if you want to up your landscape game.
Buy the DFA150-450/4.5-5.6 if you want to up your birds in flight game. And a K-3 Mark III.
Buy the DFA*85/1.4 if you want to up your portrait game. And a wireless flash setup.
Buy the three FA Limiteds for their characteristic rendering and compactness.

That should make a decent hole in your $15,000 budget

[UncleVanya]

OK!

Maybe I asked the wrong question or should come more to the point.
I was basically wondering if the technical aspects of certain camera bodies are better.


The fact is this: For business purposes, I need to purchase let's say around $15,000 on additional equipment.

I have a K-1 markii
HD Pentax-DFA 2.8/ 24-70mm ED SDM WR
HD Pentax-DFA* 2.8 / 70-200mm ED DC AW
HD Pentax-DFA* 1.4/ 50mm SDM AW

ME FOTO PMU60 tripod

I'd like to be well rounded with the equipment to explore.

What would you add? and why?

I do appreciate your comments and expertise!

Thanks!

Lighting?
Upgraded Tripod?
D FA 85 f1.4 for shallow depth of field portraits at a comfortable distance.
D FA 15-30 f2.8 for wide angle landscapes etc.
HD FA 31 to complement the D FA 50 & 85
D FA 150-450 for long reach and fast focus.
K1 grip
D FA 100WR - for close shots.

Plus

Backup K1ii - this is essential
——or——
Alternate list if K1 backup can be apsc. This adds sports speed and reach also.

K3iii & grip
DA 55-300 PLM lightweight tele fast focus.
DA* 16-50 PLM
DA* 11-18

[ChristianRock]

OK!

Maybe I asked the wrong question or should come more to the point.
I was basically wondering if the technical aspects of certain camera bodies are better.


The fact is this: For business purposes, I need to purchase let's say around $15,000 on additional equipment.

I have a K-1 markii
HD Pentax-DFA 2.8/ 24-70mm ED SDM WR
HD Pentax-DFA* 2.8 / 70-200mm ED DC AW
HD Pentax-DFA* 1.4/ 50mm SDM AW

ME FOTO PMU60 tripod

I'd like to be well rounded with the equipment to explore.

What would you add? and why?

I do appreciate your comments and expertise!

Thanks!

So if I understand correctly, this is for a tax writeoff?

Yeah adding the D-FA 15-30mm f/2.8 and the D-FA 150-450mm might round up your K-1 system, and a 2nd body would also help.

Plus if you are a landscape or portrait photographer, a 645Z system would be a great investment and really give you an edge over other systems. The 645 25mm f4 lens is highly regarded and only available used, but it's not hard to find one. The 645 28-45mm also has a good reputation, and the 645 90mm macro is also a fantastic lens. Round this set up with the 645 55mm f/2.8 "kit lens", the 645 75mm f/2.8 "pancake" and the 645 200mm f4 telephoto lens and there goes a big chunk of your budget. And you should be a pretty happy camper.

Of course Pentax isn't the only player in the medium format game, a Fuji system might also be of interest. I personally love the Pentax lenses and I feel connection to the brand, but Fuji makes really great stuff as well, and seems to be more invested in their 645 system than Pentax currently is.

[biz-engineer]

Use the K-1 Mark II body you have. Buy a second one for backup.

Back-up for camera body, but no backup for each lens? It's not proven that lenses fail less frequently than camera bodies. Also needs a stack of memory cards and a pack of replacement batteries. I'd buy 2 x (K1 II + 24-70 + 70-200 ) and also two tripods and also two flash kits.
I have a K1 + K1 II + 24-70 + 28-105 (backup lens) + 70-200 2.8 + 70-210 4 (backup lens), 4 tripods and (unfortunately) one flash, I'm weak on the lighting.

[Markpszk]

ok,

I get the Professional thing.

I probably should of used the term: Technically superior for what I have in mind for my retirement.
Yes! it's photography.

What I want to have the capability of, is to be able to blow-up and print large format photographs.

like 2' X 3' minimum. 5' X 8' possibly. and maybe larger in-order to be the main focus for a large commercial wall. Bring life into the Architecture of a space; so to speak.

Could be abstract/ could be landscapes/ could be anything.
Although I can foresee some photos having merit to be out-of-focus, I would also like to have some photos spot-on focus like...blow away spot-on focus.

Would that be directing me to the 645Z camera? and can I use the lenses I have with that body?

[UncleVanya]

ok,

I get the Professional thing.

I probably should of used the term: Technically superior for what I have in mind for my retirement.
Yes! it's photography.

What I want to have the capability of, is to be able to blow-up and print large format photographs.

like 2' X 3' minimum. 5' X 8' possibly. and maybe larger in-order to be the main focus for a large commercial wall. Bring life into the Architecture of a space; so to speak.

Could be abstract/ could be landscapes/ could be anything.
Although I can foresee some photos having merit to be out-of-focus, I would also like to have some photos spot-on focus like...blow away spot-on focus.

Would that be directing me to the 645Z camera? and can I use the lenses I have with that body?

645z is the highest resolution Pentax / Ricoh available. And it has the most dynamic range sensor. So for some types of photos, Landscapes for example, there’s some advantage to using it. However, at these sizes the Brenizer method (Brenizer Method - Wikipedia) may be the best approach as the file sizes needed for 300dpi are massive. 100dpi may be sufficient depending on planned viewing distances. Here’s a link that gives some guidelines on the size of file needed for various print sizes ( How Large Can I Print My Digital Image? ? Pro Photo Supply ).

Given the relatively small gap in the k1 vs 645z and the expense of medium format and given your desired print sizes I’d guess you could stay with the K1 - but there could be some benefits to going with the 645z. The tripod and head would necessarily need to be larger and stiffer and your workflow on the computer with large files will require more horsepower so to speak. I’m honestly unsure if the budget is enough to switch to the 645z and potentially upgrade the computer/monitor and tripod and any positioning gear needed for precision shooting using this method. My gut says that the existing gear is pretty good and investing in making it work may be a better choice than gear chasing. Perhaps a high grade prime to use as your Brenziner lens would be useful. The D FA 85 comes to mind.

Obviously spare bodies etc become less of a consideration if the earlier Pro comments were about quality not commercial work.

Edit: 5’x8’ at 300dpi needs an original file that is 18000x28800 pixels. The k1 produces a file that has Max. image resolution: 7360 x 4912; the 645z produces a file with Max. image resolution: 8256 x 6192. (Sourced from digicamdb.com). Note also that the ratio of pixels is not the same so while the final ratio may seem to make one or the other format more appropriate, using this method already involves composing without a single view in the camera and requires many images taken in a single session which probably takes the ratio largely out of play.

Bear in mind another possible path is to use sophisticated software like Gigapixel. Here’s an article on the Fuji GFX 100 and how useless the pixel Shift feature is vs using this software. https://petapixel.com/2021/06/21/fujifilms-pixel-shift-feature-in-the-gfx-10...rly-pointless/. I’m not suggesting the Fuji (although a fine camera I think swapping systems is beyond the budget given the body costs 10k and there are other expenses to consider). I’m suggesting the use of the same software perhaps with the Brenizer method as the base for some images.

[ChristianRock]

Edit: 5’x8’ at 300dpi needs an original file that is 18000x28800 pixels. The k1 produces a file that has Max. image resolution: 7360 x 4912; the 645z produces a file with Max. image resolution: 8256 x 6192. (

This kind of calculation just assumes that the large print has the same viewing distance of a small print, where 300dpi is important (and I even question that, since the human eye can only resolve 220-230dpi, from what I read). 300dpi is really for pixel peeping with a magnifying glass.

Nobody will do that with a 5'x8'.

So I think a K-1 or 645Z image will be more than fine.

I would argue even an APS-C image would do fine when interpolated (as you mentioned) because of the viewing distance.

Is anyone here familiar with Roman Johnston? He seems to sell prints quite a bit, I guess mostly for office spaces, and a lot of his prints are about 3.5x5 (that's feet) and a lot of his most known/best selling pictures were taken with cameras with 12MP or even less (he's been around for a while and uses a D850 now).

[Markpszk]

645z is the highest resolution Pentax / Ricoh available. And it has the most dynamic range sensor. So for some types of photos, Landscapes for example, there’s some advantage to using it. However, at these sizes the Brenizer method (Brenizer Method - Wikipedia) may be the best approach as the file sizes needed for 300dpi are massive. 100dpi may be sufficient depending on planned viewing distances. Here’s a link that gives some guidelines on the size of file needed for various print sizes ( How Large Can I Print My Digital Image? ? Pro Photo Supply ).

Given the relatively small gap in the k1 vs 645z and the expense of medium format and given your desired print sizes I’d guess you could stay with the K1 - but there could be some benefits to going with the 645z. The tripod and head would necessarily need to be larger and stiffer and your workflow on the computer with large files will require more horsepower so to speak. I’m honestly unsure if the budget is enough to switch to the 645z and potentially upgrade the computer/monitor and tripod and any positioning gear needed for precision shooting using this method. My gut says that the existing gear is pretty good and investing in making it work may be a better choice than gear chasing. Perhaps a high grade prime to use as your Brenziner lens would be useful. The D FA 85 comes to mind.

Obviously spare bodies etc become less of a consideration if the earlier Pro comments were about quality not commercial work.

Edit: 5’x8’ at 300dpi needs an original file that is 18000x28800 pixels. The k1 produces a file that has Max. image resolution: 7360 x 4912; the 645z produces a file with Max. image resolution: 8256 x 6192. (Sourced from digicamdb.com). Note also that the ratio of pixels is not the same so while the final ratio may seem to make one or the other format more appropriate, using this method already involves composing without a single view in the camera and requires many images taken in a single session which probably takes the ratio largely out of play.

Bear in mind another possible path is to use sophisticated software like Gigapixel. Here’s an article on the Fuji GFX 100 and how useless the pixel Shift feature is vs using this software. Fujifilm's Pixel Shift Feature in the GFX 100 is Utterly Pointless | PetaPixel. I’m not suggesting the Fuji (although a fine camera I think swapping systems is beyond the budget given the body costs 10k and there are other expenses to consider). I’m suggesting the use of the same software perhaps with the Brenizer method as the base for some images.

Gear chasing is a great...to the point ...term. I appreciate you saying that. That's what it feels like.

I like your thinking, and thanks for all the info.

I will also look up Roman Johnston and a D850. thanks!!

I still have a leading question: Can I use my present lenses on the 645Z camera? and, if so, is there any advantage to it?

---------- Post added 09-16-21 at 11:13 AM ----------

This kind of calculation just assumes that the large print has the same viewing distance of a small print, where 300dpi is important (and I even question that, since the human eye can only resolve 220-230dpi, from what I read). 300dpi is really for pixel peeping with a magnifying glass.

Nobody will do that with a 5'x8'.

So I think a K-1 or 645Z image will be more than fine.

I would argue even an APS-C image would do fine when interpolated (as you mentioned) because of the viewing distance.

Is anyone here familiar with Roman Johnston? He seems to sell prints quite a bit, I guess mostly for office spaces, and a lot of his prints are about 3.5x5 (that's feet) and a lot of his most known/best selling pictures were taken with cameras with 12MP or even less (he's been around for a while and uses a D850 now).

I'm liking your thinking!

Thank You!!

I will be looking up Roman Johnston