Originally posted by Rondec Regardless, it is telling that the K-1 (priced at 1900 in the US) is being compared to cameras priced at 3000 and more. Pentax needs to work on their lens line up and auto focus speed, but if you look at the graphs, the K-1 in terms of sensor performance compares well to any camera on the market.
I know you aren't into landscape, but for those of us who are, the K-1 is a great and relatively inexpensive option. The 6D Mk II, which is what this thread is about, wouldn't be.
As I said on many ocasions, each and everyone talks from his point of view and based on his own photography area: landscape, action, portraits, street, product, etc. I never said that 6D Mark II is in the same league with K1 (except maybe when comes to af and video) and I don't even understand why people compare these 2 cameras. Why they do that, because of the similar price?
Canon has a lot of full frame cameras, sorted on categories. Pentax has only one and competes with other brands mostly on landscape photography due to it's sensor and the landscape dedicated features. But some people from this forum live with the impression that K1 is better than Nikon, Canon, Sony at everything, which is absurd. Some people even say that K1 is better than A9, D5, 1Dx Mark II due to the image quality. But who needs 36mp and 4fps with slow as a mule buffer for sports? Only the ones who shoots for pleasure.
You say that your wife is into weddings. Give her for a week a 5D Mark IV and then ask her to give you her opinion compared to K1. Or give her a D750 for a week to shoot weddings with it. Are those 2 cameras worth 2.500 - 3.000 $? It is a question of which someone could answer after he shoots side by side with them, but for money, not for pleasure.
I have a few friends with K1 and I know the limitations of the camera as well as I know it's strainghts. For a landscape shooter, 5D Mark IV probably isn't worthing 2.000$. For a wedding shooter it probably does. This doesn't mean that I can't shoot weddings with K1. It means that for a lot people an extra 1.000 $ can make their job easier for the next 3-5 years.
Yes, 6D Mark II is overpriced, but so would be K1 if Pentax would have to cover:
- marketing costs
- a lot of international events (where Nikon, Canon, Sony spend a lot of money)
- service centers costs all over the world
- video area
- autofocus performance
- etc.
Is the image quality better on K1 compared to 6D Mark II? No one will argue that. Why? Because I don't compare an entry level camera with a pro level camera.
You want to compare the image quality of K1 with 5DsR in the studio? K1 will lose this bet. 5DsR would lose the bet if you shoot landscape in a high dynamic situation. Would 6D Mark II gives me more keeper images if I would have to go and shoot some BIF or sports? Probably yes due to it's 6.5fps, faster buffer clearing and 45 af points, all cross type with 27 of them compatible to f8 lenses + tc. With K1 I will end up with the best image in terms of IQ, but with 6D Mark II i will end up with more images to choose from and because of that, I will end up with the best image in terms of composition. It's all about needs in the end.