[jonby]

Some firmware suggestions re RAW format saving options for the K-1 ...
In some Nikons like the D810, there are options for saving RAW files in different bit depths - specifically 12/14 bit. 12 bit RAW can shrink files, boost the fps a bit, and boost the amount stored in the RAW buffer by ~20-50%.
12 bit RAW is used in some Pentaxes already (eg K-S2), so it would not be a radical change to see that feature offered in the K-1.
Additionally, some Nikons have the option to save RAW's (12 or 14 bit) with different compression options - either lossless-compressed; lossy compressed; or un-compressed RAW, which allows a range of file size and image quality options.
Both Nikon and Canon also offer options to save RAW files in various image dimensions - eg Large (ie maximum resolution), Medium or Small, which adds more useful options to reduce file sizes, boost buffer and fps, and reduce storage.

I agree that some further options for RAW file quality and size would be desirable - especially with such a high resolution sensor. Personally I would never want to shoot in JPEG, but do sometimes want to reduce the amount of storage space required for non-critical work. Both reduced size and lossy compressed RAW options would be useful for me. I have used Canon's M-Raw format in the past and found it useful, though it's not that efficient (look at the numbers - less than half the pixels but two thirds of the file size).

Having worked with the compressed DNG format available through Lightroom, DNG converter etc, I find this offers a very high quality-to-file-size ratio which is far preferable to JPEG compression, maintaining much higher dynamic range and post-processing flexibility and of course being free from sharpening, noise reduction and other in-camera-processing artifacts. Of course you can convert files in post, but this takes time and you don't get the additional card space while shooting. Perhaps there would be a performance hit by using this kind of compression, but if it's just an option, I don't see the problem.

Either way, yes - size, bit-depth and lossy/lossless options could all be welcome if implemented well (Nikon's long list of combinations is a bit confusing and probably not the best way to do it). If there's a slight performance hit to deal with the compression then I personally wouldn't mind. I would have thought these could be implemented via firmware, though not being a camera engineer, I'm not sure.

[jeffshaddix]

One thing I didn't notice at first is that the K-1 is missing the underexposure highlighting in instant review and playback. On the K-5, we had an option called "Bright/Dark Area" instead of "Highlight Alert" on the K-1. Both over and under exposed areas would flash in red and yellow respectively when "Bright/Dark Area" was active. Looking at the online manuals, it appears that "Highlight Alert" had already replaced "Bright/Dark Area" on the K-3.

I wonder why they removed just the underexposure highlighting. Does anyone know? In any case, underexposure highlighting was a good feature that I used, and it would be nice to see it come back in a firmware update.

The problem I expect is ambiguity on the cutoff for underexposure. Overexposure is simple, the well of the photosite saturates, so you get a count value of about 2^14-1. For underexposure, where should the cutoff be set? It can't be 0, as read and shot noise will bump it up above that, and really you aren't seeing 14 bits of image in the preview, hence why we can push the shadows so much in the raw file.

I get what you're saying, but I don't think it was helping as much as you might think, at least if you shot raw.

[SteveD]

Wonder if the extended sensitivity has something to do with this.

[joergens.mi]

the pentax pef format is lossless compressed, i think the dng too. Reducing the size by removing two bits only saves space and loose informaton - for the one important picture. The price for hard disc is so low, that it shouldn't matter, you can save more space by deleting the bad pictures than to reduce the bits. You can only save 13.5 % space by reducing to 12 Bit. more interesting is the idea of storing smaller pictures by reducing the resolution horizontal an vertical (I don't mean cropping here).

[rawr]

The price for hard disc is so low, that it shouldn't matter

The other advantage of smaller RAW files is a potential improvement to fps, and a boost to the buffer. For sports shooting in RAW, that may be useful.

[Barry Pearson]

The other advantage of smaller RAW files is a potential improvement to fps, and a boost to the buffer. For sports shooting in RAW, that may be useful.

I believe the fps is limited by the time for reading the sensor, not what happens afterwards. (For example, I believe it isn't improved by shooting JPEG rather than raw).

But I think you are right about improving the buffer. That is too small at the moment.

[joergens.mi]

I don't think that this will improve the buffer performance. I assume in raw the full picture is held in the buffer (16 Bit wide otherwise the HDR calculations won't work) und compressed an written on the fly to the card. Therefore there is no win in the buffer by using 12 Bit. The jpg's will be written as jpg to the buffer and using much less space per picture. Reducing the size by reducing the pixels without cropping (to 24, 20 and 15 MPixels) can increase the performance as you can see with the crop mode (6.5 f/sec) why the crop mode did not get at least the K3 Performance ore more I ddidn't understand from the electronic part - mayby the mechanics is the limiting factor for th4 6.5 f/s.

[dakotapix]

When using focus point selection in live view, I'd like the four way controller to stay in focus point select mode after taking a picture.

The current behavior (unless I've missed a setting--very possible), is that the controller automatically reverts to settings selection when the picture is taken, and it has to be toggled back to focus point selection again if that mode is needed. This is not consistent with how the four way controller function works in the K-1 OVF or how it works in the K-5 OVF or live view. Not to mention it's just plain inconvenient.

[gerard7452]

Had a nasty piece of dust on the sensor on day one....
and found DUST DETECTION is not in the firmware like it was with previous models....please put back in

[jeffshaddix]

Digital preview on FX1 please? Why do I keep seeing lost useful functionality with each model?