Sturm und Drang over the K1M2

stevebrot · 05-31-2018, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by rcolman

(unsubscribed)

My, but that is truly novel. As a dissenting voice that truly was interested in seeing the bad results that triggered a $500 loss for the OP, I am sincerely disappointed. I was hoping that the original post was just a poorly-worded lament backed by evidence and not a troll or rant aimed at fellow forum members. @rcolman, you disappointed my better inclinations.

Steve

(... "@" tagging will still send an alert...)

stevebrot · 05-31-2018, 12:32 PM

Originally posted by zapp

The DPReview of the K1ii is still the most comprehensive and complete review available for me. Pentax and Pentax forums worldwide have not provided more comprehensive data so far.

I will admit to not being impressed with DPR's camera reviews, an opinion that dates back over a decade (yes, pre-Pentax). That being said and having spent some time with the original set of DPR RAW files from the K-1II, I agree with those that feel that they maintained a low level of diligence in their testing and publication of results.* They also made fools of themselves in suggesting super resolution as a better alternative to hand-held PSR.** In all fairness, I also feel that some new product reviews on this site lack a strong testing component, though most are very complete and unbiased in terms of features and usage. I am interested, in seeing Imaging Resource's evaluation of the K-1 II.

Steve

* I did not keep the files, but the DNG that I downloaded from the original review were not in-camera files, but had been through both Photoshop and Lightroom before being exported as DNG.

** Having done some experimentation with super-resolution shooting, I simply groaned and rolled my eyes.

reh321 · 05-31-2018, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by stevebrot

My, but that is truly novel. As a dissenting voice that truly was interested in seeing the bad results that triggered a $500 loss for the OP, I am sincerely disappointed. I was hoping that the original post was just a poorly-worded lament backed by evidence and not a troll or rant aimed at fellow forum members. @rcolman, you disappointed my better inclinations.

As I said earlier, what we needed was a collection of images from @rcolman showing stars "being eaten". Everything else was just words .... and we already have plenty of them.

**Rondec** · 05-31-2018, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by zapp

The DPReview of the K1ii is still the most comprehensive and complete review available for me. Pentax and Pentax forums worldwide have not provided more comprehensive data so far.
The general conclusion here is that DPR staff is stupid and against Pentax. They used one of the highest rated lenses in their review. I have not seen any discussion here why the highly regarded FA 50M failed in this review. DPR mentions that lack of a f/1.4 lens from Pentax for AF tracking - oops, Pentax' new line of f/1.4 is not existing. Any comments here? Other reviewers, appreciated highly in this forum, play around with two camera and Rokinon 14mm lenses... The Pentax forum review tries as well, but results are not the most convincing ones.

What do we expect from K1ii after announcement: K1 performance w.r.t. to noise levels were never a problem for me, handheld pixel shift is a nice to have feature, AF performance is most interesting. DPR commented on AF performance positivly compared to K1. More reviews with educated comments about AF would be interesting.
All this detective work in reviews of others are a waste of time.

I think DP Review has different needs than many of us or for that matter, many photographers out there. The noise reduction issue is still a question -- not in the respect of whether it exists, but whether it is actually significant or for that matter, whether there is any true "pure" RAW file producing camera out there. Their analysis of pixel shift and dynamic pixel shift was terrible. The idea that anyone is going to replace a relatively fast, in camera process with a ten minute process involving a desktop computer and third party software is ridiculous. Clearly there are some people who will do that, but they aren't the focus of dynamic pixel shift anyway.

As to why their shots failed, I have no idea. I have a bunch of Pentax lenses and none of them show such softness in a quadrant like this lens did. User error? Not clear, but I doubt it is something simple like decentering unless some dropped the lens right before they mounted it on the camera to take the shots.

Pentax Forums will have a comprehensive review and will be honest. I'm sure they will address specific situations with real world shots from the K-1 versus the K-1 II. To me that will be more useful than the nonsense that DP Review is putting out.

**clackers** · 05-31-2018, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by zapp

The general conclusion here is that DPR staff is stupid and against Pentax. They used one of the highest rated lenses in their review. I have not seen any discussion here why the highly regarded FA 50M failed in this review.

I think it's already been pointed out that copy was decentred or the DPR staff were so stupid they did not test at 90 degrees to the subject, Zapp.

Keep defending them if you like, but they've admitted they botched the job - their critics were right.

texandrews · 05-31-2018, 05:09 PM - **2 Likes**

At least for this test test, but also going back a ways, and for other makes I might add(Oly and Sony have suffered in the past as well....). This is the essence that DPR apologists seem to be ignoring:

The differing methodologies, followed by a rather secretive swapping of images. Not only were different lenses used, but the 2 tests were done in different locations and the second one therefore needed to use a reconstructed scene. That's just not good methodology. It may wind up being that we indeed see the same issues all over again, but the first test was compromised.
There was this stubbornness to admit this, and from some DPR staff some real snarkiness to their replies about this issue. Sadly, some of that followed some typically intemperately worded posts by Pentaxians. Sigh. But in the end it was indeed tacitly admitted.
It's true, and there is plenty of evidence, that DPR has had a weird "relationship" with Pentax, and that they ding Pentax for things they don't ding other makes for, and also don't properly acknowledge clear price differences far in favor of Pentax. Dinging Pentax products for having lower specs in some areas while at the same time having higher specs in others, but at lower prices, sometimes 1/2 the price, seems extremely odd at best.
And then there are some inherent biases, for instance towards video specs---that's fine, but needs to be clearly stated.
So, generally, not a level playing field.

All most of us are asking is a level playing field: pros for one are pros for the other, cons for one are cons for the other.

Kunzite · 05-31-2018, 10:58 PM - **1 Like**

"Some DPR staff" said that if they were fair, Pentax would score even lower. He didn't say what definition of "fair" he was using.

**felixkh** · 06-01-2018, 03:07 AM

As it is, DPR has lost credibility.

Kunzite · 06-03-2018, 12:41 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

"Some DPR staff" said that if they were fair, Pentax would score even lower. He didn't say what definition of "fair" he was using.

Guess what, the score actually increased by 1. Which - using the same unspecified definition of "fair" - means that DPR is even more biased toward Pentax, and more un-"fair" toward the other brands

05-31-2018, 05:09 PM - 2 Likes	#36
texandrews Moderator Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Baltimore Photos: Albums Posts: 3,393	Well, for me there's several key issues At least for this test test, but also going back a ways, and for other makes I might add(Oly and Sony have suffered in the past as well....). This is the essence that DPR apologists seem to be ignoring: The differing methodologies, followed by a rather secretive swapping of images. Not only were different lenses used, but the 2 tests were done in different locations and the second one therefore needed to use a reconstructed scene. That's just not good methodology. It may wind up being that we indeed see the same issues all over again, but the first test was compromised. There was this stubbornness to admit this, and from some DPR staff some real snarkiness to their replies about this issue. Sadly, some of that followed some typically intemperately worded posts by Pentaxians. Sigh. But in the end it was indeed tacitly admitted. It's true, and there is plenty of evidence, that DPR has had a weird "relationship" with Pentax, and that they ding Pentax for things they don't ding other makes for, and also don't properly acknowledge clear price differences far in favor of Pentax. Dinging Pentax products for having lower specs in some areas while at the same time having higher specs in others, but at lower prices, sometimes 1/2 the price, seems extremely odd at best. And then there are some inherent biases, for instance towards video specs---that's fine, but needs to be clearly stated. So, generally, not a level playing field. All most of us are asking is a level playing field: pros for one are pros for the other, cons for one are cons for the other.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K1M2 - issues using manual lenses	rcolman	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	6	04-17-2018 07:48 PM
K1M2 Noise Comparison	rcolman	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	3	04-10-2018 09:31 AM
I got one - I got one - I got one (K1M2)	rcolman	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	8	04-08-2018 09:34 AM
Nature Red Kite (Milvus Milvus) Over and Over Again ...	Ian.morgan	Post Your Photos!	8	11-19-2017 04:29 PM
Apple triumphs over Samsung, awarded over $1 billion damages	jogiba	General Talk	40	08-31-2012 07:40 AM

05-31-2018, 12:18 PM	#31
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by rcolman (unsubscribed) My, but that is truly novel. As a dissenting voice that truly was interested in seeing the bad results that triggered a $500 loss for the OP, I am sincerely disappointed. I was hoping that the original post was just a poorly-worded lament backed by evidence and not a troll or rant aimed at fellow forum members. @rcolman, you disappointed my better inclinations. Steve (... "@" tagging will still send an alert...)

05-31-2018, 12:32 PM	#32
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by zapp The DPReview of the K1ii is still the most comprehensive and complete review available for me. Pentax and Pentax forums worldwide have not provided more comprehensive data so far. I will admit to not being impressed with DPR's camera reviews, an opinion that dates back over a decade (yes, pre-Pentax). That being said and having spent some time with the original set of DPR RAW files from the K-1II, I agree with those that feel that they maintained a low level of diligence in their testing and publication of results.* They also made fools of themselves in suggesting super resolution as a better alternative to hand-held PSR.** In all fairness, I also feel that some new product reviews on this site lack a strong testing component, though most are very complete and unbiased in terms of features and usage. I am interested, in seeing Imaging Resource's evaluation of the K-1 II. Steve * I did not keep the files, but the DNG that I downloaded from the original review were not in-camera files, but had been through both Photoshop and Lightroom before being exported as DNG. ** Having done some experimentation with super-resolution shooting, I simply groaned and rolled my eyes.

05-31-2018, 01:47 PM	#33
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by stevebrot My, but that is truly novel. As a dissenting voice that truly was interested in seeing the bad results that triggered a $500 loss for the OP, I am sincerely disappointed. I was hoping that the original post was just a poorly-worded lament backed by evidence and not a troll or rant aimed at fellow forum members. @rcolman, you disappointed my better inclinations. As I said earlier, what we needed was a collection of images from @rcolman showing stars "being eaten". Everything else was just words .... and we already have plenty of them.

05-31-2018, 02:13 PM	#34
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by zapp The DPReview of the K1ii is still the most comprehensive and complete review available for me. Pentax and Pentax forums worldwide have not provided more comprehensive data so far. The general conclusion here is that DPR staff is stupid and against Pentax. They used one of the highest rated lenses in their review. I have not seen any discussion here why the highly regarded FA 50M failed in this review. DPR mentions that lack of a f/1.4 lens from Pentax for AF tracking - oops, Pentax' new line of f/1.4 is not existing. Any comments here? Other reviewers, appreciated highly in this forum, play around with two camera and Rokinon 14mm lenses... The Pentax forum review tries as well, but results are not the most convincing ones. What do we expect from K1ii after announcement: K1 performance w.r.t. to noise levels were never a problem for me, handheld pixel shift is a nice to have feature, AF performance is most interesting. DPR commented on AF performance positivly compared to K1. More reviews with educated comments about AF would be interesting. All this detective work in reviews of others are a waste of time. I think DP Review has different needs than many of us or for that matter, many photographers out there. The noise reduction issue is still a question -- not in the respect of whether it exists, but whether it is actually significant or for that matter, whether there is any true "pure" RAW file producing camera out there. Their analysis of pixel shift and dynamic pixel shift was terrible. The idea that anyone is going to replace a relatively fast, in camera process with a ten minute process involving a desktop computer and third party software is ridiculous. Clearly there are some people who will do that, but they aren't the focus of dynamic pixel shift anyway. As to why their shots failed, I have no idea. I have a bunch of Pentax lenses and none of them show such softness in a quadrant like this lens did. User error? Not clear, but I doubt it is something simple like decentering unless some dropped the lens right before they mounted it on the camera to take the shots. Pentax Forums will have a comprehensive review and will be honest. I'm sure they will address specific situations with real world shots from the K-1 versus the K-1 II. To me that will be more useful than the nonsense that DP Review is putting out.

05-31-2018, 04:52 PM	#35
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by zapp The general conclusion here is that DPR staff is stupid and against Pentax. They used one of the highest rated lenses in their review. I have not seen any discussion here why the highly regarded FA 50M failed in this review. I think it's already been pointed out that copy was decentred or the DPR staff were so stupid they did not test at 90 degrees to the subject, Zapp. Keep defending them if you like, but they've admitted they botched the job - their critics were right.

05-31-2018, 10:58 PM - 1 Like	#37
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	"Some DPR staff" said that if they were fair, Pentax would score even lower. He didn't say what definition of "fair" he was using.

06-01-2018, 03:07 AM	#38
felixkh Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,201	As it is, DPR has lost credibility.

06-03-2018, 12:41 AM	#39
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Kunzite "Some DPR staff" said that if they were fair, Pentax would score even lower. He didn't say what definition of "fair" he was using. Guess what, the score actually increased by 1. Which - using the same unspecified definition of "fair" - means that DPR is even more biased toward Pentax, and more un-"fair" toward the other brands