[derekkite]

I'd stay away from the first generation mirrorless offerings from Nikon and Canon. Wait for a version or two for them to get things right.

The K1 and the K1 II are remarkable camera bodies. Rugged, and the IQ is very very nice. To get something comparable is almost double the price from other manufacturers. I think I will wear out the shutter before I find the depths of it's capabilities, which is saying something considering the rated longevity of the shutter assy.

And it is a joy to shoot. Predictable, solid and stunning results, and it pays back amply on any improvement in technique.

[shardulm]

The inherent pains of a mirrorless that you are forced to accept and be happy about the image quality. Well K-1 and K-1ii is no doubt going to make you happy about the IQ but no mirrorless pain.
And that is
1. Battery Life
2. Sunlight visibility
3. Ergonomics
4. Potentially needing a new suite of lenses depending upon which brand you go with
5. Someone peeping into your compositions.

Having said that electronic components are much cheaper to make than making and integrating mechanical parts and manufacturers clearly have more margins in mirrorless offerings than their DSLR counter parts. That also means no inventory management of spare parts outside of silicon parts, which they usually don't care to repair but only replace as it is cheaper to do so. I am thinking the margins on mirrorless' are driving this trend more than what meets the eye. An LCD TV is much cheaper to make than a Tube for the same reason given nobody cared about the color gamut/accuracy. OLEDs are the next gen screens producing perfect black levels and much more appealing an advancement in that area and is being used in right places (view finder for ex.). Eventually everything becomes a chip which can be mass produced bringing the costs of manufacturing and integration further down.
There will be a time when you will mount the sensor plate on the lens and not the other way around and use your phone to compose your images and control that plate.

Besides the above using the LCD to compose your images is just a little too dorky for me and.. and... this is my personal opinion so don't flame me for it.

[biz-engineer]

I will say that to me the most underrated aspect of the K-1/K-1 II is the pixel shift ability. It just gives you medium format quality images. Obviously this requires a more deliberate process of shooting and a tripod

Notes to self:
- pixel shift is often used for landscape photography where often something is moving in the scene (trees , water , exposed to wind)
- pixel shift is often used for macro, and users say they don't see any difference with normal mode: not surprising, stopping down the lens for deepening the DoF introduced diffraction, wiping the extra resolving power of pixel shift
- pixel shift is seldom considered for architecture photography (wide angle), very everything stands still and wide aperture is possible with wide field of view, perfect to rip extra sharpness out of pixel shift

Haven't done any print from pixel shift images, but the non pixels shift tests are already of outstanding, so I imagine it would be even better from well done pixel shifted images.

[UncleVanya]

The inherent pains of a mirrorless that you are forced to accept and be happy about the image quality. Well K-1 and K-1ii is no doubt going to make you happy about the IQ but no mirrorless pain.
And that is
1. Battery Life
2. Sunlight visibility
3. Ergonomics
4. Potentially needing a new suite of lenses depending upon which brand you go with
5. Someone peeping into your compositions.

1) To some degree battery life is less of an issue with a grip or extra batteries. I find this one a non-issue most of time for my shooting style.
2) Not an issue with EVF's of any real quality.
3) Only an issue with badly made cameras DSLR or Mirrorless. Not having a viewfinder on mirrorless leads to poor form for holding steady so perhaps that's what you mean?
4) Amen... but lens worshipers may enjoy this...
5) Only without an EVF.

There will be a time when you will mount the sensor plate on the lens and not the other way around and use your phone to compose your images and control that plate.

Besides the above using the LCD to compose your images is just a little too dorky for me and.. and... this is my personal opinion so don't flame me for it.

I own the m43 Olympus "camera" that works that way. It even holds the phone. Tiny thing. It is too awkward for many uses but a great backup camera.

[Lev]

Thanks guys!

Well, my expectation about K-1 is that of course it's a full frame camera, then it must be, if not better but as well rugged as my K3, but I've seen K-1 with broken flash shoe though... honestly I don't know any other camera that feels so great in hands. As Fenwoodian mentioned, I also like the design of its rear screen, many reviewers are speculating that it's not fully articulated, well, imho that's because there is no other way to make it both articulated and rugged and Pentax made it very well. And yes, most important part would be image quality and low light performance compared to other brands.

sutherland, what do you mean landscape in macro?

---------- Post added 03-28-19 at 01:12 PM ----------

The inherent pains of a mirrorless that you are forced to accept and be happy about the image quality. Well K-1 and K-1ii is no doubt going to make you happy about the IQ but no mirrorless pain.
And that is
1. Battery Life
2. Sunlight visibility
3. Ergonomics
4. Potentially needing a new suite of lenses depending upon which brand you go with
5. Someone peeping into your compositions.

Having said that electronic components are much cheaper to make than making and integrating mechanical parts and manufacturers clearly have more margins in mirrorless offerings than their DSLR counter parts. That also means no inventory management of spare parts outside of silicon parts, which they usually don't care to repair but only replace as it is cheaper to do so. I am thinking the margins on mirrorless' are driving this trend more than what meets the eye. An LCD TV is much cheaper to make than a Tube for the same reason given nobody cared about the color gamut/accuracy. OLEDs are the next gen screens producing perfect black levels and much more appealing an advancement in that area and is being used in right places (view finder for ex.). Eventually everything becomes a chip which can be mass produced bringing the costs of manufacturing and integration further down.
There will be a time when you will mount the sensor plate on the lens and not the other way around and use your phone to compose your images and control that plate.

Besides the above using the LCD to compose your images is just a little too dorky for me and.. and... this is my personal opinion so don't flame me for it.

I am too great fan of composing images through viewfinder

[Dan Rentea]

There is no special camera. Cameras and lenses are tools and choosing the best tool based on your needs = money well spent. Testing a few cameras from different manufacturers and choose the one that have the best score based on your needs (and budget) = money well spent and lots of fun.

K1 can be the right tool for lots of photographers. We hope that you will be one of the many who bought the right tool for your needs and we are waiting a review after a few months.

[biz-engineer]

1) To some degree battery life is less of an issue with a grip or extra batteries. I find this one a non-issue most of time for my shooting style.

Its the same with cars, cars with low efficiency aren't a problem at all because you can carry some extra Jerrycan at the back

---------- Post added 29-03-19 at 01:00 ----------

2) Not an issue with EVF's of any real quality.

EVF is more a problem when in low light, it is so bright than when you pull eye away from the EVF you need a couple of minutes to have the eye adapt to ambient light again. This problem comes from the fact that EVF brightness doesn't adapt well to ambient lighting. While OVF display the same light level as the ambient light, so the eye never need to constantly adapt from the luminance gap between EVF and ambient.

[Kaisas]

II have pentax k1 more than 1 year, it s my first pentax camera, i was doubts when I was purchasing but after that I was so happy with my k1. Image quality high quality, battery life performance fantastic, pixel shift super effective, top of the camera little wheel it s super useful quick adjustment like iso and another settings...
I forgot the mention about green button mostly all pentax cameras has it I guess, especially when I shot old manual lenses it s so useful.
Pentax doesn't have many modern lenses options Tamron and Sigma stopped making lenses for Pentax but you have enough fast modern lenses with good price like new d fa lenses 24-70f2. 8 d fa 50 mm all they are good and not very expensive lenses when you compare to other brands lenses.
I think if you have tight budget pentax k1 is the best option. I tried mirorles cameras on b&h I don't like it when I look at from Viewfinder not my type but it depends on you wht you like

[BryantCP]

Notes to self:
- pixel shift is often used for landscape photography where often something is moving in the scene (trees , water , exposed to wind)
- pixel shift is often used for macro, and users say they don't see any difference with normal mode: not surprising, stopping down the lens for deepening the DoF introduced diffraction, wiping the extra resolving power of pixel shift
- pixel shift is seldom considered for architecture photography (wide angle), very everything stands still and wide aperture is possible with wide field of view, perfect to rip extra sharpness out of pixel shift

Question: I guess this is "off topic", but why would pixel shift seldom be used for architectural photography? Pixel shift is precisely why I recently bought a KP in part to use for architectural photography. I would think it would be ideal for "architectural photography".

[biz-engineer]

why would pixel shift seldom be used for architectural photography?

It's an assumption I made, based on the photos I saw posted here and also that I see more Pentaxians into landscape than I see into architecture. There is a "post your pixel shift photos" kind of thread and it contains mostly landscape photos.

[texandrews]

It's an assumption I made, based on the photos I saw posted here and also that I see more Pentaxians into landscape than I see into architecture. There is a "post your pixel shift photos" kind of thread and it contains mostly landscape photos.

Not necessarily a good assumption. The PS forum thread is a self-selected bunch, so that's statistically invalid right there. Add to that that many doing architectural work seriously do it professionally, and can't share those images, which belong to clients. I'm in that boat with my museum work. I haven't used PS yet at work, since I use a Z as my main rig, but if I do, I won't be able to share them anywhere. C'est la vie....

As far as my personal work is concerned, well, I'm increasingly paranoid about showing it online.

[shardulm]

Its the same with cars, cars with low efficiency aren't a problem at all because you can carry some extra Jerrycan at the back

---------- Post added 29-03-19 at 01:00 ----------


EVF is more a problem when in low light, it is so bright than when you pull eye away from the EVF you need a couple of minutes to have the eye adapt to ambient light again. This problem comes from the fact that EVF brightness doesn't adapt well to ambient lighting. While OVF display the same light level as the ambient light, so the eye never need to constantly adapt from the luminance gap between EVF and ambient.

This is an excellent point you are making. I am getting old and I hate any incident light in general that is straight into my eyes. Come to think of it you are killing your eyes by using your phone or any screen in complete darkness. Think pixel burn on a plasma TV. This EVF use in the dark is I think a hazard since the incident LED light is the only source coming into eyes at a fairly high intensity at night. It takes time to recover from the impression that it creates and leaves behind on your retina. And I sure things get worse with age.
OVF is inherently safe for night photography and it "what you see is what you get" with no third party in between.

---------- Post added 03-29-19 at 03:20 PM ----------

pixel shift is seldom considered for architecture photography (wide angle), very everything stands still and wide aperture is possible with wide field of view, perfect to rip extra sharpness out of pixel shift

I hope you meant "often" and not "Seldom"?

[Rondec]

It's an assumption I made, based on the photos I saw posted here and also that I see more Pentaxians into landscape than I see into architecture. There is a "post your pixel shift photos" kind of thread and it contains mostly landscape photos.

There are probably a number of reasons. For me, it just has to do with the fact that I live in a rural area. The only architecture around me are falling down farm houses. But I wouldn't hesitate to use it for architecture.

[normhead]

There is no special camera.

Yet I'd say, all camera are special.

All my PS images are for the most part mushrooms, over 70 of them on flickr. I might have taken a few landscapes with PS, and sorry to be a contrarian Dan, but Pixel Shift is special.

Some of my Pixel Shift images.....





Canon, Nikon and Sony shooters can say what they want, Pixel Shift is something they can't match.

Please don't bore us with the "well yes but". When it works it leaves everyone else in the dust.

[Dan Rentea]

Yet I'd say, all camera are special.

All my PS images are for the most part mushrooms, over 70 of them on flickr. I might have taken a few landscapes with PS, and sorry to be a contrarian Dan, but Pixel Shift is special.

Some of my Pixel Shift images.....





Canon, Nikon and Sony shooters can say what they want, Pixel Shift is something they can't match.

Please don't bore us with the "well yes but". When it works it leaves everyone else in the dust.

If I want to leave everyone else in the dust I buy a 150mp Phase One which is also a tool, just like Canon, Sony, Nikon, Pentax. But for wildlife even a Pentax KP can leave a Phase One in the dust. Again, cameras are tools and you buy the proper tool for the job.