Is this allowed ...could the K-3 be as good as the K-1 ?

repaap · 09-05-2016, 05:34 AM

I have noticed significant change from K-3. DR is better, especially with RAW files. I shoot only RAW. You can see differense in PP..not when you look 'flat' unprocessed image from the screen. Highlights which would be gone with K-3 are rescueable with K-1. So it gives to me what I needed. One can also shoot HDR, but all the time it is not possible and now not even needed.

I suppose that we shoot different kind of things.

**MJSfoto1956** · 09-05-2016, 05:47 AM

as a reminder, the next upgrade of the K-3 will likely not have much (if any) improvement in IQ. We are reaching an era of "IQ plateau" where improvements will be incremental at best. The real changes will need to be in the area of open APIs, software enhancements, and modularity (and lenses). My hope for the next K-3* series would be to make it similar in ergonomics and controls as the K-1 -- that would be a killer pairing in my opinion.

M

bxf · 09-05-2016, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by BarryE

Will I now be banned ?

There are banning offenses, and there are hanging ones. Yours is not the former

Originally posted by Rupert

I bought the K1 because my K5IIs was badly damaged in an accident near the time the K1 was introduced...

Aha, yeah, OK. But did Mrs. Rupert buy this?

Rupert · 09-05-2016, 02:40 PM

Originally posted by bxf

Aha, yeah, OK. But did Mrs. Rupert buy this?

Technically....but I placed the order!

She is right handy in a crisis...like when my K5IIs fell off the shelf and was badly damaged....fortunately, the K1 was just being shipped.....I guess I am just an unlucky, lucky guy!

Regards!

StephenHampshire · 09-05-2016, 03:20 PM

Originally posted by BarryE

Last week I received a new, shiny K-1 ... and well I'm a little ... don't know whether I'll be allowed to say this, but to be a honest, I'm a little underwhelmed. There said it.

Why ?

I am making this comparison to the K-3 I've used extensively with Limiteds and DA* s for two years. So far I've only compared with the D-FA 100mm - new 24-70 to come, soon. I chose to add the K-1, for a few reasons, not least I wanted large square crops, which I have struggled to achieve from the K-3 and pixel shift for art reproduction work. I had hoped for more, but ...

** First off it is very early days. So if I survive this I may add more:

It's very easy to adjust to from the K-3, apart from the much louder SR noise which threw me at first. It is bigger and heavier (as the lenses will be), and I will notice it. I will be carrying both cameras, so it is not a case of getting used to it. I'll have to adjust to the different dof and focal lengths, which have become instinctive - I bet I'll make many more mistakes. Sadly mistakes, equate to missed opportunities. I knew this would be likely to happen.

What has surprised me is how little difference there is between the quality of the files at ISO 100 and 200 between the K-3 and the K-1. (Using tripod, MUP and remote). The difference doesn't really exist in noise, even when the files are pushed in post. Also, so far, the dynamic range is virtually the same, at low ISO. The DR is where I thought I'd see a difference ... The K-1 is clearly better at ISO 400 upwards. I expect I will see no (or little discernible) difference from low ISO images when printed, apart from very large output. I've just sold an A1 commission from my K-3 - the detail and tonal range was very well received. Will I want to go bigger still ... ?

The k-1 is clearly a very competent camera, but for the way I *have* been working, it is very similar in output to the K-3, which shows how good the K-3 really is.

It is only a few days into my ownership, so this post probably means very little, especially as I probably work in a fairly limited way, having learnt to get my technique tuned to what the K-3 can do. I'm sure the K-1 will change the way I work. Whether it is worth the weight, expense and initial confusion, I guess I'll find out.

I tried out the 645Z when it came out and the difference in IQ/Noise etc between the K-3 and the 645Z was very significant. Folk have said the K-1 gets near - not for me it doesn't.

* Please don't read this post as being negative to the K-1, I know there are some sensitive types out there ;-). I am greatly looking forward to owning a FF and exploring different ways of working - this is why I eventually purchased it - it just hasn't wowed me to start with. I see it as a( small ?) incremental improvement ...

Will I now be banned ?

Barry, I see you are in Hampshire, I would be happy to pop over as we are neighbours, and relieve you of the burden of your superfluous K1 !!

bxf · 09-05-2016, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

my K5IIs was badly damaged in an accident

Originally posted by bxf

Aha, yeah, OK. But did Mrs. Rupert buy this?

Originally posted by Rupert

Technically....but I placed the order!

Sorry I wasn't clear. I was wondering if she fell for the "accident" part

Rupert · 09-05-2016, 08:41 PM

Certainly...everyone knows old "honest Rupert"! You are confusing me with my little squirrel buddy...now that is a whole different story!

Regards!

BTW - The K1 was a good choice for me....it has rekindled my joy of shooting.

Most of my shooting is in the woods and low light..ISO 1600 or above and the K1 will lock focus in low light instantly!

I cuss less than ever!

**BarryE** · 09-05-2016, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by bxf

There are banning offenses, and there are hanging ones. Yours is not the former

The kindness and generosity of members of this forum, never fails to impress me. I expected to be hanged, drawn and quartered, so it is with much relief, I say, thank you kind sir ;-)

My poor unloved K-1 has sat unused for a few days, whilst I've been busy on other things. I'll give it a second chance over the next few days ...

---------- Post added 09-06-16 at 07:40 AM ----------

Originally posted by StephenHampshire

Barry, I see you are in Hampshire, I would be happy to pop over as we are neighbours, and relieve you of the burden of your superfluous K1 !!

Thanks Stephen, I'll certainly bear that in mind. Maybe I'll see you in the wilds, some time ...Just realised I suspect I may know your mother and we may have met many years ago ? PM from now perhaps ...

hoopsontoast · 09-06-2016, 12:01 AM

The main two differences for me, going from a K-3II to the K-1 have been High ISO performance and being able to push files a lot more.
I tend to mainly shoot the K-1 on Auto ISO between 100 and 1600, noise is not really an issue whatsoever in that area, and really usable between 3200 and 6400.

Like this shot at ISO6400, IIRC with no NR in LR.

These two for example, were shot in very bright light but I was able to push the shadows a LOT more than previously with the K-3II, no they are not the most amazing shots but the results did not look too 'HDR'ish.

Rico · 09-06-2016, 06:24 AM

The major thing why the K3 or any APS-C camera can not be as good as a Full Frame camera is Field of View for wide angle lenses. Some may prefer the crop factor on APS-C for telephoto but for wide angle shooting Full Frame can not be beat.

**BarryE** · 09-06-2016, 08:31 AM

Originally posted by Rico

The major thing why the K3 or any APS-C camera can not be as good as a Full Frame camera is Field of View for wide angle lenses. Some may prefer the crop factor on APS-C for telephoto but for wide angle shooting Full Frame can not be beat.

Agreed, up to a point. 15/16mm on APS-C is wide enough for the vast majority of landscape shots for me. As shots go wider and wider then the image's depth can often start to be lost, I feel. Ignoring the portability of a K-3/15mm combination .... against what's on offer for the K-1.

Anyway, that is a little distraction from my original point. I've now received my 24-70 and had a quick play. It is big and heavy on the K-1, but the balance is fine. It is quickly obvious that noise is of no consequence to 800 ISO and negligible to 1600 even 3200 on the K-1. I was never really happy going above 400 on the K-3. So that's giving me at least 2 stops of extra speed, if I require it - but on a tripod, I don't ! I'm back to seeing negligible difference between the two cameras at low ISO. With time I'll run a print experiment to see if the negligible difference on screen equates to no difference when printed, in these low ISO circumstances.

I'm looking forward to be able to change the aspect ratio to 4:3 and 1:1 with sufficient resolution and no interpolation. This will be a big plus for the K-1.

So what if I leave the tripod at home ? Can I get the quality I want hand held ? A quick test has freed me up a little in composing without the tripod. I can keep the speed up and use the ff dof to work differently. It will be interesting to see where this goes. However, I've never really made use of the SR before as I tend to use a tripod all the time. With no tripod and SR on, the images do seem to be a little softer at times. Could be me or does the SR soften slightly, whilst protecting against larger shake issues ? Guess I'll find out.

I do tend to hike to a location. Plonk the tripod down and work a small area slowly over a few hours as the light changes. Now I've got an FF system, as well as APS-C, I can see that on many occasions the results will be comparable, but it's the new compositions and more extreme conditions where I feel I'll see an FF gain. This is likely to take some time...

Maybe on my first proper outing I'll carry a K-1 & 24-70 and a K-3 & 16-50, with of course my trusty tripod and remote - that could prove an interesting start. To be truthful, though, I've actually got little interest in any points scoring between the two cameras - I just want to understand what works for me and build on it.

I'll feed back occasionally if anyone is interested ...

biz-engineer · 09-06-2016, 10:07 PM

Originally posted by BarryE

It is big and heavy on the K-1, but the balance is fine.

Exactly the feeling I had when I switch from a K3. Now, since the K1 is the only camera I have, and I use the DFA150-450, I don't remember how the K3 felt, and I feel the 24-70 + K1 is small light weight combo.

noelpolar · 09-06-2016, 10:28 PM

Originally posted by BarryE

Will I now be banned ?

Ok given this some though.... consulted widely etc etc

First off.... in reference to the thread title.... no "it is not allowed" secondly the K3 "is not" as good as the K-1.

So, this makes you a statistical aberation! Thats it. I've looked up the rules for this forum and they don't reference statistical aberations so I don't think you can be banned.

However, as part of the wide consultation process I employed, several clairvoyants indicated a period of "enlightenment" that you are entering into.... so just stay the course.

**BarryE** · 09-07-2016, 01:32 AM

Originally posted by noelpolar

Ok given this some though.... consulted widely etc etc

First off.... in reference to the thread title.... no "it is not allowed" secondly the K3 "is not" as good as the K-1.

So, this makes you a statistical aberation! Thats it. I've looked up the rules for this forum and they don't reference statistical aberations so I don't think you can be banned.

However, as part of the wide consultation process I employed, several clairvoyants indicated a period of "enlightenment" that you are entering into.... so just stay the course.

I'm beginning to think that I'm embarking in a period of considered counselling, thanks to PentaxForums. At the moment I'm in a bad space. Recovery will be slow, but with the help I get here I *will* get through it... won't I ?

noelpolar · 09-07-2016, 01:59 AM

Originally posted by BarryE

but with the help I get here I *will* get through it... won't I ?

Of course you will get through it.... no doubts about that. Of course once through it, who knows where you will end up!
(For 10 plus years the most knowledgable people on this earth didn't even know if we'd have a Pentas FF DSLR!.... so what do we really know?)

09-05-2016, 02:36 PM	#33
bxf Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Lisbon area Posts: 1,660	Originally posted by BarryE Will I now be banned ? There are banning offenses, and there are hanging ones. Yours is not the former Originally posted by Rupert I bought the K1 because my K5IIs was badly damaged in an accident near the time the K1 was introduced... Aha, yeah, OK. But did Mrs. Rupert buy this? Last edited by bxf; 09-05-2016 at 03:11 PM.

09-05-2016, 11:36 PM	#38
BarryE Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,653 Original Poster	Originally posted by bxf There are banning offenses, and there are hanging ones. Yours is not the former The kindness and generosity of members of this forum, never fails to impress me. I expected to be hanged, drawn and quartered, so it is with much relief, I say, thank you kind sir ;-) My poor unloved K-1 has sat unused for a few days, whilst I've been busy on other things. I'll give it a second chance over the next few days ... ---------- Post added 09-06-16 at 07:40 AM ---------- Originally posted by StephenHampshire Barry, I see you are in Hampshire, I would be happy to pop over as we are neighbours, and relieve you of the burden of your superfluous K1 !! Thanks Stephen, I'll certainly bear that in mind. Maybe I'll see you in the wilds, some time ...Just realised I suspect I may know your mother and we may have met many years ago ? PM from now perhaps ... Last edited by BarryE; 09-06-2016 at 02:44 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Can anyone tell me if the grip takes AAs like the k-3 and is the battery the same as	Sorver	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	6	02-22-2016 08:00 PM
FF could be as (or more) silent as (than) K-3	RuiC	Pentax Full Frame	7	12-02-2014 02:16 PM
Is this as sharp as it should be?	Todd Adamson	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	29	11-03-2010 01:34 AM
Is this as good as it gets with K-x & kit lens?	Hemi345	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	37	02-12-2010 10:40 PM
Is the Rear Converter-A 2x-L as good as the 1.4x-L?	Syb	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	4	01-05-2009 01:45 PM

09-05-2016, 05:34 AM	#31
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	I have noticed significant change from K-3. DR is better, especially with RAW files. I shoot only RAW. You can see differense in PP..not when you look 'flat' unprocessed image from the screen. Highlights which would be gone with K-3 are rescueable with K-1. So it gives to me what I needed. One can also shoot HDR, but all the time it is not possible and now not even needed. I suppose that we shoot different kind of things.

09-05-2016, 05:47 AM	#32
MJSfoto1956 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Boston Posts: 1,305	as a reminder, the next upgrade of the K-3 will likely not have much (if any) improvement in IQ. We are reaching an era of "IQ plateau" where improvements will be incremental at best. The real changes will need to be in the area of open APIs, software enhancements, and modularity (and lenses). My hope for the next K-3* series would be to make it similar in ergonomics and controls as the K-1 -- that would be a killer pairing in my opinion. M

09-05-2016, 02:40 PM	#34
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Originally posted by bxf Aha, yeah, OK. But did Mrs. Rupert buy this? Technically....but I placed the order! She is right handy in a crisis...like when my K5IIs fell off the shelf and was badly damaged....fortunately, the K1 was just being shipped.....I guess I am just an unlucky, lucky guy! Regards!

09-05-2016, 03:20 PM	#35
StephenHampshire Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Winchester Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,523	Originally posted by BarryE Last week I received a new, shiny K-1 ... and well I'm a little ... don't know whether I'll be allowed to say this, but to be a honest, I'm a little underwhelmed. There said it. Why ? I am making this comparison to the K-3 I've used extensively with Limiteds and DA* s for two years. So far I've only compared with the D-FA 100mm - new 24-70 to come, soon. I chose to add the K-1, for a few reasons, not least I wanted large square crops, which I have struggled to achieve from the K-3 and pixel shift for art reproduction work. I had hoped for more, but ... ** First off it is very early days. So if I survive this I may add more: It's very easy to adjust to from the K-3, apart from the much louder SR noise which threw me at first. It is bigger and heavier (as the lenses will be), and I will notice it. I will be carrying both cameras, so it is not a case of getting used to it. I'll have to adjust to the different dof and focal lengths, which have become instinctive - I bet I'll make many more mistakes. Sadly mistakes, equate to missed opportunities. I knew this would be likely to happen. What has surprised me is how little difference there is between the quality of the files at ISO 100 and 200 between the K-3 and the K-1. (Using tripod, MUP and remote). The difference doesn't really exist in noise, even when the files are pushed in post. Also, so far, the dynamic range is virtually the same, at low ISO. The DR is where I thought I'd see a difference ... The K-1 is clearly better at ISO 400 upwards. I expect I will see no (or little discernible) difference from low ISO images when printed, apart from very large output. I've just sold an A1 commission from my K-3 - the detail and tonal range was very well received. Will I want to go bigger still ... ? The k-1 is clearly a very competent camera, but for the way I have been working, it is very similar in output to the K-3, which shows how good the K-3 really is. It is only a few days into my ownership, so this post probably means very little, especially as I probably work in a fairly limited way, having learnt to get my technique tuned to what the K-3 can do. I'm sure the K-1 will change the way I work. Whether it is worth the weight, expense and initial confusion, I guess I'll find out. I tried out the 645Z when it came out and the difference in IQ/Noise etc between the K-3 and the 645Z was very significant. Folk have said the K-1 gets near - not for me it doesn't. * Please don't read this post as being negative to the K-1, I know there are some sensitive types out there ;-). I am greatly looking forward to owning a FF and exploring different ways of working - this is why I eventually purchased it - it just hasn't wowed me to start with. I see it as a( small ?) incremental improvement ... Will I now be banned ? Barry, I see you are in Hampshire, I would be happy to pop over as we are neighbours, and relieve you of the burden of your superfluous K1 !!

09-05-2016, 04:17 PM	#36
bxf Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Lisbon area Posts: 1,660	Originally posted by Rupert my K5IIs was badly damaged in an accident Originally posted by bxf Aha, yeah, OK. But did Mrs. Rupert buy this? Originally posted by Rupert Technically....but I placed the order! Sorry I wasn't clear. I was wondering if she fell for the "accident" part

09-05-2016, 08:41 PM	#37
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Certainly...everyone knows old "honest Rupert"! You are confusing me with my little squirrel buddy...now that is a whole different story! Regards! BTW - The K1 was a good choice for me....it has rekindled my joy of shooting. Most of my shooting is in the woods and low light..ISO 1600 or above and the K1 will lock focus in low light instantly! I cuss less than ever!

09-06-2016, 12:01 AM	#39
hoopsontoast Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 861	The main two differences for me, going from a K-3II to the K-1 have been High ISO performance and being able to push files a lot more. I tend to mainly shoot the K-1 on Auto ISO between 100 and 1600, noise is not really an issue whatsoever in that area, and really usable between 3200 and 6400. Like this shot at ISO6400, IIRC with no NR in LR. These two for example, were shot in very bright light but I was able to push the shadows a LOT more than previously with the K-3II, no they are not the most amazing shots but the results did not look too 'HDR'ish.

09-06-2016, 06:24 AM	#40
Rico Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,204	The major thing why the K3 or any APS-C camera can not be as good as a Full Frame camera is Field of View for wide angle lenses. Some may prefer the crop factor on APS-C for telephoto but for wide angle shooting Full Frame can not be beat.

09-06-2016, 08:31 AM	#41
BarryE Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,653 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rico The major thing why the K3 or any APS-C camera can not be as good as a Full Frame camera is Field of View for wide angle lenses. Some may prefer the crop factor on APS-C for telephoto but for wide angle shooting Full Frame can not be beat. Agreed, up to a point. 15/16mm on APS-C is wide enough for the vast majority of landscape shots for me. As shots go wider and wider then the image's depth can often start to be lost, I feel. Ignoring the portability of a K-3/15mm combination .... against what's on offer for the K-1. Anyway, that is a little distraction from my original point. I've now received my 24-70 and had a quick play. It is big and heavy on the K-1, but the balance is fine. It is quickly obvious that noise is of no consequence to 800 ISO and negligible to 1600 even 3200 on the K-1. I was never really happy going above 400 on the K-3. So that's giving me at least 2 stops of extra speed, if I require it - but on a tripod, I don't ! I'm back to seeing negligible difference between the two cameras at low ISO. With time I'll run a print experiment to see if the negligible difference on screen equates to no difference when printed, in these low ISO circumstances. I'm looking forward to be able to change the aspect ratio to 4:3 and 1:1 with sufficient resolution and no interpolation. This will be a big plus for the K-1. So what if I leave the tripod at home ? Can I get the quality I want hand held ? A quick test has freed me up a little in composing without the tripod. I can keep the speed up and use the ff dof to work differently. It will be interesting to see where this goes. However, I've never really made use of the SR before as I tend to use a tripod all the time. With no tripod and SR on, the images do seem to be a little softer at times. Could be me or does the SR soften slightly, whilst protecting against larger shake issues ? Guess I'll find out. I do tend to hike to a location. Plonk the tripod down and work a small area slowly over a few hours as the light changes. Now I've got an FF system, as well as APS-C, I can see that on many occasions the results will be comparable, but it's the new compositions and more extreme conditions where I feel I'll see an FF gain. This is likely to take some time... Maybe on my first proper outing I'll carry a K-1 & 24-70 and a K-3 & 16-50, with of course my trusty tripod and remote - that could prove an interesting start. To be truthful, though, I've actually got little interest in any points scoring between the two cameras - I just want to understand what works for me and build on it. I'll feed back occasionally if anyone is interested ...

09-06-2016, 10:07 PM	#42
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,222	Originally posted by BarryE It is big and heavy on the K-1, but the balance is fine. Exactly the feeling I had when I switch from a K3. Now, since the K1 is the only camera I have, and I use the DFA150-450, I don't remember how the K3 felt, and I feel the 24-70 + K1 is small light weight combo.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-06-2016, 10:28 PM	#43
noelpolar Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Goolwa, SA Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by BarryE Will I now be banned ? Ok given this some though.... consulted widely etc etc First off.... in reference to the thread title.... no "it is not allowed" secondly the K3 "is not" as good as the K-1. So, this makes you a statistical aberation! Thats it. I've looked up the rules for this forum and they don't reference statistical aberations so I don't think you can be banned. However, as part of the wide consultation process I employed, several clairvoyants indicated a period of "enlightenment" that you are entering into.... so just stay the course.

09-07-2016, 01:32 AM	#44
BarryE Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,653 Original Poster	Originally posted by noelpolar Ok given this some though.... consulted widely etc etc First off.... in reference to the thread title.... no "it is not allowed" secondly the K3 "is not" as good as the K-1. So, this makes you a statistical aberation! Thats it. I've looked up the rules for this forum and they don't reference statistical aberations so I don't think you can be banned. However, as part of the wide consultation process I employed, several clairvoyants indicated a period of "enlightenment" that you are entering into.... so just stay the course. I'm beginning to think that I'm embarking in a period of considered counselling, thanks to PentaxForums. At the moment I'm in a bad space. Recovery will be slow, but with the help I get here I will get through it... won't I ?

09-07-2016, 01:59 AM	#45
noelpolar Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Goolwa, SA Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by BarryE but with the help I get here I will get through it... won't I ? Of course you will get through it.... no doubts about that. Of course once through it, who knows where you will end up! (For 10 plus years the most knowledgable people on this earth didn't even know if we'd have a Pentas FF DSLR!.... so what do we really know?)