[monochrome]

The K1 is a step backwards for me with my HD LTD lenses.


If I needed it I would still be shooting the D810's I had... Better AF, Better lens selection, Better flash, Better FPS... Just sayin'


I still want a K1 though.

Great testimonial for Pentax APSc! The point of Pentax these days is - highly capable to best available cameras, in multiple formats, for a specific set of users who appreciate an alternative combination of features to the usual combination.

If K-1 doesn't meet your specific use case - use K-3ll. That dog can hunt too.

[D1N0]

You are of course, right, D1N0 ... but again, don't people report with the K-3 they don't even get 60MB/s?

There's always a bottleneck.

Yeah patience can't be bought though

[clackers]

Yeah patience can't be bought though

And what does the 5D Mk III, the standard Canon pro camera, have for tethering?

That's right, USB2!

Come on, Tony!

[phat_bog]

The USB2 port itself is capable of 480MB/s.

I think the issue with the interface is overrated when we realize the SD cards themselves can't get to those speeds.

No, sorry, my data & maths are good. USB2 is max 60MB. (which corresponds to 480 Mega bits. (X8) )

Nevertheless, your question is really enlightening as now i don't see any serious reason for reviewers to criticise Pentax for choosing USB2.

It would be interesting to know the transfer speeds through wifi now ! if any one knows...

[stevebrot]

but again, don't people report with the K-3 they don't even get 60MB/s?

I believe that is write speed. Read, as in file transfer is quite another matter. I suppose I could do a time trial as I have a couple of examples of both cables.


Steve

[stevebrot]

And what does the 5D Mk III, the standard Canon pro camera, have for tethering?

That's right, USB2!

Come on, Tony!

Sony! Don't forget Sony!


Steve

[totsmuyco]

I already know the limitations of my cameras. Reviews help me a bit. But as a matter of choice, I would make my own assessment if the product fits my needs. The decision will always be mine and no one else. That's why I'm using Pentax.

[Wheatfield]

Sooner or later, you have to freeze the design or the thing never gets built. I have a very interesting book about German ultra-long-range bomber projects during WW2, and the one thing that becomes obvious about a lot of the proposals was that the specification was constantly being changed to ask for more performance, or new things were asked to be added in - so airplanes were constantly getting redesigned, but never built (certainly not in production numbers). The best became the enemy of good enough, and eventually the whole programme was overtaken by events. Getting back to photography, the K-1 was delayed enough as it was; to keep it an absolute secret to work on it at leisure would have been impossible, and to delay any longer in producing it would have been unacceptable.

I read one time years ago that Germany could have had the ME262 in 1939 except Hitler couldn't bring himself to be satisfied with having the best fighter in the world. He wanted a bomber. That move might have cost him the Battle of Britain.

[monochrome]

I read one time years ago that Germany could have had the ME262 in 1939 except Hitler couldn't bring himself to be satisfied with having the best fighter in the world. He wanted a bomber. That move might have cost him the Battle of Britain.

"
Though best known as a late-war weapon, design of the Messerschmitt Me 262 began prior to World War II in April 1939. Known as Projekt P.1065, the aircraft that would become the world's first jet fighter received mixed support as many influential Luftwaffe officers felt that the approaching conflict could be won by piston-engine aircraft alone.

There was indeed a bomber variant.

[clackers]

I read one time years ago that Germany could have had the ME262 in 1939 except Hitler couldn't bring himself to be satisfied with having the best fighter in the world. He wanted a bomber. That move might have cost him the Battle of Britain.

Well, the first proof-of-concept German jet plane wasn't until 1939, so, no, that's not possible.

But the idea you and Pathdoc advance is correct - asking for design parameters to be changed once you've been awarded the contract is a great way to run over budget, over time, and even compromise original goals.

Where America and Britain put their car industries to work producing planes, the Germans trusted everything to relatively small, vulnerable, specialist companies.

Pentax has similar challenges facing its design teams.

[pathdoc]

I read one time years ago that Germany could have had the ME262 in 1939 except Hitler couldn't bring himself to be satisfied with having the best fighter in the world. He wanted a bomber. That move might have cost him the Battle of Britain.

I think your source is mistaken. He could IIRC have had the similar Heinkel 280 in '41 or so, but Nazi power politics being whaf they were, Ernst Heinkel was never really in favour and Willi Messerschmitt was. By the time Heinkel was allowed to bid for the last ditch Volksjager which became the He162, it was too late.

@clackers The problem was not the design team constantly changing the specs, it was the customer. And the old rule about the customer always being right carries ominous weight when said customer is Nazi Germany.

[Simen1]

You are of course, right, D1N0 ... but again, don't people report with the K-3 they don't even get 60MB/s?

There's always a bottleneck.

The bottleneck is USB2. There is constrains within the USB2 standard that wont allow use of the full theoretical bandwith. Its practically limited to around 35 MB/s. Read more about the limit here.

I believe K-1 potentially could transfer much faster then that if it had USB3 hardware. The bottleneck is most likely the USB2 interface, not something else.

[Wheatfield]

I think your source is mistaken. He could IIRC have had the similar Heinkel 280 in '41 or so, but Nazi power politics being whaf they were, Ernst Heinkel was never really in favour and Willi Messerschmitt was. By the time Heinkel was allowed to bid for the last ditch Volksjager which became the He162, it was too late.

@clackers The problem was not the design team constantly changing the specs, it was the customer. And the old rule about the customer always being right carries ominous weight when said customer is Nazi Germany.

I wouldn't be surprised. I was quite the history buff when I was a kid in the 1960s, but at that age it's hard to determine what is fact and what is fallacy. Heck, Donald Trump proves the same holds true for adults.
I did a little more reading after I posted that, and found that they had engine problems early on, as well as design changes brought on by Hitler's insistence on the thing being a light bomber.
It's hard to say if that one plane would have altered the course of the war, but having it available as a fighter in 1942 or so would certainly have made the allied bomber campaign a lot more dangerous and expensive. Apparently about the only way to shoot them down was to get them while they were still on the ground.

[clackers]

I did a little more reading after I posted that, and found that they had engine problems early on, as well as design changes brought on by Hitler's insistence on the thing being a light bomber.
It's hard to say if that one plane would have altered the course of the war, but having it available as a fighter in 1942

The problem wasn't Hitler, it was the design and manufacture of the engine - the British and American jet engines were better.

The German one was still a mess in 1943. When it was deemed ready in 1944, the durability was between ten and fifty hours before complete overhaul. You're not going to win a war like that.

By 1944, Germany was awaiting invasion and Hitler may have been right in thinking that the Me262 might have been the only kind of plane that could attack the Allied landings.

He was correct in that Germany's propellor aircraft never got through on D-Day.

Pentax scrapped its first FF DSLR when it realized the key component (the sensor) wasn't up to scratch, the Luftwaffe were in a desperate situation and kept going with their first-of-a-kind product.

[clackers]

The bottleneck is USB2. There is constrains within the USB2 standard that wont allow use of the full theoretical bandwith. Its practically limited to around 35 MB/s. Read more about the limit here.

I believe K-1 potentially could transfer much faster then that if it had USB3 hardware. The bottleneck is most likely the USB2 interface, not something else.

You're probably right about the real world performance.

But I think K-3 owners don't really get beyond 35MB/s either, and they have USB3.

The K-1 and D810 both shoot at about 5fps, so the Fujitsu bus can write to RAM okay. Once the buffer fills, though, it's then that slow write to the card.

MSC mode reads about 36MB/s from the K-3, PTP about 19MB/s, so there is a bottleneck there, Simen1.

Taking the card out of the camera and transferring images with a USB3 card reader gets about 90MB/s.

Northrup should know better because he's technically minded (I used to have a couple of his system administration books as references) but like the lenses comparison, he obviously hasn't researched the issue.