[MMVIII]

Must be me, coz I'm not seeing the K-1 as a clear winner from this dpreview comparison. Interestingly I added the 645Z to the Canon R5 and the Sony A7Riii and downloaded the RAWs to compare. First thing to notice both Pentax cameras are set with NO sharpening, but oddly both the Canon and Sony have 40 in ACR (that's 40 out of 150, so not insignificant). Funny that. There was me thinking dpreview were brand neutral ...

Anyway, resetting the sharpening to be equivalent then the Sony and Canon are still sharper, especially at the edges. But do I care? Not a jot. This sort of test is, to me, a nonsense. Different lenses. Different focusing methods. Maybe different test conditions. Maybe best of a few exposures for some, but not others. General bias.

Fun, up to a point, but I do regret getting sucked into looking at dpreview again, having decided to ignore them many moons again. Grrrr.

Interesting, the sharpening settings.
However, you might see more differences because this 'tool' offers to compare the images at the same assumed viewing size, thus the higher MP images are always downscaled to the lowest resolution in the comparison. How good this is done is another question, still, it gives an impression, comparable to scaling images of different sensors for a desired print size.
If this pixel peeping is a useful method or not for any assessment may be open for debate. At least there is some control of some variables, but others might kick in. I would not take anything too serious in that.

[texandrews]

Must be me, coz I'm not seeing the K-1 as a clear winner from this dpreview comparison.

Must be you. I was actually surprised.

Interestingly I added the 645Z to the Canon R5 and the Sony A7Riii and downloaded the RAWs to compare. First thing to notice both Pentax cameras are set with NO sharpening, but oddly both the Canon and Sony have 40 in ACR (that's 40 out of 150, so not insignificant). Funny that. There was me thinking dpreview were brand neutral ...

No, not brand neutral. That's been true for a long time, and it's not just Pentax. There have been times when Oly got short shrift, then Sony.

IN any case, Imaging resources is better than DPR. Not that I know your results would be different, but, that's where I go when I think I might like something or want to see some comparisons.

Agree completely. I still look at DPR, but Imaging Resource is the best....resource, for testing at least.

I don't think that is a fair comparison as K1 is higher res than all the cameras listed. Choose R5, Z7 and A7RIV and see that K1 really compares favorably with cameras that are substantially higher in resolution. That is in no PS mode and if you choose PS then non of them come close. Let's remember that A7RIV is almost twice the resolution of K1. The only camera that really goes well above K1 is the Fuji GFX100. And that camera body is priced at $10K, more than 5-times the prices of K1.

Good points. I know my Z outperforms my K1mkII in several ways, and vice versa. I'll be looking hard at PS in the coming weeks.

[gatorguy]

Must be me, coz I'm not seeing the K-1 as a clear winner from this dpreview comparison.

I'm thinking it's you Barry.

For instance sample the face of the male on the right (with the scruffy beard) using the K1, Canon R5, and R6 as comparison, and RAW not processed JPEGS. Pay particular attention to the beard hairs, eyes, and the shadow detail in the face. Do the same with the Asian woman's face on the upper right paying attention to the shadow detail and eyes.To me it's pretty obvious the K1 is displaying more dynamic range and rendering better detail in actual photo images.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison

[btnapa]

Get the new-ish Blackmagic 6K and don't depend on one camera for both video and stills.

I chose Fuji for video. I came to that conclusion after trying to get into the Sony system at substantially higher prices compared to Fuji. Even mighty Sony does not give you top notch video and photos in the same camera body. You have to buy two bodies and much more expensive lenses to accomplish the task. My K1 rules when it comes to stills and the Fuji does a decent job of video projects. I have since read up on BM and would choose either Panasonic or BM M43 for reasonably priced video only system.

[mikesbike]

Well, I just did a check with the ISO upped to 12,800 and overall there is not a glaring difference to see, but I was rather surprised to find myself most impressed- with the Pentax K-1 II! Upon scrutiny, I'm seeing a tad better fine detail. One place to look is in the woodwork. So instead of the Accelerator Chip blurring fine detail, this proves it may be contributing to better performance in retaining detail as well as lower noise, especially in higher ISO use! I liked it better at 100 ISO also.

As to the Canon's 20mp new body, its lower resolution shows, but there are reasons for producing designs deliberately with lower resolution, such as greater frame rates per second in burst shooting for professional sports photographers shooting races and the like.

[Serkevan]

Of course, I beg to differ. I've used everything from Minox to 8x10 film. I pick cameras based on overkill image quality for the job. I don't need overkill squared , just simple 1.5x oversample or higher. For the image quality I need for the job I'm doing I'll ignore any of those considerations. If I'm using FF , I'll use the best image quality I can get in an FF, made easier in that the more expensive items AF speed are followthrough are high lighted, but a $6,000 20 MP 1DX file doesn't compare to a 36 MP Pentax file in IQ. I may miss the image with the Pentax, but if get it, I have better, and you can do a lot with good technique and skill to make up for all these camera "deficiencies" photographers didn't need even 20 years ago.

Eh, the K-1 is already a lot of overkill for everything I do, but I still like the camera . The third dial, tilt screen, astrotracer and other stuff that makes your life easier (and the experience enjoyable) is important to me*. Photography is a hobby, so if I'm not having fun I'm not doing it.


For example, I ain't using one of those uncomfortable Sony bricks for all the money in the world, no matter how good the IQ is or were to be. The few times I handled a NEX or A7 the experience was almost traumatizing .

*I won't buy a camera without tilt screen or third dial anymore, for example. IQ differences are splitting hairs until you get to poster size anyway.

[noelpolar]

I must admit.... the K1 is such a sweet spot of camera it really is hard to put a case forward for someone like me to need an upgrade. Would not surprise me in a year or so's time when a replacement is out I just end up getting a new DFA lens or two instead of dropping the money on a new body.

[mikesbike]

If we get a very pleasant surprise with the K-new, I wonder what kind of surprise a FF K-new might then bring!

[Paul the Sunman]

If we get a very pleasant surprise with the K-new, I wonder what kind of surprise a FF K-new might then bring!

That there is one.

[Kunzite]

That there is one.

That would not be a surprise at all.

[mikesbike]

Well, what if the APS-C K-new performs virtually as well in every way as the K-1 II or might even outperform it in some ways? There are new sensor advancements out there, which perhaps the K-new incorporates, and so could a K-new FF model. That would make sense, in view of the various FF lenses Pentax has and is developing.

My impression is the K-1 and K-1II have been a success, with very attractive pricing for a very well-built, very full-featured, and extremely well-performing 36mp FF DSLR.