[Rondec]

It depends on how good (or bad) the lenses are.

A Bayer filter sensor has pretty nasty sampling performance in both the red and blue channels -- throwing away 75% of the image information in those color bands. In effect, a 50 MPix Bayer sensor is really only a 12.5 MPix sensor in red and blue with huge gaps between the light-sensitive elements. If the lens has any ability at all to resolve any contrast at 60 LPM, there's a risk of moire without some sort of OLPF on even a 50 MPix FF (or 22 MPix APS-C). (Some of the best lenses can resolve to 160 LPM)


That said, for most scenes (which don't have moire-suseptible details), most lenses (which are not the best of the best), and most shooting situations (some combination of aperture or shutter speed leaves a pixel or two of blur), then an OLPF does more harm than good.

(It's another reason that more recent Pentax cameras are superior to Canikon. Pentax uses the SR system to induce OLPF when the photographer needs it.)

The other thing to me is that pixel shift really helps in these situations. I just tried to make a post of my best 12 images of 2017 (Year in Review: Share Your 12 Favorites of 2017 - Page 4 - PentaxForums.com). Of those 12, 8 were shot with pixel shift. Of course, I shoot landscape a lot, but I think if you can use pixel shift, there is no down side to leaving off the AA filter.

[photoptimist]

The other thing to me is that pixel shift really helps in these situations. I just tried to make a post of my best 12 images of 2017 (Year in Review: Share Your 12 Favorites of 2017 - Page 4 - PentaxForums.com). Of those 12, 8 were shot with pixel shift. Of course, I shoot landscape a lot, but I think if you can use pixel shift, there is no down side to leaving off the AA filter.

Exactly! AA or OLPF is not needed for pixelshift because the shifting ensures full sampling of all colors in all pixel locations.

In fact, the manual for K-1 (p107) implies that pixelshift disables AA simulator (and it does practice on my K-1).

[Dan Rentea]

Nikon FF Camera with low pass filter D610, D750, D5, Df for Nikon for the recent one. Most of the older got one two D600, D700, D800 (not D800 E).
Canon: All Canon FF DSLR except the 5ds R
Sony: A7/A7 II, A9, A7s, A7sII...
Leica: No idea but I'd bet they have quite a few with a low pass filter...

Interrestingly the top of line of all FF manufactuers except Pentax has a filter like the D5, Sony A9, Canon 1DX mark II... And Pentax has a way to simulate it if you need it.

Canon introduced the "Fine detail" picture style on the latest models. Compared to the conventional "Standard" Picture Style, "Fine Detail" expresses texture in detail and places priority on the tonal gradation. It's not the same thing as a sensor without AA filter like the one from D850, D810, K1, 5DsR, but it has a nice impact on the images. I started to use this picture style on 5D Mark IV and there are some detail improvements on images.

[normhead]

Canon introduced the "Fine detail" picture style on the latest models. Compared to the conventional "Standard" Picture Style, "Fine Detail" expresses texture in detail and places priority on the tonal gradation. It's not the same thing as a sensor without AA filter like the one from D850, D810, K1, 5DsR, but it has a nice impact on the images. I started to use this picture style on 5D Mark IV and there are some detail improvements on images.

If you look at all the Canon sensors they have on many models the ability to get more lw/ph out of less MP. It would be interesting to see how that works.

[photoptimist]

If you look at all the Canon sensors they have on many models the ability to get more lw/ph out of less MP. It would be interesting to see how that works.

It's probably not unlike Pentax' diffraction correction algorithms. If the camera designer knows that the entire image has been softened in a precisely known way, then they can create software that undoes that softening created by an OLPF or diffraction. And because the un-softener is the exact mathematical inverse of the softener, it will never introduce any of the kinds of artifacts that can often arise if one plays with the sharpness slider.

The only downside is that it can increase image noise a bit. Fortunately, the high DR of most modern sensors (even Canon's) can tolerate the noise increase in well-exposed, modest-ISO images. Side-by-side, a noise-free but soft image probably looks worse than an accurately sharpened image with just a bit more noise.

[zapp]

If you are looking for a second hand priced FF system, Pentax is not what you want - unless you can wait for the K1 to be replaced/upgraded.
If you are looking for a well priced new FF system, Pentax is a very good choice.
Lenswise used FF lenses are much easier to find and much less expensive from/for CaNikon.

In my opinion Pentax has a very nice APS-C system with a bunch of unique prime lenses. FF is expensive and Pentax will continue presenting large and costly lenses.

Find out what is missing from your Pentax camera instead of looking what others think that CaNikon cameras do better. At the high-end level, Pentax cannot compete with all system. At the mid size level, Pentax is much better than most people think.

[following.eric]

What's missing now from my kit is almost everything. Sold off almost all.

Down sizing kit to one body one lens. A7ii with 24-108.

Realised I have loads of lenses I don't use and I get tired of changing lenses especially when I'm travelling and every year my bag gets heavier.

Simplifying the kit. Lighter. Focus more and just enjoying the shots.

[Nicolas06]

If you are looking for a second hand priced FF system, Pentax is not what you want - unless you can wait for the K1 to be replaced/upgraded.
If you are looking for a well priced new FF system, Pentax is a very good choice.

I don't agree at all for the new FF system. Many lenses are not there at all or from Sigma/Tamron, the older version as the new ones are not available at all.

Pentax has only expensive high end lenses available new even the 28-105 is not cheap just a bit cheaper than say the Canon 24-105 f/4 I... The affordable FF primes available new are restricted to FA35 & FA50. There no cheap 70-300 outside the older versions of sigma/tamron... The new f/2.8 primes for Pentax are extremely expensive and for some just rebadged tamron you can get at better price in Canikon.

If you go for Pentax FF you should go there because you love the brand and the specifities offered like pixel shift, astro tracer and other things like that. You'll not save money there if you are not already heavily invested in K-mount.

If you want small light, that more like Sony if you know what you are doing. If you want nicely priced AF lenses and lot of choice, that's Canon. If you want the best AF for action/sports that Nikon. If you want to play with MF lenses from any manufacturer and a great experience when focussing manually that Sony again.

Pentax is a small player that bring together some interresting stuff but it can't really compete with the others on their strengths. It doesn't compete well with price of lenses, AF, the variety of lenses or even manual focussing experience (no mirrorless).

It compete if you love the old FAltds, if you love the Pentax ergonomics, pixel shift, IBIS and astrotracer. And most of it was really a differentiator 5 years ago. Now the competition Panasonic, Olympus & Sony have most of it too.

[Nicolas06]

What's missing now from my kit is almost everything. Sold off almost all.

Down sizing kit to one body one lens. A7ii with 24-108.

Realised I have loads of lenses I don't use and I get tired of changing lenses especially when I'm travelling and every year my bag gets heavier.

Simplifying the kit. Lighter. Focus more and just enjoying the shots.

Exactly that except i guess that 24-105 f/4 you speak of... On my side I got the A7, less that half the weight and quite smaller than K1 and plan for getting the 24-105 soon. That's pragmatic, great quality, decent high iso, overall quite small/light kit for the quality packed inside and damn conveniant.

A7 + 24-105 f/4 is cheaper, ligher, smaller than K1 + 28-105 and more interresting. 24 vs 28, f/4 vs f/3.5-5.6... Interestingly even as Sony is extremely expensive already, there more cheap/affordable prime lenses avaible Samyang 14, 35, 50 AF lenses, Sony FE28, FE50 and FE85...

The only benefit of K1 is the max resolution and bit better high iso but that can be handled with an A7RII on grey market or used for same price as the K1... In exchange you get on top much better AF, video and a body that can AF most MF lenses thanks to the TechPro Art.

[Kunzite]

If you have to go gray market or used to get a similar price than Pentax, then the Pentax is better value.

[normhead]

If you have to go gray market or used to get a similar price than Pentax, then the Pentax is better value.

That is obvious, but so often overlooked by argumentative people.
IN fact the first question I'd ask to answer the question "Am I an argumentative person?" Have you ever compared the used price of something from the brand you like with the new price of the brand you oppose, and claim you could get a cheaper system with your brand?"

If in fact that answer is "yes", you might be an argumentative person.

(In the spirit of. if you have to ask, "If I divorce my wife is she still my cousin?" you might be a redneck. )

[following.eric]

If you have to go gray market or used to get a similar price than Pentax, then the Pentax is better value.

New they come in at similar prices. A7ii + 24-105 is about £2K new while the Pentax k1 + 28-105 comes in around £1800-2000.

At the moment I wont buy used unless its from somewhere that will offer a warranty. After getting the 15mm limited used and decentered, just a waste of money if you cant be sure on the quality.

arguments can be made for either side being better, guess it depends which side of the fence you stand on. The way I see it, at the end of the day it's aging technology as soon as it is released and I doubt this will be the only time I change systems. In a few years I may move on to something else.

[Kunzite]

The A7II is lower resolution, and it lacks the weather sealing and build quality of the Pentax.

[biz-engineer]

A7 + 24-105 f/4 is cheaper, ligher, smaller than K1 + 28-105 and more interresting. 24 vs 28, f/4 vs f/3.5-5.6... Interestingly even as Sony is extremely expensive already, there more cheap/affordable prime lenses avaible Samyang 14, 35, 50 AF lenses, Sony FE28, FE50 and FE85...

That's a valid choice. For urban and people photography, pretty much anything can do the job, in that case, a smaller system that can be carried everywhere is a good choice, although the full frame sensor might lead to large lenses anyway, so the size advantage might not always be that significant.

[surfar]

The new f/2.8 primes for Pentax are extremely expensive

Are they?