Originally posted by BigMackCam With respect, I do take issue here - not just as a regular member but as a moderator. Why? Comparing the output of any modern DSLR or mirrorless camera to a phone camera is provocative - and especially so when we're talking about Pentax on a Pentax-oriented site. Remember, many posts here are available to view publicly. If we want the best for Pentax as a brand, we should consider how we phrase our critique and make it relevant and objective, not provocative (unless that's valid and warranted).
I agree that phone cameras produce a very "painterly" effect. In that sense, there is a similarity between that effect and aggressive noise reduction and over-sharpening in any other camera and / or post-processing software, albeit to a
much lesser extent.
But until we understand the full details of the shot, software and processing parameters, how it looks as an in-camera-processed JPEG, a JPEG produced from RAW by the latest DCU, comparisons from various other RAW development tools, and like-for-like comparisons with the K-1, it's potentially counter-productive to conclude there's a problem with the K-1II. I'm not saying there isn't - just that we ought to be fully informed and do some research before we draw conclusions
As a matter of fact, I'm not drawing any conclusions.
I've always seen the fact that you can make out the single pixels in a photograph, the fact that you're really limited by the number of pixels in the sensors, as a mark of high quality cameras (well, lenses, actually, but you get the point). When you don't, it reminds me of something else, bothing I can do about it.
Furthermore I wrote about "crops from [brand X], [brand Y]", and
nowhere I said that there's an issue with the camera itself.
It could be the demosaicing software, it could be PP...
But since you're moderating so actively, and read meanings and/or motives that just aren't there in the words I wrote, I'll just stop posting my observations in this thread, can't stand censorship, I'm afraid. Have a nice day.