[texandrews]

Richard Butler just posted in the DPR Pentax SLR forum that they were going to do this after re-acquiring a 77 limited lens (to match the K1 test) and also to re-do the camera settings.

[monochrome]

Richard Butler just posted in the DPR Pentax SLR forum that they were going to do this after re-acquiring a 77 limited lens (to match the K1 test) and also to re-do the camera settings.

Intereesting. Richard Butler is a pro, no question.

Who should we nominate as a consultant to help with optimizing the camera settings?

[SSGGeezer]

Intereesting. Richard Butler is a pro, no question.

Who should we nominate as a consultant to help with optimizing the camera settings?

There are plenty of qualified folks here, who can tolerate them?

[CarlG]

Want to bet that they will reconfirm their convictions?

[SSGGeezer]

Want to bet that they will reconfirm their convictions?

Only if you are offering amazing odds, like maybe 100-1 or so?

[Rondec]

Should I feel good about this?

It seems as though the damage has been done. DP Review has slammed the K-1 II as a waste of their time and even though they reshoot their comparison tool and even rephrase a few of the harshest phrases in their review, I don't really think it changes much, except to calm down the rabid Pentaxians who are ready to burn their castle down around their ears.

[Rico]

There is really only two things wrong with the test images for the K-1MKII that has nothing to do with the lenses used.

First the K-1MKII is not as square to the Studio Scene. This is evident by the soft focus in the lower left corner and the upper right corner. The camera is slightly out of square along that diagonal axis.

The second problem is the K-1MKII is overexposed by at least 1 stop which can be seen in the tin painters pallets. It is clear the color is blown out on the tops of the tins.

Even with these problems the images from the K-1MKII does not support the DPR conclusion that image quality for the MKiI is inferior as ISO is increased.

[DennisP]

The FA77 has few peers in the center of the frame, especially at around F5.6.
As long as they base their image quality assessment on the central portion of the frame and use the exact same settings across the board, we might finally learn something useful.

[LensBeginner]

It feels like soccer...

First they added goal line referees, and still incomprehensible mistakes were made, which couldn't be explained if not by bad faith.

Then V.A.R. was introduced, and still huge blunders that couldn't possibly have happened with the help of the video check were committed.

If someone has made up his mind, you can add all the checks and balances you want, you can re-do everything a thousand times, the outcome is not likely to be different.

[Kunzite]

What a difference between Richard Butler's handling of this issue and that of a certain gentleman who's also a member here. And I'll also mention Simon Joinson, who, AFAIR, played a role in "fixing" the WaterFAILS article (and apologized for it).
They should have higher visibility, and that certain gentleman should be more restrained.

The second problem is the K-1MKII is overexposed by at least 1 stop which can be seen in the tin painters pallets. It is clear the color is blown out on the tops of the tins.

Not overexposed, but the light is directly reflected on the test chart. I believe the lightning arrangement was made for a longer distance, corresponding to an 85mm focal length on FF.

[DennisP]

It feels like soccer...

First they added goal line referees, and still incomprehensible mistakes were made, which couldn't be explained if not by bad faith.

Then V.A.R. was introduced, and still huge blunders that couldn't possibly have happened with the help of the video check were committed.

If someone has made up his mind, you can add all the checks and balances you want, you can re-do everything a thousand times, the outcome is not likely to be different.

Very true. I'm not expecting the conclusions to be amended since they were obviously decided upon before they even received the camera.

[Rico]

What a difference between Richard Butler's handling of this issue and that of a certain gentleman who's also a member here. And I'll also mention Simon Joinson, who, AFAIR, played a role in "fixing" the WaterFAILS article (and apologized for it).
They should have higher visibility, and that certain gentleman should be more restrained.


Not overexposed, but the light is directly reflected on the test chart. I believe the lightning arrangement was made for a longer distance, corresponding to an 85mm focal length on FF.

Kunzite if it is the lighting it is still overexposing the whole Studio Scene for the K-1MKII. The blown color on the top of the tins show the extent to how much it is overexposed.

[Kunzite]

IMO it's reflected light washing out the scene.

[richandfleur]

Personally I thought the vibe of the review was on point.

It’s a mkii release, not a new model as such. It has incremental improvements over the previous model, and it begins to show it’s age against fully new models in 2018.

The K-3 mkii is even worse now, with no new release in a very long time.

Pentax refuse to address the tracking AF (eye AF would be super useful for portraits) and video (where many want both adequate stills and video in one package) and overall this reviews poorly in 2018.

I hope they do a good reshoot and re assessment of the K-1 mkiis capabilities, but they shouldn’t shy away from comparing it with the current competition either.

[surfar]

It feels like soccer...

Then V.A.R. was introduced, and still huge blunders

Yes, a few weeks ago the VAR failed in the final game of the A league season.The line person was in perfect position to put the flag up from a deadball situation,he didnt...an offside goal decided the Championship.Lets hope no world cup games are decided this way but i suppose you wont be worried.