Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-11-2020, 11:33 AM   #61
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
pschlute's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,114
QuoteOriginally posted by pranza Quote
ohh i'm happy to see such activity, it's entertaining and informative!
i won't address every reply personally as there has been so many... and yesterday i met another photographer who happened to have a K1! and of course we had a chat about Pentax.
found out that he finds K1 ergonomics fine and also AF to be fine.. but wait!.. AF is fine in Pentax terms! Pentax-fine means you'd never want to go with that camera to shoot wedding or sports. He uses other cameras for that.
What I also discovered that K1 uses the same dreadful sensor as a Nikon D800. Why dreadful? Well, because the colours are off. Once one guy came to my place and did a shooting with a D800 when it was just released. Zeiss glass and all that. I was so excited, asked to leave some files to me to check. And heck, The colours of a sofa were wrong! The green LED of one of my devices in the photo was so weirdly green... "fresh leaves green" and completely not the colour of that LED. K100D with its CCD never does such tricks. The colours can be dull a bit, but still they mostly correspond to reality. I noticed same effect going from nikon D200 to D300... colours became harder to tame, they were abundant but off. You can get used to it perhaps but once you see some proper mapping, it's very surprisingly annoying. That's already a CMOS talk though... must say that not all cmos sensors are so, but many are to smaller or greater extent.

There was one very good comment about having a K28 F2 - why on K100D? I also ask same question myself. I can't talk myself into a K1 and K100D has a little small sensor and resolution to justify.
You really do talk rubbish.


Last edited by Sandy Hancock; 06-17-2020 at 03:49 PM. Reason: Quote modified
05-11-2020, 11:45 AM - 1 Like   #62
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by pschlute Quote
You really do talk rubbish.
He means that in a nice way.
05-11-2020, 11:48 AM - 1 Like   #63
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2019
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,976
QuoteOriginally posted by pranza Quote
Actually, an 28 f2.8 A lens i had before was really good, just didn't have that particular Distagon bokeh and look... i bet K28 F2.8 would be really nice on video, but again, K1 video capabilities.. well... let's not begin that again

no, i was not trolling, please have a look at two photos. Same lens (K28 f2), same place, shot one after the other. K100D is duller, but the model's t-shirt color is as it actually was. K1 seems nicer but it's not what it was
Which one is which? Those reds on the first photo scream "I didn't change the JPEG settings to something sensible" or "I didn't bother editing the raw file as I should have"
05-11-2020, 11:50 AM - 2 Likes   #64
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
Learn to post process.


Disengeniusly, your lighting and or exposure is different. On the first the tops of the mannequins breasts are highlighted. Not so on the bottom one. It actually looks like bounce flash was used on the first image but not on the second. The other possibility was that it's a camera store set, and the hair light isn't turned on in the first. The vertical nature of the shadow mean hair accent light or bounce flash aimed almost directly over her head. Also notice the difference in the shadow line under her chin. It's amazing how many people mess themselves up by not knowing what they don't know.

As for the second one was the way it was... fine, prove it. Who made that determination? The same guy who used flash on one and not the other? How do you even know what the flashed one looked like? The flash only lasts a fraction of a second. You do understand that flash is going oto be a different colour temperature than existing lighting don't you? You could only know what it looked like without the extra light present in the second. The memory would have had to have been formed in 1/1000th of second when the flash went off.

I can't believe you know so little about photography you'd try and pass those off as comparable images showing difference in cameras.

You might want to quit while you have even the smallest modicum of respectability left.

There are number of ways this could play out.

You could be unknowledgeable and it's an honest error.
You could be deliberately trying to trash the camera for unknown reasons.

Please inform us which it is.
Whether or not I ever talk to you again depends on it.

There are a lot of competent photographers here. You won't be getting away with that nonsense if that's all you've got. Or as I often say "I can't get away with nothin."


Last edited by normhead; 05-11-2020 at 01:40 PM.
05-11-2020, 12:01 PM - 1 Like   #65
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
c.a.m's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,171
QuoteOriginally posted by pranza Quote
Same lens (K28 f2), same place, shot one after the other. K100D is duller, but the model's t-shirt color is as it actually was. K1 seems nicer but it's not what it was
@pranza, it would be useful to indicate the relevant settings of each camera, and say whether the posted images were straight out of camera (SOOC) JPEGs or post-processed RAW files. If they are SOOC JPEGs, it's important to know and control the custom image settings on the K-1 (e.g., the image finishing tone). I think the default setting is 'Bright', which tends to brighten and saturate some tones in the image while punching up the red tones, more than the 'Natural' setting. Other settings such as white balance and contrast can also affect the JPEG output.

It appears that you might have been testing the K-1 in a camera store. Were you able to spend much time with it to test various settings before drawing your (negative) conclusion?

- Craig

Last edited by c.a.m; 05-11-2020 at 12:23 PM.
05-11-2020, 12:28 PM   #66
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
pschlute's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,114
QuoteOriginally posted by c.a.m Quote
@pranza, it would be useful to indicate the relevant settings of each camera, and say whether the posted images were straight out of camera (SOOC) JPEGs or post-processed RAW files. If they are SOOC JPEGs, it's important to know and control the custom image settings on the K-1 (e.g., the image finishing tone). I think the default setting is 'Bright', which tends to brighten and saturate some tones in the image while punching up the red tones, more than the 'Natural' setting. Other settings such as white balance and contrast can also affect the JPEG output.

It appears that you might have been testing the K-1 in a camera store. Were you able to spend much time with it to test various settings before drawing your (negative) conclusion?

- Craig
Contrast on one image is set to hard and on the other is set to normal. It's in the EXIF. This guy is talking rubbish.
05-11-2020, 12:44 PM - 1 Like   #67
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2019
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,976
QuoteOriginally posted by c.a.m Quote
I think the default setting is 'Bright', which tends to brighten and saturate some tones in the image while punching up the red tones, more than the 'Natural' setting.
Oh boy if that isn't true... if I set Lightroom to use the colour profiles for the K-1 instead of "Adobe Standard", I normally have to tone down the reds because they have a tendency to turn into an uniform blob, to the point where sunset clouds lose detail quite often.

---------- Post added 05-11-20 at 12:51 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Disengeniusly, your lighting and or exposure is different. On the first the tops of the mannequins breasts are highlighted. Not so on the bottom one. It actually looks like flash was used on the first image but not on the second. Also notice the difference in the shadow line under her chin. It's amazing how many people mess themselves up by not knowing what they don't know.
To be fair to the guy: the EXIF on both photos says "No Flash", but as Peter said the K-1 is set to Contrast Hard while the K-100D is set to Contrast Normal... although I would personally say that the most important difference is the K-1 being set to "Saturation Normal" instead of "Low Saturation" as per the K-100D, so obviously it will look more saturated (and "Bright" SOOC JPEGs from the K-1 tend to brighten up reds a lot, that shirt is a typical SOOC red shirt.



(And yes, "learn to process" is the solution here ).


Last edited by Serkevan; 05-11-2020 at 12:52 PM.
05-11-2020, 01:42 PM   #68
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteQuote:
o be fair to the guy: the EXIF on both photos says "No Flash",
Ah then, it's the hair light in the camera store portrait set, was turned on for one and then not for the other. The light is not the same, and the colour temperature of the added light is not the same as the bottom image.

The big clue is the red shirt is brighter than the background in the top image, and about the same (meaning ambient light) in the bottom one. There is no jpeg setting that can do that.
It's definitely not comparable images.
The only question is deliberate or accidental?

One is taken May 6th, one on May 11th. If they were both taken by the same person, not a particularly experienced photographer, the absence of the hair light might have been missed. It's a lot harder to jusitfy if it was flash since the flash used would have to have been set to bounce almost directly over the model's head. That doesn't happen by accident.

I don't think anyone with experience with studio lighting is going to see it differently.

Last edited by normhead; 05-11-2020 at 02:03 PM.
05-11-2020, 08:34 PM   #69
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 390
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Snob alert.
Snob alert, really. I thought dpreview was rude to Pentax owners, or to the KI, KII, but apparently not as bad as the Pentax forum. Pentax comes out with a FF digital camera that unbiased professionals have reviewed and given it positive reviews if you use it for what is was designed for. Live view focussing for sports, not very good. All would agree on that. Cost...at the low end of FF's when it came out. Lenses...I can use lenses that came out 10,20,30,40 years ago, or more and still use them. Colour of photos...yes Fuji has a different colour scheme...and Pentax has theirs...and Nikon has theirs. We could debate it all we want, but only on a Pentax forum could people trash a FF digital camera that is enjoyed by many users. Show me a camera forum where users love their camera so much that is all you read. No, the majority of posts are about negative aspects and problems with their cameras.

Use a K1, a K3, K30, KX, or older digital...it doesn't matter. You purchase what you like and hopefully for what meets your requirements. If you are simply looking at them on a laptop then the resolution from an older digital probably looks fine. If you are enlarging to poster size or more then yes a FF will likely show details differently than a non-FF. Just like a medium format will produce a different photo than FF, or APS.

I have purchased more cars than I can count, restored some, some new, and would never ask someone why they bought it. I may ask them if they enjoy it and was it reliable. Just like the police officer who followed me for 1/2 hr. to ask me if I liked my car. He never asked why I didn't buy something else.

Perhaps the topic should be...what do you like about the K1 ?
05-12-2020, 03:11 AM - 2 Likes   #70
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
QuoteOriginally posted by pranza Quote
ohh i'm happy to see such activity, it's entertaining and informative!
i won't address every reply personally as there has been so many... and yesterday i met another photographer who happened to have a K1! and of course we had a chat about Pentax.
found out that he finds K1 ergonomics fine and also AF to be fine.. but wait!.. AF is fine in Pentax terms! Pentax-fine means you'd never want to go with that camera to shoot wedding or sports. He uses other cameras for that.
What I also discovered that K1 uses the same dreadful sensor as a Nikon D800. Why dreadful? Well, because the colours are off. Once one guy came to my place and did a shooting with a D800 when it was just released. Zeiss glass and all that. I was so excited, asked to leave some files to me to check. And heck, The colours of a sofa were wrong! The green LED of one of my devices in the photo was so weirdly green... "fresh leaves green" and completely not the colour of that LED. K100D with its CCD never does such tricks. The colours can be dull a bit, but still they mostly correspond to reality. I noticed same effect going from nikon D200 to D300... colours became harder to tame, they were abundant but off. You can get used to it perhaps but once you see some proper mapping, it's very surprisingly annoying. That's already a CMOS talk though... must say that not all cmos sensors are so, but many are to smaller or greater extent.

There was one very good comment about having a K28 F2 - why on K100D? I also ask same question myself. I can't talk myself into a K1 and K100D has a little small sensor and resolution to justify.
I wouldn't use a K-1 to shoot sports if that was the main thing I was interested in, mainly because of the slow frame rate. My wife does shoot weddings with a K-1/K-1 II combo and Pentax lenses and things have worked out nicely. No issues, good colors, good auto focus -- basically what you would expect from a modern camera.

As others have said, I think you need to figure out your post processing. It isn't rocket science and if you are shooting jpegs then you need to change to a different jpeg setting and if you are using Lightroom then you need different presets. Not much else to say there -- colors are fixable. Bick Mack Camera had a preset to give K10 colors to a K3 camera and I'm sure you can do the same with the K-1 and K100 if you want.

Last edited by Sandy Hancock; 06-17-2020 at 03:50 PM. Reason: Quote modified
05-12-2020, 05:25 AM   #71
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteQuote:
Snob alert, really. I thought dpreview was rude to Pentax owners, or to the KI, KII, but apparently not as bad as the Pentax forum.
You have to know, if you drive a Vet, some people will be in awe, some people will think it's pretentious. No sense in getting worked up about it. You take the good with the bad. Pretty much the same as Pentax. I would have thought any experienced Vet owner would be over it by now.
05-12-2020, 05:30 AM   #72
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2019
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,976
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Ah then, it's the hair light in the camera store portrait set, was turned on for one and then not for the other. The light is not the same, and the colour temperature of the added light is not the same as the bottom image.

The big clue is the red shirt is brighter than the background in the top image, and about the same (meaning ambient light) in the bottom one. There is no jpeg setting that can do that.
It's definitely not comparable images.
The only question is deliberate or accidental?

One is taken May 6th, one on May 11th. If they were both taken by the same person, not a particularly experienced photographer, the absence of the hair light might have been missed. It's a lot harder to jusitfy if it was flash since the flash used would have to have been set to bounce almost directly over the model's head. That doesn't happen by accident.

I don't think anyone with experience with studio lighting is going to see it differently.
The shadows on the shirt follow a very similar -if not identical- pattern (I superimposed the cuts and checked the relative L* values on the CIELAB color space, which is probably much more work than this deserves ). Auto Tone in Lightroom (which basically means that the K100D image gets a +0.4 EV in exposure, the other parameters get almost the same adjustment which tells me the lighting distribution is almost the same - the difference can be explained because the FOV is different so you have a different frame) plus some saturation adjustment on the reds for the K100D (-25 Hue, +20 Saturation, +10 luminance) makes the images look almost the same. My money is on the JPEG engine not using the same colour calibration across sensor technologies and almost a decade of cameras*... and most importantly not knowing how to process on part of the OP. 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.


*The reds are sometimes completely different for "bright" JPEGs if you compare a K-7 with the K-1 already, and they are both CMOS. The K-1 always has them brighter SOOC for whatever reason.

Last edited by Serkevan; 05-12-2020 at 05:48 AM.
05-12-2020, 06:34 AM - 1 Like   #73
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
From the highlight on nose to the middle shadow on the K-1

Luminance values are 195 and 127 ratio /20 10-6
Same spot on the 172 and 108 10-6

Luminance values for the back ground are 163 and 141.

For the illuminated images middle of the woman in the woman child image

234 vs 240.
The independantly lit Images are very close to the same in luminance values.

The luminance values on the shirt are in 10-6 ratio in both images.

So highest luminance value in the K-1 image, shirt to back lit back ground
195 to 234 in the K-1 image.
141 to 240 in the K100 image.

If we assume the independently, probably back lit image has the same lighting in both pic Luminance values of 230 and 240, meaning the both cameras exposed the scene roughly the same, then the light on the model is different.

It would be nice if we could sit side by side and talk this through. But personally I know of no software setting where the back ground of the image is constant, as in the high up back lit portrait. The luminance value drops to 141 in the K100 image, but only 195 in the K-1 image. That is half the fall off in the K-1 image given a constant background. And although the K100 image is 33% darker, the back ground is 2% lighter.



I'd be interested in someone demonstrating that can be accomplished with the same lighting with software settings on a camera. In fact to create that effect without dodging or burning would be next to impossible.

But beyond that, I like the K-1 image. I don't like the K100 image, it looks flat and boring. So at least for me the whole argument is meaningless. You don't get bonus marks for producing an image the exact same as the original scene, you get bonus marks for creating images people like to look at. I would have bought the K-1, just for the PP time it saves me, all other things being equal.

And if you are shooting jpeg with filters, lets not even discuss colour accuracy. That's not what filters design for specific effects are about. Shoot with your sepia filter... are you really going to discuss colour accuracy?

Last edited by normhead; 05-12-2020 at 06:49 AM.
05-12-2020, 06:36 AM - 2 Likes   #74
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
c.a.m's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,171
QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
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?

QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
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.

QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
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.

QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
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

Last edited by c.a.m; 05-12-2020 at 09:57 AM.
05-12-2020, 06:46 AM - 5 Likes   #75
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by c.a.m Quote
I think one conclusion is that the poster should simply continue to use their K100D.
Absolutely, if you don't value what the K-1 brings to the table, there's no sense in paying the big bucks.
After all, the real issue for the owner is not what the camera can do, but what results they themselves with their shooting style, skill level etc can get out of it.

If the K100 image is what he wants for whatever reason, go with it. You only live once.

I was looking at my old K100D images the other day. I like the images, just not the resolution. So I can even identify, a bit. These days with my main display being 4k TV, they area bit small, but they can be upscaled to fill the screen and still look good. For me, sunsets and landscape with bit of wildlife, I'd take a K-1 over it any day.


But it's not a K-3


Or a K-1

Last edited by normhead; 05-12-2020 at 07:13 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
35mm, aesthetics, camera, crop, design, dli90, dslr, ff, film, format, frame, glass, hands, k-01, k-1, k-5, k-7, k1, k5, kp, lenses, mode, mx, nostalgia, photography, resolution, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax Battery Grip D-BG6 for K1, K1 Mark II tscip22 Sold Items 2 09-27-2019 01:56 PM
K1 to K1 II surgery on camera but I had the lobotomy. rechmbrs Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 7 08-31-2018 11:20 AM
Thinking about getting a K1 richard0170 Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 18 07-04-2018 06:02 PM
Pentax ME meter & AE stopped tario Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras 5 03-18-2013 06:20 AM
Kansas Rep. Pete DeGraaf: Getting pregnant from rape is just like getting a flat tire deadwolfbones General Talk 15 06-02-2011 09:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:47 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top