[lsimpkins]

Yeah, Ken Rockhead would never show any bias like that...right? Pixel shift and SR are only gimmicks not worthy of mention in his world of "fair and balanced".

Regards!

Actually his review of the K-1 was positive, at least to me. He did find fault with Ricoh releasing a FF camera now without negatively commenting on the recent FF releases in the Canikon realm.

[monochrome]

Actually his review of the K-1 was positive, at least to me. He did find fault with Ricoh releasing a FF camera now without negatively commenting on the recent FF releases in the Canikon realm.

Strange that he could review a camera he'd never touched.

[mcgregni]

Come on... I know this is Pentax Forums but you've got to see how so many of these results are skewed in the Pentax's favour and omits things where the Nikon is superior? .....

It has the weaker auto focus system, terrible flash support (does it even do HSS?) let alone in built commander system like the Nikon has. .

Of course it will, with a compatible Dedicated System Flashgun .... exactly the same situation for any Nikon or Canon model as well.

True, we don't have the sophistications of the Nikon CLS or Canon TTL multi-grouping features, that's true, but we have all of the expected features for on-camera flash (HSS, 2nd Curtain, Multi-Flash, P-TTL, Manual, Bounce / Swivel, LED light) and P-TTL wireless with ratio control also. The wireless options are simple compared to Canon and Nikon, but we have the choice of great radio triggered alternatives for multi-group remote control like the Cactus system, for example.

The Pentax flashes offer wireless on-camera controller & master modes, including for HSS.

[KDAFA]

Come on... I know this is Pentax Forums but you've got to see how so many of these results are skewed in the Pentax's favour and omits things where the Nikon is superior?

Despite the D810's more sophisticated AF, it seems to me that in reality, neither camera here is ideally suited for high-speed, burst photography, because their high megapixel count pulls the max frame rate down.

I believe in fairness and objectivity.

The aforementioned "Pentax K-1 vs Nikon D810 Detailed Comparison" chart may have missed out certain points, etc., in either direction. Probably no comparison chart ever manages to truly and totally capture the whole picture, in either direction.

But in my comment earlier regarding the Nikon AF, in the context of fast burst shooting, I said that neither camera (neither K-1 nor D810) is ideal for that application regardless of AF, due to the max frame rate limitation. I think that's a balanced evaluation.

---

Last edited by KDAFA; 03-18-2016 at 11:05 PM.

[MadMathMind]

How in any way can the Pentax be better for Portraits? It has the weaker auto focus system, terrible flash support (does it even do HSS?) let alone in built commander system like the Nikon has.

Why would you need HSS for portraits? Are you putting your models in blazing sun that requires ridiculous shutter speeds? That seems like a poor way to shoot a portrait.

And the 51 vs 33. Of the 15 Nikon points, only 15 are cross types while 25 of the Pentax's are. For portraits, you don't need the world's most sophisticated system either--unless you're planning on having your models jump around while you shoot. You can place them pretty much as you desire with focus points and get exactly what you need.

[Nass]

Why would you need HSS for portraits? Are you putting your models in blazing sun that requires ridiculous shutter speeds? That seems like a poor way to shoot a portrait.

Fill on a sunny day. Sure, there are other ways to do it, but it's an option. See Simple Truths About High-Speed Sync | PixSylated | Syl Arena's Photography Blog on Light & Imagemaking

[mcgregni]

I would imagine many users of the K1 will use HSS in those situations (from Nass's link), as I do myself a lot now with the K7. The big advantage that the K1 will bring to it is an increased DR and deep shadow noise performance ....

The ambient light reduction often needed to bring highlights down with wide apertures (eg bright skies behind the subject), plus allow the flash lit subject to stand out, can have the side effect of pulling shadow areas way down ...eg under trees or buildings in the background. This high contrast can be a further distraction, so having more leeway with greater DR and being able to restore these shadows better will help.

The slightly shorter x-sync speed can only help a little as well. ....

[dcBear78]

Why would you need HSS for portraits? Are you putting your models in blazing sun that requires ridiculous shutter speeds? That seems like a poor way to shoot a portrait.

Yes... 1/800s. And I did some more today.

Tara by Crew One Photography, on Flickr

And the 51 vs 33. Of the 15 Nikon points, only 15 are cross types while 25 of the Pentax's are. For portraits, you don't need the world's most sophisticated system either--unless you're planning on having your models jump around while you shoot. You can place them pretty much as you desire with focus points and get exactly what you need.

I want as many focus points covering as much of the frame, with as little space between them as possible. But everyone has their own way of focusing.

Of course it will, with a compatible Dedicated System Flashgun .... exactly the same situation for any Nikon or Canon model as well.

True, we don't have the sophistications of the Nikon CLS or Canon TTL multi-grouping features, that's true, but we have all of the expected features for on-camera flash (HSS, 2nd Curtain, Multi-Flash, P-TTL, Manual, Bounce / Swivel, LED light) and P-TTL wireless with ratio control also. The wireless options are simple compared to Canon and Nikon, but we have the choice of great radio triggered alternatives for multi-group remote control like the Cactus system, for example.

The Pentax flashes offer wireless on-camera controller & master modes, including for HSS.

Not that I use TTL much but from my experience Pentax was a bit hit n miss where Nikon is extremely reliable. To be fair I never really got into flash photography until I moved to Nikon though.

Like I said I didn't mean for my post to put the K-1 down. Just highlighting some oddities. I truly think the K-1 will be the best FF landscape camera around. If the K-1 had come out a year and a half ago with the exact same specs I would have jumped at it. Too invested in Nikon to look back now.

[lsimpkins]

Strange that he could review a camera he'd never touched.

Sorry, it was Tony Northrup. There is no evidence in his video of his having used the K-1 so it boiled down to a feature comparison.

[monochrome]

Sorry, it was Tony Northrup. There is no evidence in his video of his having used the K-1 so it boiled down to a feature comparison.

That was a pretty old comment (as they go).

Tony's first-day recap of the claimed feature set was exceedingly positive, and he raved about PixelShift. He pleaded for a pre-production camera to actually review, which Pentax has been reluctant to provide aside from DPR and Imaging Resource it seems..

I think Rupert was bashing Ken Rockwell, who panned the camera on spec. (after all, it's a Pentax, not a Nikon).

[Rondec]

Yes... 1/800s. And I did some more today.

Tara by Crew One Photography, on Flickr



I want as many focus points covering as much of the frame, with as little space between them as possible. But everyone has their own way of focusing.



Not that I use TTL much but from my experience Pentax was a bit hit n miss where Nikon is extremely reliable. To be fair I never really got into flash photography until I moved to Nikon though.

Like I said I didn't mean for my post to put the K-1 down. Just highlighting some oddities. I truly think the K-1 will be the best FF landscape camera around. If the K-1 had come out a year and a half ago with the exact same specs I would have jumped at it. Too invested in Nikon to look back now.

I think both cameras are great with slightly different feature sets. The biggest draw for folks on the forum is the ability to use their K mount lenses on the K-1. If the D810 had a K mount, we would have been all over it long ago. Neither one is a sports camera. The D810 will probably have a slight advantage at base iso (and obviously has a lower base iso). Sounds like auto focus is better on the K-1 than past generation Pentax cameras -- but probably not quite as good as the D810.

The biggest thing to me that is a negative on the K-1 is that there isn't going to be a lot of new glass for it. We'll have three zooms, which will be nice and the FA limiteds, but I was hoping for a 20-ish mm prime.

Anyway, of course we are going to think the K-1 is better here on the forum. I mean, we get to mount our current lens line up on it, right? I will say that even though they feel pretty equal to me, the fact that the D810 is priced at 2796 and the K-1 is priced at 1796 (B and H prices) would push me pretty hard towards the K-1, assuming I didn't need any of Nikon's specialty glass. The D810 may even be slightly better, but it isn't a thousand dollars better, to me.

[WPRESTO]

MPO: The item that pushed many buyers to Nikon rather than Pentax, other than a long-term reputation that Nikon is a pro camera and Pentax a consumer product (going back to the original Nikon F which really established the brand's reputation), is that list of FF lens options: 74 versus 177. Not that anyone, including me with a terrible case of LBA, would own all of them, but there are quite a few optics made by Sigma, Tokina, Tamron, etc. that I wish were offered in K-mount. Would you like a Voigtlander 125mm Macro? Look at the offerings on EBAY for Nikon mount versus Pentax mount. Would you like a used 200mm macro made by your camera manufacturer? Again, look on EBAY for 200mm Nikon macros versus 200mm Pentax macros. Try to find an AF 200 macro Pentax versus a Nikon AF 200 macro.

[tabl10s]

Come on... I know this is Pentax Forums but you've got to see how so many of these results are skewed in the Pentax's favour and omits things where the Nikon is superior?

For example it rates both of their battery lives as equal. Yet the Pentax battery life is 60% of the Nikon. No mention that in lens shake reduction is actually usable for video unlike the Pentax's IBIS. And this is despite it penalising the Nikon at every opportunity for lack of stabilisation (when there are many situations where it isn't necessary). The graphs are laughable. How in any way can the Pentax be better for Portraits? It has the weaker auto focus system, terrible flash support (does it even do HSS?) let alone in built commander system like the Nikon has. Nikon smacks the Pentax for lens availability, most of them were actually made this century too. No mention of third party lens support.

I'm not saying the K-1 isn't a great camera. Some great features and unbelievable value. Just saying this comparison conveniently skips some details.

How do you know the flash is weak?

[Dr_who]

I'm all for cheering for Pentax, but I agree that this is a spread sheet comparison, and doesn't cover enough of the things that actually matter. How about actual image quality and noise at iso 800 or 1600. Sure Pentax iso can go twice as high, but few are going to use it. How much nice is Nikon's ISO 64 if at all.

Physical things like comfort in your hand, how the viewfinder looks. Sure they might both be 100% x magnification, but that doesn't say how well it looks when your viewing thru it.

[WPRESTO]

I'm all for cheering for Pentax, but I agree that this is a spread sheet comparison, and doesn't cover enough of the things that actually matter. How about actual image quality and noise at iso 800 or 1600. Sure Pentax iso can go twice as high, but few are going to use it. How much nice is Nikon's ISO 64 if at all.

Physical things like comfort in your hand, how the viewfinder looks. Sure they might both be 100% x magnification, but that doesn't say how well it looks when your viewing thru it.

Yes. The quality called ergonomics. How does it feel in your hands? Are the controls where you think they should be? I have both a K3 and a Nikon 7100. The latter is a really nice camera, takes excellent pictures, really fast accurate AF, but it doesn't feel quite right in my hands. Pentax was my first 35mm camera, and after at least 55 years and maybe 12 or 15 Pentax bodies, that shouldn't be surprising.