Originally posted by Serkevan which is probably much more work than this deserves
Hehe, I was thinking the same thing -- should I put any more time into this topic?
Originally posted by Serkevan The shadows on the shirt follow a very similar -if not identical- pattern
I agree. The shadows -- especially the hard shadow borders -- appear identical to me, and the lighting on the background appears to be similar in each image. I think the lighting conditions were identical for each shot. I note that @normhead has a different interpretation.
Originally posted by Serkevan My money is on the JPEG engine not using the same colour calibration across sensor technologies and almost a decade of cameras
So, I saved both images and inspected the Exif data through ExifToolGui. (yet more work than this deserves...)
Unfortunately, the MakerNotes have been stripped off, so we can't see all of the relevant information. The HistoryParameters tag indicates that both images were converted from RAW. For the K100D Super: "converted from Pentax raw to image/tiff" and K-1 II: "converted from image/dng to image/tiff."
The HistorySoftwareAgent tag in both images indicates Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw v. 9.12.1 (Windows).
The K-1 II image shows white balance = Manual, while the K100 WB = Auto.
Originally posted by Serkevan If less than two minutes in LR get you from one shirt to another while working on a JPEG file then it's clearly not a sensor problem.
In my opinion, this is a key point.
Here we seem to have a member who discounted or rejected the K-1 II on the basis of several points -- ugly, terrible ergonomics [several issues], unrealistic colours, inferior AF, screw-driven lenses, poor viewfinder [my word] especially for focusing manually, USB 2.0, lack of a flippy screen, doesn't like CMOS [sensors]. While the poster made the effort to show two images to illustrate the K-1's 'bad' colours, it's obvious that a simple, quick tweak in post-processing could have brought the colours to an acceptable match to the K100's, if that is what they desired. On the other points, I suspect that the criticism is based on a relatively brief experience at a camera shop and a cursory discussion with an acquaintance. As for the poster's shooting styles and genres, "weddings" and "sports" are mentioned, but it's not clear that the K100D Super has been used in those contexts.
I think one conclusion is that the poster should simply continue to use their K100D.
- Craig