Originally posted by stevebrot Ed is Ed and he has shifted his mix of cameras a couple of times over the years. He is known for his strong opinions.
Being mostly a landscape guy, I could comment about a few of your assertions regarding choice of camera and "all that it takes", but who am I? Nobody buys my photos and I don't have a YouTube channel. I do have 40+ years of FF experience however and the difference in format is not measured in megapixels. I currently shoot the full range from APS-C through 4x5.
Steve
It is not about the camera brand, or about the eternal debate between full frame vs APS-C. Is about the people behind the camera. I don't need you to have a Youtube channel or people buying your photos in order to value your opinion, as long as it is argued. For me this gentleman called Ed is just a guy which talk to much and say nothing in the end.
I would love to see Pentax photographers doing some really heavy tests on Pentax cameras, and present us their thoughts and their arguments based on real field tests. As an example, there is a romanian wildlife and landscape photographer which shoots with Nikon and if you look on his reviews you would understand what I'm talking about. His name is Mircea Bezergheanu (
http://www.intufisuri.ro/ click on the link if you want to see his review on Nikon D7200). He refused to work for DXO when they offered him a job because he loves too much spending time in the woods.
I had Pentax K-5 II for almost 2 years and I was more than happy with that camera. I took a lot of good pictures at my weddings friends, I took a lot of good pictures to my nephews, etc. I didn't thought for a second that K-5 II will not be good for what tipe of shooting I had. That is why I bought Pentax K-3 II as an upgrade.
My problems with Pentax were different:
- no possibilities to test Pentax lenses (if I spend 1400$ or 2000$ on a lens, I want to be able to test it before I buy it)
- no third party flashes with P-TTL (like Yongnuo, Nissin, Godox, etc.)
- no smart triggers
- no service (my K-3 II was in the serial range with problems, and our official dealer told me that it will take up to one month until my camera will be fixed and shipped back to me).
That is why I left Pentax and went to Canon. But before buying Canon 6D I spent between 6 to 8 month testing that camera and I decided that the 200$ price difference is worth the investment.
So yes, pixel shift images are better than 6D images, but normal images (without pixel shift) are no better than 6D images. And I'm talking about low ISO images, taken with tripod.
Ed has a different opinion, but I'm going to ask a Pentax friend to borrow me a K-3 II and I will upload 2 RAW files and see for yourself.
Later edit: actually, I'm going to upload also 2 JPEG images, one from Pentax (with pixel shift activated) and one stack image from Canon (4 images combined) and you tell me which is which.