[rodaballo]

Instead of asking, what I need to do is to grab a K-1 one of these days and check how the manual focus behaves on this camera (a funny way to say if I am actually capable of doing manual focus with it).

Many thanks for your answers!

[ignath]

resurrecting this ancient topic, 'cause just bought brand new sony a7II, what caused anger and frustration! i wouldn't even think to get one if pentax had fullframe mirrorless. you hear me ricoh? no, you don't. had k-50 before, but quickly got kp and still am happy about the quality and features. writing in this topic as k-1 noise levels are even better than of kp. after few sony test shots i thought there is something wrong with settings, but they were all fine, then i suspected my specimen is somewhat defective, however only after deepdive into many iso tests published on the web i came to bitter conclusion, that iq of sony alpha I and II is crap. not to mention battery life. i always shoot raw and had no problems whatsoever with kp at 1600, 3200 and even 6400. i've shot concerts at 6400, sometimes even pulled 1,5 - 2 stops and result was very good with pprocessing. kp at 1600 produces minimum, almost no noise and gets seriously bad only after 6400. yes, yes, noise reduction is of an essence , but iso tests should be done without any. sony a7II photos at 1600 looks like kp at 6400, even at 400 i can see grain and color noise. sony, are you serious? the noise levels are unforgivable for fullframe camera with it's price. i needed mirrorless for attaching all the freaky lenses from old days, those of m39 mount, various projection and enlarger glasses i have, but am not able to use on kp. i guess the fate of my brandnew semicrappy camera is for shooting with open aperture only at iso up to 400 max. also it doesn't have multiple exposure option i need badly. the most wtf thing is that kp has sony sensor and as crop frame is far superior to fullframe sony a7II.
conclusion - sony? never again!

[brokeh]

resurrecting this ancient topic, 'cause just bought brand new sony a7II, what caused anger and frustration! i wouldn't even think to get one if pentax had fullframe mirrorless. you hear me ricoh? no, you don't. had k-50 before, but quickly got kp and still am happy about the quality and features. writing in this topic as k-1 noise levels are even better than of kp. after few sony test shots i thought there is something wrong with settings, but they were all fine, then i suspected my specimen is somewhat defective, however only after deepdive into many iso tests published on the web i came to bitter conclusion, that iq of sony alpha I and II is crap. not to mention battery life. i always shoot raw and had no problems whatsoever with kp at 1600, 3200 and even 6400. i've shot concerts at 6400, sometimes even pulled 1,5 - 2 stops and result was very good with pprocessing. kp at 1600 produces minimum, almost no noise and gets seriously bad only after 6400. yes, yes, noise reduction is of an essence , but iso tests should be done without any. sony a7II photos at 1600 looks like kp at 6400, even at 400 i can see grain and color noise. sony, are you serious? the noise levels are unforgivable for fullframe camera with it's price. i needed mirrorless for attaching all the freaky lenses from old days, those of m39 mount, various projection and enlarger glasses i have, but am not able to use on kp. i guess the fate of my brandnew semicrappy camera is for shooting with open aperture only at iso up to 400 max. also it doesn't have multiple exposure option i need badly. the most wtf thing is that kp has sony sensor and as crop frame is far superior to fullframe sony a7II.
conclusion - sony? never again!

As someone that has owned the a K-50, K-1, A7i, A7ii, and A7C, I have to disagree about the scope of your comments and point out the use case for each of the cameras is different. The K-1 is a fantastic low-light performer, and I generally enjoy Pentax cameras for still photography (the K-1 may be my favorite camera to shoot stills with to this day). The K-50 was a great camera, but it did not stand up to the A7ii in my low light usage, and I was usually able to shoot lowlight concert settings well below 3200 iso on my a7ii (the A7i is a different story that I'm more inclined to agree with). Noise wasn't an issue for me with my settings. With that said, the Sony cameras are designed to provide more flexibility: photos and video, and much of the developments seems to go into the video aspect of the camera. When it comes to video, Sony clobbers Pentax. I'm also curious how you found a brand new A7II, as it was released in 2014 and is discontinued, and even while the A7ii wasn't "semicrappy," low light performance was acknowledged to have taken a large step forward with the A7iii generation.

[ignath]

As someone that has owned the a K-50, K-1, A7i, A7ii, and A7C, I have to disagree about the scope of your comments and point out the use case for each of the cameras is different. The K-1 is a fantastic low-light performer, and I generally enjoy Pentax cameras for still photography (the K-1 may be my favorite camera to shoot stills with to this day). The K-50 was a great camera, but it did not stand up to the A7ii in my low light usage, and I was usually able to shoot lowlight concert settings well below 3200 iso on my a7ii (the A7i is a different story that I'm more inclined to agree with). Noise wasn't an issue for me with my settings. With that said, the Sony cameras are designed to provide more flexibility: photos and video, and much of the developments seems to go into the video aspect of the camera. When it comes to video, Sony clobbers Pentax. I'm also curious how you found a brand new A7II, as it was released in 2014 and is discontinued, and even while the A7ii wasn't "semicrappy," low light performance was acknowledged to have taken a large step forward with the A7iii generation.

as i mention in the beginning it's anger and frustration, so my statements are naturally a bit harsher than reality. i agree on k-50, it's way below kp, but still was decent cheap camera for 12bit gear, too bad it survived only 50k clicks (bought it used at 46k). i got a7II at recent black friday limited sellout at local sony center in Riga, they have all the alphas from first to last available, even the first. the price was unbelievable 659 euros for body only. also, completely agreeing on video, pentax can't beat sony on that, however i believe photo camera need to have all developement going into image quality first, then other features. i hope industry will not add a cellphone function to photocamera even autofocus is secondary to iq, i'm not using that either, except for the pentax da 12-24mm, which is impossible to focus correctly manually, but it's af is really good. personally i don't need video, naturally i tried a few tests with kp of course, it wasn't impressive to say at least. however i'll try that again with sony for sure, just not my cup of tea. that being said, for now i have to calm down and use a7II for shooting bokeh wide open with old freaky or modified optics as there is no competition in price for full frame mirrorless until i find a bag of cash on the street or an unknown uncle will leave me a massive inheritance

[Rondec]

As someone that has owned the a K-50, K-1, A7i, A7ii, and A7C, I have to disagree about the scope of your comments and point out the use case for each of the cameras is different. The K-1 is a fantastic low-light performer, and I generally enjoy Pentax cameras for still photography (the K-1 may be my favorite camera to shoot stills with to this day). The K-50 was a great camera, but it did not stand up to the A7ii in my low light usage, and I was usually able to shoot lowlight concert settings well below 3200 iso on my a7ii (the A7i is a different story that I'm more inclined to agree with). Noise wasn't an issue for me with my settings. With that said, the Sony cameras are designed to provide more flexibility: photos and video, and much of the developments seems to go into the video aspect of the camera. When it comes to video, Sony clobbers Pentax. I'm also curious how you found a brand new A7II, as it was released in 2014 and is discontinued, and even while the A7ii wasn't "semicrappy," low light performance was acknowledged to have taken a large step forward with the A7iii generation.

Sony's approach to camera pricing is to keep older cameras around to fill the entry level tier. B and H still has A7 II cameras with 28-70 lenses for 998 dollars, so it is still available. I'm guessing it is finally on its way out as there don't seem to be body only deals available, but it looks to me like if you want a cheap Sony, this is the one for you right now -- the next one up in terms of price on B and H is the A7 III at 1500.

[ChristianRock]

Asking Pentax to do mirrorless at this point is like asking Jeep to do a race car. There's a certain ingrained philosophy that is part of the brand now. It would be easier for Ricoh themselves to release a mirrorless platform based on the GR like Fuji did with the original X100. But even they haven't wanted to do that with the current shrinking market.

Also, I would not surprised that the A7II is really noisier than the KP. I'll just leave it at that...

[ignath]

Asking Pentax to do mirrorless at this point is like asking Jeep to do a race car. There's a certain ingrained philosophy that is part of the brand now. It would be easier for Ricoh themselves to release a mirrorless platform based on the GR like Fuji did with the original X100. But even they haven't wanted to do that with the current shrinking market.

Also, I would not surprised that the A7II is really noisier than the KP. I'll just leave it at that...

i would be happy about Ricoh fullrame mirrorless! for reasonable price. perhaps we can agree that noise amount is a personal preference, sometimes i like pentax grain, and i hope to discover that sony does better than my first tests. these days were really busy on social side, work etc i haven't shot a frame with new camera. on the positive note open aperture shots were encouraging and that's why i bought it as a second camera, to eliminate need to change lenses for modified or macro during unpredictable moments and longer walks. and for that box of m39's unused until now

[Wheatfield]

Pentax has indicated mirrorless is not in their future. Like it or not, that's just the way it is.

[ignath]

Pentax has indicated mirrorless is not in their future. Like it or not, that's just the way it is.

it is true, i don't like it, but can live with that. and other cameras