[superpowerpinger]

Dynamic range analysis for Nikon D850 is out on DP review. This should be the part of complete review to be released at a later date.

Nikon D850 First Impressions Review
Analysis: Dynamic Range

I used the Image comparison tool to compare the cameras:

1. Nikon D850 ISO 64 +6EV
2. Nikon D810 ISO 64 +6EV
3. Pentax K-1 ISO 100 +6EV
4. Pentax K-1 ISO 100 +6EV

Results:




From what I can see:

1. K-1 ISO 100 seems to be better than D810, D850 on ISO64.
2. K-1 with Pixel-shift wipes the floor with all other images.

[Wild Mark]

It is hard to not be smug about such results

---------- Post added 12-09-17 at 06:09 PM ----------

Also, I just noticed the giant difference in file size. WOW. K-1 packs a whack not only in IQ but also file size.

[beholder3]

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.

[Ash]

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.

Now that's a fine comparative study. Thanks for sharing this for the pixel peepers out there. It is noticeable even without pixel peeping

[beholder3]

The overall differences seem so miniscule these days, that at least from my perspective the image quality race with sensors has come to a standstill and I see no need to upgrade for this reason in a long time, especially not for solid 4-digit money figures.
Just the same with lenses. They all (inlcuding kit lenses, especially those as excellent as the DFA 28-105) deliver fantastic outputs which show not faults unless you really dont care for the photo as such, but go extreme pixel peeping for technical aspects.
We are now where HiFi audiophiles were when they started discussion around the question if an enthusiast would ever dare listen to music without using gold end plugs on the audio cables.

It's only really new features (not "enhanced") ones, that seem interesting. Like a lightfield sensor. Like a truly hybrid viewfinder.

Lets not forget that these consumer toys we discuss here are sold for the amount of money that can feed a family for a year in quite some countries.

[photoptimist]

The overall differences seem so miniscule these days, that at least from my perspective the image quality race with sensors has come to a standstill and I see no need to upgrade for this reason in a long time, especially not for solid 4-digit money figures.
Just the same with lenses. They all (inlcuding kit lenses, especially those as excellent as the DFA 28-105) deliver fantastic outputs which show not faults unless you really dont care for the photo as such, but go extreme pixel peeping for technical aspects.
We are now where HiFi audiophiles were when they started discussion around the question if an enthusiast would ever dare listen to music without using gold end plugs on the audio cables.

It's only really new features (not "enhanced") ones, that seem interesting. Like a lightfield sensor. Like a truly hybrid viewfinder.

Lets not forget that these consumer toys we discuss here are sold for the amount of money that can feed a family for a year in quite some countries.

Indeed! I'd love a true OVF/EVF hybrid to provide an optical view before the picture and a quickly EVF view of the resulting photograph.

For the most part, IQ has reached the physical signal quality limits imposed by the typical photon flux rates in typical photographic scenes. The only possible improvements could come from larger pixels but that implies either physically larger format cameras or reducing the megapixel count on existing formats.

Advancements are more likely to come in better automation of multi-image photography such as panoramas, pixel shift, focus stacking, HDR, time-lapse, and compositing that retains or removes features.

[Igor123]

Not sure if I'm misinterpreting or misunderstanding something, but shouldn't we use the "print" setting to account for the increased resolution you get with the 850? If so, I think they look quite similar instead, so I'd still say it's a win for the K1 since it's ISO 60 vs 100 and almost double the price, but maybe a tad more "fair"?

Edit: Just saw their definition of the settings...so in short, never mind =)

[Rondec]

The overall differences seem so miniscule these days, that at least from my perspective the image quality race with sensors has come to a standstill and I see no need to upgrade for this reason in a long time, especially not for solid 4-digit money figures.
Just the same with lenses. They all (inlcuding kit lenses, especially those as excellent as the DFA 28-105) deliver fantastic outputs which show not faults unless you really dont care for the photo as such, but go extreme pixel peeping for technical aspects.
We are now where HiFi audiophiles were when they started discussion around the question if an enthusiast would ever dare listen to music without using gold end plugs on the audio cables.

It's only really new features (not "enhanced") ones, that seem interesting. Like a lightfield sensor. Like a truly hybrid viewfinder.

Lets not forget that these consumer toys we discuss here are sold for the amount of money that can feed a family for a year in quite some countries.

I think the question is if you need 9 fps or 4K video. It is impressive that Nikon did as well with dynamic range and high iso performance while boosting frame rate and video as much as they did. Typically when you bump up read out speed a bunch, actual image quality goes down, at least a little bit.

At the same time, if you are OK with 4 fps and want maximal performance at base iso and don't shoot 4K video then I think the K-1 is a no-brainer.

[normhead]

At the same time, if you are OK with 4 fps and want maximal performance at base iso and don't shoot 4K video then I think the K-1 is a no-brainer.

The increased price of the D850 once again demonstrates, high FPS and 4k video doesn't come cheap. Its great to have a system where you don't have to pay for those things if you don't want to. Choice is good.

[JohannSMac]

The overall differences seem so miniscule these days, that at least from my perspective the image quality race with sensors has come to a standstill and I see no need to upgrade for this reason in a long time, especially not for solid 4-digit money figures.
Just the same with lenses. They all (inlcuding kit lenses, especially those as excellent as the DFA 28-105) deliver fantastic outputs which show not faults unless you really dont care for the photo as such, but go extreme pixel peeping for technical aspects.
We are now where HiFi audiophiles were when they started discussion around the question if an enthusiast would ever dare listen to music without using gold end plugs on the audio cables.

It's only really new features (not "enhanced") ones, that seem interesting. Like a lightfield sensor. Like a truly hybrid viewfinder.

Lets not forget that these consumer toys we discuss here are sold for the amount of money that can feed a family for a year in quite some countries.

That's what would have got my attention with the Nikon D850, a hybrid viewfinder. The shutter mechanism sounds atrocious and the price is atrocious! Will probably last forever but... I miss the evf of the Oly Emd Om1 which I parted with to purchase the K-3. After having the K-3 for a month I'm now selling it with some accessories because in the future I intend to purchase a Fuji X100F which will suit the majority of what I like to do more. The K-1 though would be my choice to get into full frame and probably will be in the future as I prefer to purchase used equipment. I'm going to be happy with my Canon SX500HS (limited but still very able) until I obtain the Fuji.

[beholder3]

The increased price of the D850 once again demonstrates, high FPS and 4k video doesn't come cheap.

Didn't the omniscient forum experts (who never show any photos which you couldnt take with a K10D) preach day in day out video is dirt cheap and costs only a few cents to add?

[LeRolls]

The increased price of the D850 once again demonstrates, high FPS and 4k video doesn't come cheap. Its great to have a system where you don't have to pay for those things if you don't want to. Choice is good.

Yes, agreed. Cameras keep coming out but I'm still happy with the K-1.

[Rondec]

Didn't the omniscient forum experts (who never show any photos which you couldnt take with a K10D) preach day in day out video is dirt cheap and costs only a few cents to add?

I think it depends, doesn't it? If you have a modern CMOS sensor capable of 4 or 5 frames per second, it can do HD video. The rest is just software.

But when you get into 4K and 6K video, you really do need to have sensors capable of higher read out speeds and with big sensors, those aren't cheap.

I think the point is more that just "leaving video off" doesn't save money if the sensor is video capable. The expense comes when you go to a higher end sensor.

If Pentax decided for the K1 sequel that they wanted to use the D850 sensor, the cost will be roughly the same regardless of whether or not they choose to enable 4K video.

[PiotrM]

Dynamic range analysis for Nikon D850 is out on DP review. This should be the part of complete review to be released at a later date.

Nikon D850 First Impressions Review
Analysis: Dynamic Range

I used the Image comparison tool to compare the cameras:

1. Nikon D850 ISO 64 +6EV
2. Nikon D810 ISO 64 +6EV
3. Pentax K-1 ISO 100 +6EV
4. Pentax K-1 ISO 100 +6EV

Results:




From what I can see:

1. K-1 ISO 100 seems to be better than D810, D850 on ISO64.
2. K-1 with Pixel-shift wipes the floor with all other images.

The image comparison tool was one of the reasons I bought this camera. Be aware that pixel shift is only good for a scene that is perfectly still, and even then you can get "teeth" around edges if you pixel peep really carefully. But, yeah, it does well compared with the competition. I didn't care much about slightly higher fps, 4k video or a huge lens selection, while I do like the on-board image stabilization, the pixel shift, the ease of use and other goodies like astrotracer, the horizon correction and pretty good auto settings, especially white balance. Over all the pentax flagship was a good choice for me.

[Fenwoodian]

The overall differences seem so miniscule these days, that at least from my perspective the image quality race with sensors has come to a standstill and I see no need to upgrade for this reason in a long time, especially not for solid 4-digit money figures.
Just the same with lenses. They all (inlcuding kit lenses, especially those as excellent as the DFA 28-105) deliver fantastic outputs which show not faults unless you really dont care for the photo as such, but go extreme pixel peeping for technical aspects.
We are now where HiFi audiophiles were when they started discussion around the question if an enthusiast would ever dare listen to music without using gold end plugs on the audio cables.

Agree when it comes to camera sensors. Disagree when it comes to lenses.

To my eye I do see a difference between expensive, premium lenses on my K1's and cheaper/older lenses. And the difference I'm speaking of isn't just sharpness and technical pixel peeping characteristics. It's also the rendering, bokeh, contrast, and other artistic characteristics that separate the OK lenses from the great ones.