|
Overall, I agree with most of the text in the report as I am gradually exploring the KP. Based on the recommendations, I have re-customized the C-1 setting for bracketing function, which does make more sense than default. As to the rest, I have left as is, except I do prefer the exposure comp/AF button to be for exposure comp rather than assigning that function to a C-? on that control dial. This is because I use exposure comp quite often, and the rear AF button rarely. The button is handier than using 2 dial knobs.
Given the goal of a pro-level body that is a uniquely compact concept, the KP succeeds admirably. The shortfall I wonder about most is why the on/off lever could not be designed like that of the K-5, K-3 and K-1, which is one more spring-loaded position for optical DOF preview. It appears to have just enough room for that, even if it comes to the edge of the exposure comp button- so what? Maybe there's inadequate interior room for the mechanism- who knows.
It is in the final ratings where I see problems. Handling is described in the text as being the best-ever Pentax DSLR or close to it. Then it is rated below the K-70. How can this be when with the KP one can customize the handling to fit the individual, and also add the available battery grip for use with large lenses, all features absent with the K-70. It is agreed that the K-3/K-5/K-1 designs are the best for large lens handling, and also have available battery grips.
I don't know where control features are considered. This could be part of handling, or build quality, or performance. Control features certainly lend themselves to operational efficiency, or fail to do so, and thus in that sense are part of performance. Perhaps that should be another separate category. Certainly in this regard the KP is ahead of the K-70 and K-S2, which I also own, yet I think still below that of the K-3/K-5/K-1 type designs which have more dedicated controls.
For build quality, its final rating is the same as the K-70 and K-S2, which are well-made, but there is no comparison when it comes to quality construction. Its shutter is far more quiet, and rated more highly. It also appears not to have the aperture malfunction that has sometimes surfaced in the K-30, K-50, K-S2, and perhaps will in the K-70 also. If the K-3/K-5/K-1 are rated at 10, and they should be, and the K-70 and K-S2 are rated at 9, then the KP should be at 9.5 for sure.
For performance, its final rating is the same as the K-S2 (8) and below that of the K-70 (9), which is strange, unless it is mainly based on JPEG burst shooting. It has the latest Prime IV image processor, 2 steps above the K-70. It has a more sophisticated metering system which I can say is the most reliable and accurate i have experienced. Its AF system has shown itself to be an improvement. Its high ISO performance has been shown to be state of heart for APS-C and very close to full-frame capability, but maybe that is something assigned to the image quality category.
I also have a different view when it comes to a recommended walk around lens. Don't get me wrong, I have a high regard for the DA 16-85mm, but it is rather large and of average speed. I think Pentax got it right when they usually show the KP with the DA 20-40mm f/2.8-4 Limited mounted on it. The quality+compactness design concept comes together perfectly. Add a DA 15mm f/4, and perhaps the FA 43mm f/1.9 and/or the FA 77mm f/1.8 for low light and some FL extension, and you've got quite a compact system. The other suggested lenses are good alternatives depending on need, but I also like taking along my DA* 50-135mm, which is pretty compact for what it is and matches up quality-wise.
Last edited by mikesbike; 07-13-2017 at 11:20 AM.
| 
Originally posted by Adam 
Post #17 by mikesbike
Similar Threads 
