[stevebrot]

I don't see the connection. Canon releases a camera, therefore expectations for K-new image quality? The K-new will perform according to marketing requirements and available tech during its development cycle. If any of us expect competition-shattering IQ or any other aspect, that expectation is based on nothing except perhaps intoxicating vapors.


Steve

[gatorguy]

I don't see the connection. Canon releases a camera, therefore expectations for K-new image quality? The K-new will perform according to marketing requirements and available tech during its development cycle. If any of us expect competition-shattering IQ or any other aspect, that expectation is based on nothing except perhaps intoxicating vapors.


Steve

I agree with you, and so ignored everything other than the image comparison which I found to be very insightful. I'll happily take any imaging improvements thank you ( and expect some), but my biggest hopes lay in the areas of autofocus, subject tracking, frame rates, and dynamic range. Zero interest in any video features which others might desire.

[MMVIII]

I don't see the connection. Canon releases a camera, therefore expectations for K-new image quality? The K-new will perform according to marketing requirements and available tech during its development cycle. If any of us expect competition-shattering IQ or any other aspect, that expectation is based on nothing except perhaps intoxicating vapors.


Steve

No. This has nothing to do with Canon. The image comparison tool invited me to compare the new offers to the existing offers in the Pentax line. There was some recent discussion in the news section, a thematic derailment, as so often in these threads. I thought a dedidacet dedicated thread sparked by an image comparison of recent offers in the market might be a much better place for that.

The title should not refer to expectations towards the K-new, but denote a temporal entity - the time while expecting the k-new.

To rephrase and refine it: there have been repeated concerns towards the announced use of an accelerator unit in the imaging pipeline of the K-new. A comparison of Pentax cameras with AU and recent contenders on the market shows that the Pentax approach is not in any disadvantage to the competition in regard to image quality. If the K-new will follow this approach (no expectations here, just knowledge from the announcements) than these discussions would be not only premature, but probably also useless.

[texandrews]

IF I had any interest in video, which I don't, I would take the advice of the pro I was talking with in Orlando who tried to convince me wedding shoots were relatively easy and profitable (!): Get the new-ish Blackmagic 6K and don't depend on one camera for both video and stills.

EDIT: That and a K1 would cost less than one Canon R5. That's a surprise too.
Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 6K CINECAMPOCHDEF6K B&H

That's interesting about the Blackmagic...

[gatorguy]

No. This has nothing to do with Canon. The image comparison tool invited me to compare the new offers to the existing offers in the Pentax line. There was some recent discussion in the news section, a thematic derailment, as so often in these threads. I thought a dedidacet thread sparked by an image comparison of recent offers in the market might be a much better place for that.

The title should not refer to expectations towrds the K-new, but denote a temporal entity - the time while expecting the k-new.

To rephrase and refine it: there have been repeated concerns towards the announced use of an accelerator unit in the imaging pipeline of the K-new. A comparison of Pentax cameras with AU and recent contenders on the market shows that the Pentax approach is not in any disadvantage to the competition in regard to image quality. If the K-new will follow this approach (no expectations here, just knowledge from the announcements) than these discussions would be not only premature, but probably also useless.

Ah, understood, though I did resort to a dictionary for dedidacet and I didn't find it there. Thanks for the attempt at a new word-of-the-day but perhaps you meant dedicated?

[MMVIII]

Ah, understood, though I did resort to a dictionary for dedidacet and I didn't find it there. Thanks for the attempt at a new word-of-the-day but perhaps you meant dedicated?

Haha, you are welcome. My autocorrect does not catch all my typos, and that is a hilarious one... Anyway, excuse someone writing in his third language...

[normhead]

Canon spends more money on marketing than on R&D. Pentax spends more money on R&D than on marketing.

That means Pentax gets better images but, alas, Canon gets bigger marketshare.

As a photographer, I prefer having a better camera rather than having a more popular camera.

Exactly... it's so sad listening to folks intellectually trying to reason that a piece of equipment designed to take images should be judged on something other than final image quality.

[Serkevan]

Canon spends more money on marketing than on R&D. Pentax spends more money on R&D than on marketing.

That means Pentax gets better images but, alas, Canon gets bigger marketshare.

As a photographer, I prefer having a better camera rather than having a more popular camera.

The obvious counterpoint is that Canon spends much more money on R&D than Pentax, in absolute terms . Whether that means quantity or quality, that's an entirely different story. However, their good lenses are very good, so I wonder if it's just the insistence on having sensors done in-house that hurts them in terms of IQ.

---------- Post added 09-01-20 at 11:09 AM ----------

Exactly... it's so sad listening to folks intellectually trying to reason that a piece of equipment designed to take images should be judged on something other than final image quality.

There's definitely more than final image quality playing a part*, and that's not getting into the "what is image quality?" debate...


*Weight, size, ergonomics, build quality, price, you name it.

[repaap]

IF I had any interest in video, which I don't, I would take the advice of the pro I was talking with in Orlando who tried to convince me wedding shoots were relatively easy and profitable (!): Get the new-ish Blackmagic 6K and don't depend on one camera for both video and stills.

EDIT: That and a K1 would cost less than one Canon R5. That's a surprise too.
Blackmagic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 6K CINECAMPOCHDEF6K B&H

You would need two R5s anyway, 20 minutes of filming is at least 10 minutes of cooldown... another reason for dedicated stills cameras

Even thou Canon R5 will be better through updates, it is going to cost some to get kit for events. Even then you might not be able to do it your self. I did buy BMPCC 4K to compliment that video thing, and might get even more 'serious' video camera. 4K should be good for long time. Still, be prepaired to add some big bucks to get gear connected to Video too. Even if it is how good with IBIS and what not. RF must be amazing for what it is, but I'v let my self understand that Cine dedicated lenses will be necessary if one is very serious in filming. And they are not so good with Photo things. Cine tripods are not good for photos...ect. Not everythign can be done with one or 2 hybrid cameras. (I'm in process of buying my self a gimbal to get me sorted for hand held stuff, and this is what many with hybrid cameras are using anyway AND sky is the limit how much money can be burned(I'v begun to realise that you match your budget to your 'style' of doing things.)). regardless, I do think that They will match 'competition' image quality and in photography vise very well.

[stevebrot]

No. This has nothing to do with Canon.

Ha! Ha! Tell that to the other thread participants.

FWIW, I take at face value the claims by the folk at Pentax that the K-new will be a standout APS-C camera. I am tempted to expect that comparisons to the Nikon D500 will be made...when and if they ever get the K-new to market.


Steve

[normhead]

*Weight, size, ergonomics, build quality, price, you name it.

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.

[BarryE]

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.

[normhead]

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.

Is saving an image with sharpening and then reducing it the as not sharpening the original? I suspect you have a methodology method there. 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.

[Rondec]

I think the problem is that there has been minimal progress from a still image quality standpoint with regard to sensors. I don't really think that the D850 is that much better than a D810. The difference is primarily faster readout speed.

What this means is that the K-1 III will have the same image quality as the K-1 II, but with 10 fps and 4K video. Not sure what else can be read from it. Pentax doesn't design their own sensors -- they use Sony sensors and we know what those are capable of.

[btnapa]

Here the R6 compared to the Z6 and the A7 III:

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.

I feel confirmed in my assumption that the development of the last few years in the field of mirrorless cameras has not brought any significant improvements in stills image quality.

I agree on that count too, 100%. We should qualify that with "given the cost." As I mentioned above FGX100 is better but for more than 5-times the cost. BTW, I had a chance to shoot the GFX 100 and did not like it. For some reason it did not feel right and the monster size files froze my fairly strong computer.