[beholder3]

OK, definitely a better value, but the original comment was only making an image quality comparison.

And the D850 IQ is slightly worse than the K-1s image quality even without taking pixelshift into the equation.
Nikon is just no match for Pentax yet if you want top notch image quality.

[Rondec]

I think it cuts both ways. They are close enough that you probably couldn't tell the difference at most iso settings and most post processing.

Leaving the K-1 out of it, the question is if the D810 is still around and is 500 dollars less, would you choose the D850 over it? The answer is clearly that it depends on what you shoot. If you want to be able to shoot birds in flight, and wildlife, action photography, 4K video, or sports, then you probably would choose a D850. On the other hand if your work is portraits, weddings, and landscape, then the improvements probably wouldn't be worth it.

One thing to mention is that if you are shooting in crop mode with D810 you can shoot 7 fps. This is probably OK for birding, as you need an awfully long lens to actually fill up the frame with your average bird.

[beholder3]

If you want to be able to shoot birds in flight, and wildlife, action photography, 4K video, or sports, then you probably would choose a

If that was the case, I'd be a egocentric incompetent looser.

Really good images are not even 0,1% caused by equipment. Either I can or I can't. No lame excuses there.

[Rondec]

If that was the case, I'd be a egocentric incompetent looser.

Really good images are not even 0,1% caused by equipment. Either I can or I can't. No lame excuses there.

Sure. So those things make certain types of photography easier. People shot sporting events back in the manual focus days with very slow frame rates and slow film. I still would prefer faster frame rates (probably without as high megapixels) and top notch auto focus if I was shooting sporting events.

[awscreo]

Why do we care how well it stacks up though we have a great body that's capable of anything one can want from photography.

[funktionsfrei]

Anyway, it seems clear what sensor will be used in the K-1's successor. I'd bet on the D850's sensor, as the K-1 uses the D810's sensor.

Apparently, Pentax is abled to improve image quality even by using the same sensor, so the results of the D850's sensor in a K-1-style camera (with better signal processing and pixel shift) ought to be more than just decent.

And when might that beast hit the market? I'd say in two or three years.

[monochrome]

RE burst shooting at high frame rates - I had never seen the need. Maybe if I shot half-pipe snowboarding I would, but . . .

My son shoots most Lacrosse action single shot except in goal shooting situations. However, he recently made a case for 3 - 5 shot bursts at 8 fps when trying to capture his infant children's smiles. At that rate he can capture in a short burst his child's actual facial transition from resting to recognizing his father to full smile - with natural eye catchlights - in less than a full second. It isn't really spray and pray because he is aware of having too many files to process, but he is intentional.

Also, he is content to shoot APSc jpeg because he only posts to Twitter, Facebook, an iCloud account and his commercial website. There's no real need to shoot RAW and process, so a 7D is the right tool. He spent his money on the 24-70/4L IS and 70-200/2.8L IS. Any high end FF would just be overkill, whether K-1 or Canon or Nikon. D500 would be overkill also.

Here's a real-world user who has shot 30,000 frames since January, gets the quality images he needs and intentionally bought a NIB end-of-life body. Much of the discussion here really is not meaningful to lots of real world users.

[ffking]

He spent his money on the 24-70/4L IS and 70-200/2.8L IS

You might argue that those are overkill for his purposes too, but they will still be just as good as they are now if he decides to go into the type of photography where he needs bigger final images - and they hold their price pretty well - so yes, good choices - possible parental input?

[Rondec]

Why do we care how well it stacks up though we have a great body that's capable of anything one can want from photography.

I think the question folks (myself included) are asking is if Pentax goes with this sort of sensor for the K-1 MK II, what can we expect? Of course, there could be another sensor available by then, but testing and development start years in advance and certainly within a year before launch the sensor decision is probably set.

[monochrome]

You might argue that those are overkill for his purposes too, but they will still be just as good as they are now if he decides to go into the type of photography where he needs bigger final images - and they hold their price pretty well - so yes, good choices - possible parental input?

Agreed on the lenses, but parental input (Pentax) was declined; lenses having a 10-year life horizon and bodies at his frame rate only three was accepted. He bought at a local B&M store and also bought a drone and a GoPro. He markets his Lacrosse gear store on social media with the images and clips he takes and he's 22 weeks revenue ahead of Plan.

For larger image prints for store display he can borrow K-1 and FA*300/4.5 and buy processing and printing.

[ffking]

but parental input (Pentax) was declined

Thinking more of wisdom than brand

[mee]

If people want to think the K-1 does or does not 'wipe the floor' with competing products, let them. It's just a camera.


I mean, it is fine to share opinions and thoughts on it, that's a huge reason for the forums, but some take it to another level... and I know, by experience, that it just gets escalated with no end. Because we're arguing subjectively as if the concepts we are arguing are objective.

[monochrome]

Thinking more of wisdom than brand

The most useful advice I gave - for Lacrosse action - move your focus point down to the belt buckle and compose for the entire body and stick - I merely passed along from a PF member.

[tgchan]

#proud owner

[awscreo]

Looking at detail resolution here: Image comparison: Digital Photography Review
the D850 with all its nominal pixels is not really showing any improvement over the K-1 non pixel shifted, it just falls behind with more moire.
And it really is far behind the curve when looking at K-1 pixel shift results, which seems to provide results similar to 60 MPx Bayer type.

The K-1 still is market leader with its max dynamic range: Image comparison: Digital Photography Review
The D850 seems to have failed to improve here, even at it's nominal ISO 64 its behind the ISO 100 of the K-1 not pixel shifted. Far behind when pixel shifted.

if you move the frame to the bottom right corner (with tube paints and brushes) and look at the object near the brushes (looks like a sponge? or some plant?) - d850 shows more detail there. I guess that's where the extra 9mp are going, or a sharper lens. K-1 looks better DR-wise, absolutely. With PS it's not even a contest. But it seems d850 (or the lens they've used) resolves more detail. It's more noticeable if you use the "Comparison" mode which downsamples the 45mp to 36mp.