[Mahadragon]

I've been over these forums last couple days looking at the different photos people are making with the new full frame K1. I'm not impressed. Maybe it's because all the lenses for Pentax are relatively cheap? (compared with typical Canon 'L' lens). I've looked at the Official pictures that Pentax released for the K1 and I've looked at some of the photos that newly minted owners have put on this website and none of these pictures blow me away.

I have looked at hundreds of photos made with the Canon 5D Mark III, including many, many wedding photos and I'll tell you, the 5D Mark III with a quality prime makes absolutely stunning results. Can someone do a head to head test of the K1 versus the 5D Mark III?? Same subject, same focal length, etc. etc. I want to see a direct comparison because right now I'm not seeing anything that makes me want to jump out and get a K1. All the pictures look like an APS-C on steroids. They have more detail, and maybe some better dynamic range, that's about it.

I think part of the problem, is that people are using these FA and DA Limited lenses, which weren't exactly built to be the baddest lenses out there. I believe Pentax made their lenses to give you really good value for your dollar as opposed to giving you insanely good performance at any price. Pentax makes some good, special glass, but it's not on par with Canon's 'L' lenses, or is it?

There's gotta be somebody out there with both of these cameras in their hand. There's a gazillion Canon 5D Mark III's out in the wild, you sneeze and you're bound to get a 5D Mark III wet. I'll be honest, if I had money today for a full frame DSLR, I'm making a beeline for the Canon and the first lens I get will either be the 50mm F1.2 or the 24-70mm F2.8.

---

Last edited by Mahadragon; 05-11-2016 at 10:07 PM.

[jatrax]

If the difference in your photography is the difference between those two cameras then you don't need either one.

Any camera at this level is going to be indistinguishable from one to another. The real difference will be in the skill of the photographer.

If you like Canon L glass go with that. Trying to make a contest out of which brand has better glass or cameras is just silly. Pick what you like and go take pictures.

[stevebrot]

I'll be honest, if I had money today for a full frame DSLR, I'm making a beeline for the Canon and the first lens I get will either be the 50mm F1.2 or the 24-70mm F2.8.

Well, there you go! End of discussion!

I am confident that a field test with both systems may be done at some point, but whatever the outcome, where there is no money, no cameras or lenses are bought, not L glass nor even the mediocre Pentax offerings.

In the meantime...

http://www.imaging-resource.com/cameras/canon/5d-mark-iii/vs/pentax/k-1/


Steve

[robthebloke]

There's the ISO invariance tests from dpreview which contain direct comparisons. I think you'll agree, Canon looks pretty good....

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

[stillshot2]

I think you ought to have a look at the samples from the new Pentax DFA* 70-200 f2.8. They should tell you all you need to know about how it compares to L glass.

[jbinpg]

Please, people, do not feed the trolls.

[pepperberry farm]

Please, people, do not feed the trolls.

bingo - it's soooo much easier just to use them to expand your 'ignored' list....

[clackers]

I'll be honest, if I had money today for a full frame DSLR, I'm making a beeline for the Canon.

$700 more for that dinosaur with a dud sensor? Come on, Mahadragon, you're easily parted with your cash!

[Rondec]

I think you'll be fine staying with Canon. Gear is definitely not the reason behind good or great images, skill of photographer is and if you are getting good results with a 5D, why change?

[Na Horuk]

I think only reason for Canon is if you are planning on doing a lot of Video, as that is one place where Canon is better than Pentax. Or if you need some crazy noise performance like the 12 MP Sony A7s. Or if you need a lens that is available for Canon, but not for Pentax.
Anyway, I think in the following year Pentax will fill up the lens lineup, and will also gain more third party support. If you need a camera now, and have the cash, go for Canon and have fun. If you will be waiting anyway, might as well keep your eyes peeled. In a year, there will be new cameras and lenses, from all manufacturers.

The K-1 is right there at the top of the current DSLR lineup of all brand. It can directly compete with other brand's flagships, at a good price point, and (I assume) you already have some lenses for it. It has many features that are unique.
But, you know, have fun with the 5D. Hope you get one with a good sensor

[redpit]

I've been over these forums last couple days looking at the different photos people are making with the new full frame K1. I'm not impressed. Maybe it's because all the lenses for Pentax are relatively cheap? (compared with typical Canon 'L' lens). I've looked at the Official pictures that Pentax released for the K1 and I've looked at some of the photos that newly minted owners have put on this website and none of these pictures blow me away.

I have looked at hundreds of photos made with the Canon 5D Mark III, including many, many wedding photos and I'll tell you, the 5D Mark III with a quality prime makes absolutely stunning results. Can someone do a head to head test of the K1 versus the 5D Mark III?? Same subject, same focal length, etc. etc. I want to see a direct comparison because right now I'm not seeing anything that makes me want to jump out and get a K1. All the pictures look like an APS-C on steroids. They have more detail, and maybe some better dynamic range, that's about it.

I think part of the problem, is that people are using these FA and DA Limited lenses, which weren't exactly built to be the baddest lenses out there. I believe Pentax made their lenses to give you really good value for your dollar as opposed to giving you insanely good performance at any price. Pentax makes some good, special glass, but it's not on par with Canon's 'L' lenses, or is it?

There's gotta be somebody out there with both of these cameras in their hand. There's a gazillion Canon 5D Mark III's out in the wild, you sneeze and you're bound to get a 5D Mark III wet. I'll be honest, if I had money today for a full frame DSLR, I'm making a beeline for the Canon and the first lens I get will either be the 50mm F1.2 or the 24-70mm F2.8.

ΗΑΗΑΗΑΗΑΗΑΗΑ hilarious? Or maybe not?

[RobA_Oz]

It's a bit futile, not to mention utterly irrational, comparing a few first exploratory shots taken with a camera that's been on the market for a couple of weeks, with the hundreds of thousands from a camera that's been on the market for four years, and then dismissing what you see from the new one on the basis of those photos.

Nonetheless, the OP makes a good point that some real life head-to-head comparisons would be good to see, but you're not going to see those emerge for a while, yet, especially as the Pentax system is a bit short on new glass.

However, a bit of background reading on the philosophy behind the FA Limited designs wouldn't go astray, before jumping to conclusions about the qualities of those lenses. Anyone got the link for our bold friend?

[HopelessTogger]

I've been over these forums last couple days looking at the different photos people are making with the new full frame K1. I'm not impressed. Maybe it's because all the lenses for Pentax are relatively cheap? (compared with typical Canon 'L' lens). I've looked at the Official pictures that Pentax released for the K1 and I've looked at some of the photos that newly minted owners have put on this website and none of these pictures blow me away.

I have looked at hundreds of photos made with the Canon 5D Mark III, including many, many wedding photos and I'll tell you, the 5D Mark III with a quality prime makes absolutely stunning results. Can someone do a head to head test of the K1 versus the 5D Mark III?? Same subject, same focal length, etc. etc. I want to see a direct comparison because right now I'm not seeing anything that makes me want to jump out and get a K1. All the pictures look like an APS-C on steroids. They have more detail, and maybe some better dynamic range, that's about it.

I think part of the problem, is that people are using these FA and DA Limited lenses, which weren't exactly built to be the baddest lenses out there. I believe Pentax made their lenses to give you really good value for your dollar as opposed to giving you insanely good performance at any price. Pentax makes some good, special glass, but it's not on par with Canon's 'L' lenses, or is it?

There's gotta be somebody out there with both of these cameras in their hand. There's a gazillion Canon 5D Mark III's out in the wild, you sneeze and you're bound to get a 5D Mark III wet. I'll be honest, if I had money today for a full frame DSLR, I'm making a beeline for the Canon and the first lens I get will either be the 50mm F1.2 or the 24-70mm F2.8.

One of my first test shots with the Pentax FA 1.8/31mm Limited, hand held, wide open . . .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/56053365@N07/26859952156/in/dateposted/

Pixel shift with the Pentax D-FA 2.8/100 Macro WR . . .

https://www.flickr.com/photos/56053365@N07/26348460563/in/dateposted/

I've owned Pentax K-5, K-5IIs, K-3, Sony A7r and A6000. Never used Canon, so don't know, but for me the K-1 is perfect.

[robthebloke]

However, a bit of background reading on the philosophy behind the FA Limited designs wouldn't go astray, before jumping to conclusions about the qualities of those lenses. Anyone got the link for our bold friend?

Technical report here:

http://gw.org.za/images/Lens%20Technical%20and%20Trial%20Use%20Reports.%20SM...su,%202000.pdf

[RobA_Oz]

Technical report here:

http://gw.org.za/images/Lens%20Technical%20and%20Trial%20Use%20Reports.%20SM...su,%202000.pdf

That's the one, thank you.