[MadMathMind]

They are clowns.

Once I realised that I started to enjoy their youtube nonsense.
It is not more than entertainment, though.
In terms of learning about gear, one needs to look elsewhere.

http://bokeh.digitalrev.com/article/pentax-k1-hands-on-first-impressions?utm...m_campaign=edm

seems overly critical about things other people haven't found to criticise (not mention ignoring a lot of stuff) - maybe they are Sony fans afterall :

They went in sour because they weren't recognized by the staff. This has more to do with their egos than anything else.

From digitalrev article :
"While the pentaprism harks back to the golden age of Pentax and makes no difference to the feel of the camera, the grip did feel a little too shallow in my hands, due to the thick camera body. It's not for the light-hearted, and weighs in at 1010g, which is marginally heavier than the D810 at 980g, and quite a bit chunkier than the 5D Mark III at only 860g."

This guy is smoking something. I was just admiring the depth of the grip yesterday compared to my D800E, which was shallower. Pentax fits like a glove, I should put a ruler to this and compare it. I also have a 5D mark 3 sitting around, i should test that too.

I found this discussion of weight laughable. Just put a lens on it...Canon and their plethora of 82mm and 86mm filter threaded lenses are going to eat that 150g in a few seconds. FA43 anyone?

[jatrax]

My main point is that I don't want big file sizes, and not just because of storeage limitations. Big files also mean slower processing and data transport.

While the K-1 is getting all the attention right now, if you do not need 36mp, and in fact you seem to want smaller files you might look at the K-S2 or the K-3II. Both have much smaller file sizes and also will use your existing Pentax lenses.

[Zygonyx]

As expected, they're bashing Pentax for not being (insert mirrorless brand here). Yawn.

Let's forget about any "intuitive" conception lack in K-1 ergonomics...
And let's forget about those two effeminate teenagers, whose conception of photography is limited to that of geeks in the virtual world...

[Class A]

You Tube

You Tube

Unfortunately, it is not true that SR mechanism is used for video as well...
Still a great camera.

[Oakland Rob]

Thanks Dr_who,
You are probably right, although I am, instinctively, from the "less is more" school.

For example, my one and only digital camera is 10 years old and has a 5MB pixel sensor........

Two of the key attractions of the K-1 for me have nothing to do with sensor size.
First, I have Pentax film cameras ans Pentax-M lenses, the latter being useable on K-1.
Second, the optical viewfinder is a key "pull" factor for me. I hate staring at camera backs, held at arm's length.

The K-1 is NOT a less-is-more camera. Higher resolution means bigger files. You can compress them like crazy, but if you do that you'd be better off with a different camera. The large files are rather a non-issue since modern computer storage is cheap. But processing those files can be a chore for old wheezing computer equipment, and since this is a digital camera, you have to think of it as a system, and having an old monitor, a spinning hard drive, older processors, and limited storage is not gonna be sufficient with this camera. Or maybe even the K-3II.

I'd suggest you consider maybe the K-50; it takes much smaller file sizes, and works with all the same lenses the K-1 does. And has an optical viewfinder. And it's WAY less expensive. Buying a K-1 to take only JPEGs is rather a waste of money.

[jcdoss]

While the K-1 is getting all the attention right now, if you do not need 36mp, and in fact you seem to want smaller files you might look at the K-S2 or the K-3II. Both have much smaller file sizes and also will use your existing Pentax lenses.

Or you could probably set your K-1 to shoot jpeg and set the file sizes to something less than 36mp if you want small file sizes.

[Winder]

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-k-1-expert-review-28884

Not a single mention of AF performance..... Not a good sign.

[jatrax]

From the pictures they have firmware .38 so is this 'review' anything new or just a rehash of the early look magazines got months ago?

I like 5 *s across the board and editors choice but I don't see anything new here.

[Zygonyx]

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-k-1-expert-review-28884

Not a single mention of AF performance..... Not a good sign.

I tried once more DFA*70-200 the other day in good light, AF-C and 33 sensors alltogether, with focus priority and "keeping focus" at highest grade, i got in about 3 seconds a 7 shot serie of a car driving on me at about 30mph from about 50m to about 20 m : 6 of them where tak sharp, 1 a bit blurred. Quite acceptable imho.
DFA*70-200's engine is finally seemingly faster with K-1 fw1.00, than DFA150-450's engine. The SAFFOX "hunting drawback" can still happen in low light, but things are really improving.
Once again, K-1's AF speed is not as fast as the fastest Canikon body's, but now reaching the desired performance.

[Pentaxis]

The K-1 is NOT a less-is-more camera. Higher resolution means bigger files. You can compress them like crazy, but if you do that you'd be better off with a different camera. The large files are rather a non-issue since modern computer storage is cheap. But processing those files can be a chore for old wheezing computer equipment, and since this is a digital camera, you have to think of it as a system, and having an old monitor, a spinning hard drive, older processors, and limited storage is not gonna be sufficient with this camera. Or maybe even the K-3II.

I'd suggest you consider maybe the K-50; it takes much smaller file sizes, and works with all the same lenses the K-1 does. And has an optical viewfinder. And it's WAY less expensive. Buying a K-1 to take only JPEGs is rather a waste of money.

Thank you very much for your advice. It certainly is food for thought.

---------- Post added 04-30-16 at 09:57 AM ----------

While the K-1 is getting all the attention right now, if you do not need 36mp, and in fact you seem to want smaller files you might look at the K-S2 or the K-3II. Both have much smaller file sizes and also will use your existing Pentax lenses.

Many thanks for your advice!

[Winder]

I tried once more DFA*70-200 the other day in good light, AF-C and 33 sensors alltogether, with focus priority and "keeping focus" at highest grade, i got in about 3 seconds a 7 shot serie of a car driving on me at about 30mph from about 50m to about 20 m : 6 of them where tak sharp, 1 a bit blurred. Quite acceptable imho.
DFA*70-200's engine is finally seemingly faster with K-1 fw1.00, than DFA150-450's engine. The SAFFOX "hunting drawback" can still happen in low light, but things are really improving.
Once again, K-1's AF speed is not as fast as the fastest Canikon body's, but now reaching the desired performance.

Very good news. I don't need as fast as Canon or Nikon, but I do expect it to be faster than mirrorless. On K-3 the D-FA* 70-200mm is not faster than my Sony A7II and that is not a camera that is known for good AF speed. Hopefully my K-1 will arrive next week and I can finally test it out.

[Pentaxis]

Or you could probably set your K-1 to shoot jpeg and set the file sizes to something less than 36mp if you want small file sizes.

Many thanks! That is what my instincts are telling me, too.

Going for the K-1 rather than an APSC-sensored camera will retain all the desired fields of view of my current Pentax-M lenses: shooting compressed files, as you suggest, will make lower demands on the memory and processor of my aged PC. On the infrequent occasions when i need a huge print I could shoot uncompressed files.

Thanks again for your advice!

[Oakland Rob]

https://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-k-1-expert-review-28884

Not a single mention of AF performance..... Not a good sign.

No, it's a sign they didn't use it in any meaningful way.

---------- Post added 05-01-16 at 08:27 AM ----------

Many thanks! That is what my instincts are telling me, too.

Going for the K-1 rather than an APSC-sensored camera will retain all the desired fields of view of my current Pentax-M lenses: shooting compressed files, as you suggest, will make lower demands on the memory and processor of my aged PC. On the infrequent occasions when i need a huge print I could shoot uncompressed files.

Thanks again for your advice!

Just download some of the JPEGs that are appearing online—here, at dpreview, or other sites. Then see if you can successfully do any work on them. That'll tell you whether you're gonna have to invest in new computer equipment in order to use the camera. And check the system requirements for Digital Camera Utility at Ricoh; it would probably be the minimum needed to use the camera.

[Pentaxis]

No, it's a sign they didn't use it in any meaningful way.

---------- Post added 05-01-16 at 08:27 AM ----------



Just download some of the JPEGs that are appearing online—here, at dpreview, or other sites. Then see if you can successfully do any work on them. That'll tell you whether you're gonna have to invest in new computer equipment in order to use the camera. And check the system requirements for Digital Camera Utility at Ricoh; it would probably be the minimum needed to use the camera.

Thanks very much for your comments.
However, with respect, I do think I am marching to a different tune to you.

Then see if you can successfully do any work on them.

First, I have little wish to do post exposure work on my photographs. Even in my many years of doing my own black and white home processing I was unenthusiastic about dodging or burning-in. My pleasure taken in photography is almost entirely in composition, striving to capture the moment. Many photographers whom I respect, like Don McCullin in Britain, have expressed similar views, indeed even about digital photography more generally.

That'll tell you whether you're gonna have to invest in new computer equipment in order to use the camera. And check the system requirements for Digital Camera Utility at Ricoh; it would probably be the minimum needed to use the camera.

Second, I have no intention in allowing my photographic hobby to drive my level of investment in computer technology. My current computer is a 9 year old laptop, bought refurbished 7 years ago. I ditched MS Windows as my OS some three years ago, embraced Ubuntu Linux, and greatly prefer it.

Thanks very much anyway for your perspective and your efforts to help me..

[kvetcha]

Many thanks! That is what my instincts are telling me, too.

Going for the K-1 rather than an APSC-sensored camera will retain all the desired fields of view of my current Pentax-M lenses: shooting compressed files, as you suggest, will make lower demands on the memory and processor of my aged PC. On the infrequent occasions when i need a huge print I could shoot uncompressed files.

Thanks again for your advice!

From what I'm hearing from others, you cannot shoot in FF mode at anything other than native resolution. Apologies for the bad info I provided.