Originally posted by Not a Number As I recall the PF article said they applied 25% color noise filtering to the processing. If the K-1II Raw are cleaner to begin with say by 20% then the accumulative effect would be say 35-45% color noise filtering for the K-1II vs 25% for the K-1. Think that might make a difference?
If. I sure don’t know. I know my KP RAW’s sure are nice.
Do you know? What do your eyes tell you? Can you print a 12,800 ISO night scene for normal viewing distance per print size that you couldn’t before? Are you a RAW purist? I don’t think it is possible for me to care less about what other people think about this. I shoot RAW+, manual SMC K lenses on FF K-mount. A couple DFA* / FA* / FA Lim for convenience. I print a little. I develop the good ones. I acc pt most of the jpegs.
They’re supposedly selling by 84,000 K-1’s a year. How many of hose people do you think even know this is happening? Until real world people show real world images both sides are posting measurbation arguments without measuring. Keep your K-1. Buy a K-1. Buy K-1M 2 / upgrade to one and shoot with it - or both - or don’t.
I still haven’t decided whether I need another camera with the AU just to get HHPS. Maybe I’ll sell KP and upgrade K-1. So far, so everything I read from everyone who has a K1M2 says it’s great.