[Digitalis]

I actually would say, there is a ridiculous amount of lenses available for canon in the wide end.

and half of them are complete crap.

[surfar]

The bottom line is that the K1 was created for existing Pentax users, not for Sony,Canikon reviewers.Its attracting attention from other brand users because of its positive attributes.


After a month of owning it ive finally tried crop mode, YES very good!


Now I suppose i'll have to find WHERE? that video button is?

[rawr]

After a month of owning it ive finally tried crop mode, YES very good!

I still haven't used that yet after a month with the K-1. Nor GPS, pixel-shift, WiFi, HDR mode, Astro-tracer, intervalometer, video, and probably 20 other things.

A lot to grow into with this camera.

[Ratcheteer]

Are you saying the D FA* 70-200mm is clearly behind the Canon 70-200 IS II because the FA 50mm f/1.4 obtains a lower resolution score than a Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 - on different cameras? No offense, but what kind of logic is that?

nah just pointing out that a lens released by canon in 1987 out resolves the FA 50 f1.4 released in 1991

[Digitalis]

pointing out that a lens released by canon in 1987 out resolves the FA 50 f1.4 released in 1991

The 1975 Pentax K50mm f/1.2 has less field curvature and lower CA than the Canon 50mm f/1.2L released 2007..you really don't want to play this game with me.

[pinholecam]

Too much whining about "not enough lenses".
Especially so from theorists who don't really have the camera or lenses.


Actually to the naysayers using this argument, its more like "do you have the $"

I have tried the DFA15-30, 24-70, 70-200.
They are very good indeed.
DFA15-30 for example is sharp to the edges for landscapes.
A match for anything out there.
Just need to pay up......
It may sound blunt, but any good IQ UWA to wide combi with AF (often without), will cost.

Don't even get started with the "but the original Tamron costs less ".
From the ephotozine review, the DFA had better edges.
Pentax may have asked for very tight test specs for their version of the lens.


Canon went thru 4 versions of a uwa zoom to get to the current good one (ie. EF 16-35 /4 L)
17-40L, x2 16-35/2.8L were not great on the edges.
The DFA15-30 is right, straight off.

[Ratcheteer]

you really don't want to play this game with me

now your just going backwards, no auto aperture, no auto focus and without a focusing screen gonna have to use live view
not everyone is gonna want to spend $300 on a secondhand lens

lets just agree to disagree :P

[Kunzite]

Red herring? Moving the goalposts? I see a pattern here...

[D1N0]

nah just pointing out that a lens released by canon in 1987 out resolves the FA 50 f1.4 released in 1991

Which is based on a lens design from 1965. Anyway it renders better than any Canon F1.8 There is a reason it is popular with Canon shooters.

[sculptormic]

In this K1 review, Tony recommends taking a regular photo before shooting a subject using Pixel Shift (especially if there is any wind or subject movement). This is unneccessary because one can extract and save a TIFF file from the first image in a four image Pixel Shift set. Tony obviously was unaware of this capability, which is not surprising given that he's not a Pentax guy (and likely has little if any prior pixel shift experience with the K3ii).

How do you extract that one image? In camera?

[Rondec]

now your just going backwards, no auto aperture, no auto focus and without a focusing screen gonna have to use live view
not everyone is gonna want to spend $300 on a secondhand lens

lets just agree to disagree :P

By this standard, I don't think that Samyang lenses should be counted as available in EOS or F mount. At least they do have an 'A' setting for the k mount, but not for Nikon or Canon, as far as I can tell. Obviously manual focus for all mounts.

[Ratcheteer]

Anyway it renders better than any Canon F1.8 There is a reason it is popular with Canon shooters.

actually the helios 44 and the ais nikkors are whats popular with the canon crowd, the rendering your referring to is just difference in bokeh which becomes irreverent once you stop down.

---------- Post added 06-20-16 at 11:34 PM ----------

I don't think that Samyang lenses should be counted as available in EOS

its controlled by the body and does have auto aputure, i own a 14mm in ef and a 8mm in e mount, sure its manual focus but do you actually need autofocus once you go wider than 18mm

[D1N0]

actually the helios 44 and the ais nikkors are whats popular with the canon crowd, the rendering your referring to is just difference in bokeh which becomes irreverent once you stop down.

The fact that helios 44's are popular doesn't exclude the fact the 50 1.4 takumars (as well as the 55 1.8's) are also popular. I was not talking about the bokeh, which is great too but the rendering of skin, materials surfaces etc...

[pathdoc]

My impressions are that he felt jilted that Ricoh never sent him one to test. This is maybe why he makes comparisons with cameras a lot more expensive.

Oh yep. I can see why they didn’t too. I reckon they knew what was coming.

At the end of the day, it remains a biased review.* Either that or he didn't do his homework, which contradicts the opinion that Tony Northrup is a detailed, independent, unbiased reviewer.

I have never held that opinion, and after this I never will.

I actually would say, there is a ridiculous amount of lenses available for canon in the wide end. Way too much overlap

Quantity in lieu of quality?

now your just going backwards, no auto aperture, no auto focus and without a focusing screen gonna have to use live view

A lot of people don’t mind shooting this way. Leave them to their methods and you stick with yours.

Oh..too funny! @4:44 - exactly!!!! Total creep factor with Matt.

I’m not the only one who feels this? Good.

I think the grudging tone of the review, though, was the thing that grated most with me

And me. There is legitimate pointing out of flaws and then there is character assassination – this felt far more like the latter.

I have two of them.

I feel the pain of your oversupply. Let me PM you my address and you can send me one to ease your suffering. I will even pay shipping


As far as the lens availability thing is concerned – he’d better hope he’s never caught with an adapted +/- mutilated Takumar or SMC-Pentax lens on any of his cameras, or he’s going to be given hell. I suspect he knows just how many full-frame Pentax lenses there are out there and that ALL OF THEM are usable on the K-1, so he restricted his terms of reference to digital-optimised lenses to wriggle around the fact that this is a door closed to Canon and only open to Nikon with interesting convolutions.

[sbh]

In this K1 review, Tony recommends taking a regular photo before shooting a subject using Pixel Shift (especially if there is any wind or subject movement). This is unneccessary because one can extract and save a TIFF file from the first image in a four image Pixel Shift set. Tony obviously was unaware of this capability, which is not surprising given that he's not a Pentax guy (and likely has little if any prior pixel shift experience with the K3ii).

How do you extract that one image? In camera?

Maybe some people don't understand all the Pixelshift options. The way it works is that you can choose in post whether you want to use
- the regular shot
- the pixelshift shot
- the pixelshift motion corrected shot

No need to make an additional safe-shot. Silkypix 7 isn't the official Pentax software. I've tried it and it didn't work properly with PS images. The official and proper tool is DCU 5. Well, it has an awful UI, but the image quality is Excellent and on par with Capture One. + You get Diffraction correction which is noticable similar to PS. (Using DCU makes quite a difference in IQ.)

I don't have LR (I use Capture One) but it seems like it doesn't support all these features just like Silkypix. It's unfortunate that this leads to misunderstandings.