[bdery]

Well, to begin with, I was always fully open to reproduce their tests in the exact same conditions, so I'm still an individual open to acknowledge a failure.
On the side of DPReview, they are scared, scared that after digging their own crave of denying anything that does not fit their conclusion.

I think dpreview made a bad job for their reputation with that.

After being purchased, DPreview became a marketing arm for Canon and Nikon.

Only when caught red-handed by a large amount of people will they acknowledge that they can mess up (or lie). They have little ethics and next to no credibility in my eyes. I stopped going there a long time ago.

[BigMackCam]

I get pictures I like. My skill is more limiting than my equipment. What do I care what they or their tests say?

Agreed. Tests are interesting, and it can be mildly irritating when websites - particularly those with bias for or against certain brands - put down the equipment we own and enjoy. But if I get the results I'm expecting, or at least I feel my equipment is capable of delivering those results (though I might not be!!), that's all that matters to me

[starbase218]

I get pictures I like.

That's good.

My skill is more limiting than my equipment.

I never understand quotes like these. You develop skills to work with your equipment to get the results you want. Some people have argued that technique can make up for the less-than-stellar (can we agree on that?) continuous AF of Pentax camera's. In that case, their skills could be better than the average Canon/Nikon sports shooter. Yet they may not get the same results.

Besides, DPR's job is to review cameras, not people and their skills.

What do I care what they or their tests say?

Any test is as important as you make it out to be. You decide on that. Just be sure you decide in favor of you, and not in favor of a camera brand. Whether it be Pentax, Canon or Nikon.

---------- Post added 07-08-2016 at 02:18 PM ----------

After being purchased, DPreview became a marketing arm for Canon and Nikon.

Only when caught red-handed by a large amount of people will they acknowledge that they can mess up (or lie). They have little ethics and next to no credibility in my eyes. I stopped going there a long time ago.

I don't know if you'll see this since you may still be ignoring me, but have you noticed the EOS 750D getting a 75% score and no award at all? The 760D got 77% and only a silver award. 80D? Again a silver award.

[WPRESTO]

those with bias for or against certain brands

BIAS: they like another brand better than mine; OBJECTIVITY: they are wildly positive about the equipment I own.

[totsmuyco]

The important thing is, you like what you have and you're happy with it. No amount of negative publicity should be able to sway you. I like my gears and I don't aim to change systems just because someone's opinion doesn't agree with mine.

Let's enjoy our gears and take more pictures.

[Bob from Aus]

Congratulations

[biz-engineer]

I will most likely never buy the K-1, so I'm not going to waste my time with that

Why are you wasting your time in a K1 thread then?

Again, that's your conclusion, not mine.

What's your conclusion?

I will most likely never buy the K-1, so I'm not going to waste my time with that

---------- Post added 08-07-16 at 15:01 ----------

Anyone can have an opinion. You can't override evidence with an opinion. Go at the court and tell the lawyers that his conclusion is not yours... you'll see how faster they conclude about your case.

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 07-08-2016 at 06:02 AM.

[starbase218]

Why are you wasting your time in a K1 thread then?

I could ask you a similar question. Having already bought a K-1 anyway, you probably don't need any buying advice right now. So why the interest in the DPR review?

What's your conclusion?

If you read through the comments section, they say they've repeated the test quite often in various conditions with various settings, and all provided similar results. Based on some comments, they updated the review to show a sequence where the center AF point was kept on the head of the cyclist, again with similar results. You could go on and on and, putting salt on every snail, but my conclusion so far is that I have nothing to really contradict their findings. From my own experience with the K-3 and DA* 60-250, tracking is less than stellar, often falling behind. And if you read through the Canon EOS 80D review, that camera also struggled (although not as badly as the K-1) with the cyclist test. I think it's no secret that Canon/Nikon tracking of, say, 80D/D7200 cameras and upwards is generally better than Pentax's.

[biz-engineer]

If you read through the comments section, they say they've repeated the test quite often in various conditions with various settings, and all provided similar results. Based on some comments, they updated the review to show a sequence where the center AF point was kept on the head of the cyclist, again with similar results. You could go on and on and, putting salt on every snail, but my conclusion so far is that I have nothing to really contradict their findings. From my own experience with the K-3 and DA* 60-250, tracking is less than stellar, often falling behind. And if you read through the Canon EOS 80D review, that camera also struggled (although not as badly as the K-1) with the cyclist test. I think it's no secret that Canon/Nikon tracking of, say, 80D/D7200 cameras and upwards is generally better than Pentax's.

You are right. I did not jump in DPR at first. I read there evaluation and since I had never really push the Pentax K1 AF system, I was curious about what I would get. So, I first took dpreview evaluation for true, I questioned myself and I went out to try it to see what I would get. I was surprised that I got worst case 85% keeper rate, and often 100% in focus, very different from DPR claiming 85% out of focus shots. I read comments from non K1 owners on DPR posts, saying that DPR review is probably right, from knowing Pentax AF reputation, somhow backing up DPR conclusion based on nothing. I couldn't accept this. If DPR conclusion is the 50% AFS shots are out of focus and 85% AFC tracking shots are out of focus, and I get the contrary from my camera, I can't let go that every non Pentax K1 owner will wwallow a conclusion that's so far from reality of the field.

If DPR would have wrote: Pentax K1 AF keeper rate >85%, not as good as D750 keeper rate 95%, I'd not have reacted. But saying that Pentax K1 keeper rate is 15% (85% shots out of focus), is a big fat lie that only people not having a Pentax K1 at hand can believe, and that's the problem because that's a serious blocking point for Ricoh to sell new camera. I was banned as soon as I put Ricoh in the loop to check DPR AF results... because at this point, knowing that they faked the AF conclusion, DPR guys started to pi** in their pants.

Immediately, they started to modify bit after bit their conclusions.

[starbase218]

Why are you wasting your time in a K1 thread then?


What's your conclusion?

---------- Post added 08-07-16 at 15:01 ----------

Anyone can have an opinion. You can't override evidence with an opinion. Go at the court and tell the lawyers that his conclusion is not yours... you'll see how faster they conclude about your case.

Funny that you should mention a court. In a court, both sides get to speak. Here, we only had one side so far.

I'm not accusing you of anything. It's just that, you might see some things differently from them (or from me).

[WPRESTO]

CONFESSION: I am a hopeless - and unrepentant - gear head. Always looking at, lusting after, and at this stage of my life (why put it off to later?) pretty much willing impulsively to buy some new, different, better, unusual, don't-have-something-like-that, better-than-the-one-I-have piece of equipment. Such pointless, illogical extravagance will sometimes lever inertia into getting me out taking pictures, just to see what the new toy will do. Are the images any better? Sometimes. The K1 is a palpable step up from APS-C in several ways. But is it perfect? Nope. That will be the K1Pro (K1s, K1 ii, K1 Super - whatever). Can hardly wait. Or should I switch to the new Hasseblad mirroless??

[Dlanor Sekao]

The Problem is ...... You were a Goat and Not a Sheep !

[starbase218]

You are right. I did not jump in DPR at first. I read there evaluation and since I had never really push the Pentax K1 AF system, I was curious about what I would get. So, I first took dpreview evaluation for true, I questioned myself and I went out to try it to see what I would get. I was surprised that I got worst case 85% keeper rate, and often 100% in focus, very different from DPR claiming 85% out of focus shots. I read comments from non K1 owners on DPR posts, saying that DPR review is probably right, from knowing Pentax AF reputation, somhow backing up DPR conclusion based on nothing. I couldn't accept this. If DPR conclusion is the 50% AFS shots are out of focus and 85% AFC tracking shots are out of focus, and I get the contrary from my camera, I can't let go that every non Pentax K1 owner will wwallow a conclusion that's so far from reality of the field.

You may get a sequence where 85 or even 100% of the shots is in focus. I'm not saying that's impossible. I've also seen topics in DPR forums where users posted their own sequences with a higher percentage in focus than the DPR test shows. Unfortunately, the test conditions were also quite different, e.g. a greater distance, less distracting backgrounds etc. So, my conclusion is that those sequences still don't prove that DPR deliberately made the K-1's focusing look worse than it is.

So my question would be: have you asked them about the speed of the cyclist, the distance from the camera, and maybe other relevant things? Have you tried to recreate that test as closely as possible? If so, you may have a point. If not, the K-1 might still be perfectly adequate for the situations you encounter, but it doesn't prove that their test was carried out in a way to make the camera look bad.

Again, look at the 80D review. That also had a significant percentage of out-of-focus images.

As far as AF-S is concerned, I raised eyebrows too when I read about the 50% out-of-focus rate. Haven't really looked into that though. I don't really need to either, because I'm happy with my K-3's AF-S performance. If you have a gripe with that, I could understand it better. But I thought this topic was about the AF-C test?

[biz-engineer]

Have you tried to recreate that test as closely as possible?

Yes, I went out one time and shot a cyclist at night. Got good results, but... the conditions where not the same. So I asked DPR for the conditions: 200mm, cyclist coming toward the camera, daylight, AFC center point, first frame focus prio, subsequent frames focus prio. I went out again, I photographed 5 cyclists running towards the camera, I got 2 photos slightly out of focus among 70 shots. I came back to DPR with 68 x 36Mpixel AF shots and they banned me. I gave up. What the point of redo their test if it's going to be rejected anyway.

[WPRESTO]

Moi?? Something Pentax I don't have certainly gets my goat, but it doesn't always work out. Ordered and received the new 15~30mm for my K1, but immediately on opening the box, I knew it was too big & heavy and I'd leave it home too often. So I returned it (thank you B&H for your liberal return policy and speedy service) and located a new Sigma 12-24 in K-mount that was much less expensive, smaller and lighter, as well as wider even if it does not, by the tests, have quite the optical WOW of the 15~30.