[skawa]

Hi,

so I've spent the last week driving myself nuts comparing XT10/XT20, A6x00 and the slightly unexpected KP. I was initially dead set on trying out mirrorless for the WYSIWYG experience which would probably fit my current shooting more than the K7 and K01 I have been using for the last 8 years.

I realized that first of all I shoot for hobby, have far less time now to go over my RAW shots on the PC and that I always felt slightly frustrated by Pentax Jpegs for some reason. There is no doubt that Pentax RAW files are best in class for the price but the time required to develop them actually led me to almost stop shooting : since I was always afraid that the JPEGS would not do my Limiteds justice I would shoot RAW and then leave them as such. Not bad but pictures are meant to be shot and shown...

After discovering and reading about the KP I started having doubts, first because of the pixel peeper in me : the APSC sensor data and ISO look astounding. On top of that the camera seems compact enough yet retains all the ergonomic fundamentals of why I went with Pentax, adds IBIS and all the premium Pentax magic tricks my K7 got me accustomed to (well except the top LCD).

I want to spend 500-700 euros ($600-850) on a body I will actually have the desire to use and take out in order to replace my dormant K01. I want to focus on a single focal length (somewhere between 25-35 APSC) to force myself to get better at composition (currently I have Sigma 10-20, Sigma 17-70, Pentax 17-70, Samsung 18-250, Sigma 30 1.4, FA 43 and DA 15). I really loved the 30 1.4 that got me started in proper photo and then got lost in zooms, mainly because of travels when they were really useful. Then 3 years ago I bought DA 15 and FA43 but I didn't use them much because that was the time I got bored with the mandatory Lightroom treatment in my photography workflow. I still use LR for my truly best shots and the odd printouts but really can't be bothered for 90% of my images, and as such I feel I haven't explored the promised awesomeness of the 43 which is really sad and a waste of money...

I want to stick with Pentax (if only for not having to rebuilt a lens collection, though the Fuji ones look like they're up to the Limited's level) but there is no doubt to my eyes that Fuji's OOC jpeg's are way more accomplished, even though technically the image data that make them up is inferior to the KP's.

Compare the KP, XT10, XT20 and A6000 below :

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

Based on this and other galleries I looked at and If I wasn't lazy with RAW processing, the KP would be a no-brainer upgrade, familiar and superior on every point except AF (as usual I guess ). The Raw file is amazing, better even than early A7 FF. However the JPEGs are another story sadly and I still haven't found a way to tweak my K01 to pump out truly pleasing files. I fear it will probably be the same with KP and I doubt Ricoh will react or improve the situation since it's been 15 years that Pentax JPEGs have been criticized Vs the competition, and that I guess most of their customers only shoot RAW.

I like that Fuji offers film emulation bracketing, advanced in-camera Raw processing, sustained firmware improvements and other LR-repellent tweaks.

So again I would really like to stay with Pentax and this is why I'm wondering what JPEG shooters think about this, have I reached a point where Pentax is not the right system for me any more? Any in-camera magic settings to test out? Or should I simply make peace with the fact that Pentax excels in RAW and Fuji in JPEG and that I have to therefore abandon ship?

I'm looking for impartial, down to earth feedback from those of you who use both systems and please rest assured I just want to shoot pictures again, not start a pointless Raw Vs Jpeg debate.

Thanks!

[BigMackCam]

I can't comment on the cameras you mention, but I would just like to mention the RAW vs JPEG thing.

As you know, the in-camera JPEG engine converts RAW data into a JPEG, applying some preset adjustments such as tone curve, contrast, clarity, noise reduction, sharpening etc.

If you take just a little bit of time to come up with even just one Lightroom preset of your own (and the adjustments mentioned above are probably all you need to include), you can apply that at the time of import so that all of your RAW files start off that way. In the majority of cases, those images could be ready to export as JPEG with no further adjustments. Of course, you could argue, why do this when the camera can supply ready-to-use JPEGs? The answer - because you'll still have the RAW file should you need to deal with blown highlights, crushed shadows etc. and you can carry out non-destructive editing with no layering of compression artefacts. Lightroom really doesn't need to be any amount of work at all, if you set up one or more presets and apply them during import. It has built-in support for laziness

[Kozlok]

I use a preset for auto-import. For 90% of my shots, I never do more.

On a different note, if you are bored using Lightroom to edit your photos, take fewer, better photos. Try to only capture only “the one” keeper.

[jatrax]

After reading your post my answer was going to be the same as the ones above. But they beat me to it.

My Lightroom import:
1) copies the images to my server drive
2) renames them to my standard file structure
3) makes a second backup copy on my local external drive
4) applies an import develop preset that covers 90% of my 'develop' work and a large portion of the images never get anything else done to them
5) applies a metadata preset with basic information like my copyright

There is no need to 'develop' every RAW by hand. I try to get my standard import close to the camera jpeg and then develop the RAW further on only those images I know have the potential to go beyond that.

As to which camera, I think only you can decide that. The KP is reputed to be very good but so are the mirrorless options. You just need to decide what you like most. But I don't think going mirrorless is going to improve your images any.

And if you don't like the Pentax jpegs and want to go the jpeg route remember that the cameras allow you to tweak the jpeg settings almost as much as Lightroom allows you to tweak the RAW files.

---

Last edited by jatrax; 03-29-2018 at 08:54 AM.

[Adam]

Hi,

so I've spent the last week driving myself nuts comparing XT10/XT20, A6x00 and the slightly unexpected KP. I was initially dead set on trying out mirrorless for the WYSIWYG experience which would probably fit my current shooting more than the K7 and K01 I have been using for the last 8 years.

I realized that first of all I shoot for hobby, have far less time now to go over my RAW shots on the PC and that I always felt slightly frustrated by Pentax Jpegs for some reason. There is no doubt that Pentax RAW files are best in class for the price but the time required to develop them actually led me to almost stop shooting : since I was always afraid that the JPEGS would not do my Limiteds justice I would shoot RAW and then leave them as such. Not bad but pictures are meant to be shot and shown...

After discovering and reading about the KP I started having doubts, first because of the pixel peeper in me : the APSC sensor data and ISO look astounding. On top of that the camera seems compact enough yet retains all the ergonomic fundamentals of why I went with Pentax, adds IBIS and all the premium Pentax magic tricks my K7 got me accustomed to (well except the top LCD).

I want to spend 500-700 euros ($600-850) on a body I will actually have the desire to use and take out in order to replace my dormant K01. I want to focus on a single focal length (somewhere between 25-35 APSC) to force myself to get better at composition (currently I have Sigma 10-20, Sigma 17-70, Pentax 17-70, Samsung 18-250, Sigma 30 1.4, FA 43 and DA 15). I really loved the 30 1.4 that got me started in proper photo and then got lost in zooms, mainly because of travels when they were really useful. Then 3 years ago I bought DA 15 and FA43 but I didn't use them much because that was the time I got bored with the mandatory Lightroom treatment in my photography workflow. I still use LR for my truly best shots and the odd printouts but really can't be bothered for 90% of my images, and as such I feel I haven't explored the promised awesomeness of the 43 which is really sad and a waste of money...

I want to stick with Pentax (if only for not having to rebuilt a lens collection, though the Fuji ones look like they're up to the Limited's level) but there is no doubt to my eyes that Fuji's OOC jpeg's are way more accomplished, even though technically the image data that make them up is inferior to the KP's.

Compare the KP, XT10, XT20 and A6000 below :

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

Based on this and other galleries I looked at and If I wasn't lazy with RAW processing, the KP would be a no-brainer upgrade, familiar and superior on every point except AF (as usual I guess ). The Raw file is amazing, better even than early A7 FF. However the JPEGs are another story sadly and I still haven't found a way to tweak my K01 to pump out truly pleasing files. I fear it will probably be the same with KP and I doubt Ricoh will react or improve the situation since it's been 15 years that Pentax JPEGs have been criticized Vs the competition, and that I guess most of their customers only shoot RAW.

I like that Fuji offers film emulation bracketing, advanced in-camera Raw processing, sustained firmware improvements and other LR-repellent tweaks.

So again I would really like to stay with Pentax and this is why I'm wondering what JPEG shooters think about this, have I reached a point where Pentax is not the right system for me any more? Any in-camera magic settings to test out? Or should I simply make peace with the fact that Pentax excels in RAW and Fuji in JPEG and that I have to therefore abandon ship?

I'm looking for impartial, down to earth feedback from those of you who use both systems and please rest assured I just want to shoot pictures again, not start a pointless Raw Vs Jpeg debate.

Thanks!

The image processing engine in the KP is better for JPEGs- in particular, the WB will be more natural, and you'll see less noise compared to the K-01. The sensor's natural sharpness (i.e. no AA filter) will also make details clearer.

The main lingering issue, IMO, is fine detail. Pentax JPEGs are still over-sharpened by default, so I'd turn that setting down. Even then, you can squeeze more detail out of raw files. Skin tones also tend to be over-saturated, though Pentax did add a new dedicated processing setting for portraits, which works quite well if you're willing to wait.

[surfar]

I'm looking for impartial, down to earth feedback from those of you who use both systems and please rest assured I just want to shoot pictures again, not start a pointless Raw Vs Jpeg debate.

Ok, i have plenty of K mount gear and a small Fuji system and i bought into Fuji for the Jpeg secenario you talk of.

You dont have to sell out of K mount,its easy to add a system to "try it out".The way i did this was to buy the Fuji Xe1 and an adapter and used K mount and Takumar lenses.All manual of course.

Gradually ive added 4 native X mount lenses(3 used 1 new), another used body and late last year the Xe3.

For a year before i bought into Fuji,i read their main forum which is,member wise,about 85% the size of PF after 7 years in operation.

Ive never shot a Raw file with my Fujis.A recent survey showed 25% of X mount shooters shoot raw only,the Pentax figure is 50%.Many comments on their forum go along the lines of" i tried processing Raw but couldnt get it as good as the in camera jpegs".

Disadvantages of the XT10/20 are no stabilisation in the body and no WR.The Xt20 is virtually the same as my Xe3 apart from where the viewfinder is located.The Xtrans 3 sensor provides 24mp and 4K video,a very capable device for still and moving pictures.

A major plus for Fuji is the ongoing support for their products and they listen to their client base and keep them informed.

ALL the lenses are good,my 4 are the cheapest 4 and they produce excellent images SOC.

[stevebrot]

I got bored with the mandatory Lightroom treatment in my photography workflow.

I do my winnowing and "flagging" using LR's library view. If I can't see "ka-ching" vs. "sucks" with default import settings or the full resolution preview JPEG (present in both PEF and DNG RAW), then there is little use doing that step.

If one prefers to do that in-camera, I would expect increased wear and reduced lifetime for the camera buttons. An alternative for winnowing might be FastStone, which uses the preview JPEG for RAW and no additional processing JPEG.

Compare the KP, XT10, XT20 and A6000 below

Ideally, this is something to do in a brick and mortar store (fat chance ). The three body forms are quite different in hand. As far as image comparison, I suggest the real-world gallery photos from DPR or Imaging Resource. The "studio shot" poster is a poor substitute for actual shooting in real light.

I'm looking for impartial, down to earth feedback from those of you who use both systems and please rest assured I just want to shoot pictures again, not start a pointless Raw Vs Jpeg debate.

If you prefer in-camera JPEG, then some time with each of the four bodies doing in-camera processing would be needed to tell whether any would meet your expectations. An XT10 user, for example, may post here that they are thrilled with their camera and its JPEG performance and may even provide example images, but such would say little about your potential experience with the same camera and whether the provision for tweaks are practical in the field.


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 03-29-2018 at 12:37 PM. Reason: clarity

[Sliver-Surfer]

I've compared my own cameras Sony A6000 Pentax k5 and Fuji XT10 Jpegs. I don't think there is any basis to the reputation of Fuji having better JPEGs. It probably get fueled by the fact that Fuji has really good Kit lenses and Fuji hides some pretty good sharpening voodoo in their firmware. Fuji has some really nice cameras but I prefer the flexibility and pre-tweakability of my Sony and Pentax cameras(and Pentax,Sony are more robust)

[DrawsACircle]

In case you haven`t seen the KP review referred to in another thread

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Read some of the comments, Mattias does have an XT20.

[clackers]

Skawa, I just don't see how your pictures will get better by shooting JPEG only.

Whatever brand of camera you use, you're better off applying your own Import profile in Lightroom that you've customized to suit your particular tastes.

It can be a high-contrast and saturation Editorial or retro muted Fujifilm style or whatever ... the point is that the software allows you to quickly and automatically do whatever the camera's engine does ... and better.

[skawa]

Hi everyone,

thank you for your valuable feedback which helped in balancing my personal issue with Pentax JPEG. Last night I spent some time in the KP section and discovered that I am not the only one hesitating between KP & Fuji because of the JPEG/LR conundrum. I guess deep inside I know that KP is probably the better, longer-lasting and more reliable camera Vs the XT10/20. Reading your replies I also realized my gripe with LR is mostly due to the fact that I didn't really use the software properly, however JPEG shooting is and will still be a major part of my shots because simplicity, because of one less step from a hobby point of view.

I also discovered last night that the KP deal on Amazon canada doesn't apply for EU orders, which challenges my choices since KP here in EU is almost twice the price (999 EUR amz.fr Vs 560 EUR on amz.ca) and I am not spending that much on a camera right now.

Regarding your suggestions about LR, I really wish to thank you for those as they have challenged the way I thought about PP. I probably should have bought and read a LR book back when I started, this would have helped me setup a workflow which would have reduced the perceived weight/annoyance I currently have with PP...

BigMackCam & Jatrax: It is true that I could use scripting/presets to automatically import and process the files, I hadn't really looked into that!

Kozlok : That is very true and is really my goal with the next chapter in my photography. However sometimes, because of kids or poor AF, you end up with 20-30 pictures to sort out rather than the One. This is independent of raw/jpg obviously but I guess inconsciously I assimilated this experience with raw for some reason...

Adam : Thanks for specifying the JPEG improvements, very useful! Sometimes I forget that the sensor and chips in the K01 are 6-7-8 years old...! Has the in-camera processing speed improved in the new generations? Stuff like lens correction, auto shadow/highlights, image filters, HDR? These can add quite a few seconds to in-camera jpeg processing on the K01.

Surfar : Thank you for your input, I'm glad to hear from someone who had a similar approach! I agree about not selling everything but keeping all these lenses would be overkill for me, especially in my endeavour to streamline and work on 1 or 2 focals at most. Plus losing automatics on X mount would probably frustate me, in that case I could as well get old M lenses for cheap and sell the FA/DAs...

What X lenses do you have? The 35 and 10-24 look like they would make a perfect pair to work on composition... On Pentax I'd be looking at the 15 and FA43 which lay dormant in a drawer (or perhaps the 20-40 + FA 50 1.7? )
I checked the XE series, they seem nice result-wise but the body is so small and are not really cheaper than XT. They are however easily found 2nd hand in my price range. I don't really care for video or 24mpx but I'd like to ask how do you feel about losing IBIS when using the Fuji? This is really the main stumbling point for me with Fuji.

Stevebrot : Thanks, really need to get back to LR I guess... I know about the studio shot, it is artificially technical however I do find it useful to evaluate sensors. There is no way indeed I can try these cameras in store!

What you write is obviously true, no way but to try them out I guess. Seeing as Fujis have good resale value I could probably grab a 2014-2015 model used along with a 23 or 35mm, play with it for some time and sell it back at no loss a few months later. The same can't be said about KP as I wrote above.

DrawsACircle : Hehe that video is actually the one that instilled doubts and made me post this thread! I love his picture style. Peeking mode looks very useful and having 3 wheels is very interesting. He says it's much cheaper in Sweden, I wish he would share the links!

clackers : I know JPEG won't improve my photos as I've already been shooting JPEG these last few years, I guess what I meant is that I didn't find K01 JPEGs rewarding enough to do my lenses justice and that put me off taking the camera out.

All in all the KP is nice but it seems I will either have to go 2nd hand (though unlike the Fujis almost no 2nd hand KP are available here) or find someone in Canada to get it for me and send it over. Last option if I want to stay with Pentax would be K70 but again I feel it's very expensive over here for an entry level, around 650 EUR with currently no 2nd hand offers. It does fit my budget but I would probably feel frustrated paying that much for it, especially after owning the K7.

So I think my choice might have to do with whatever comes up first on ebay and the local craigslist. The good thing is that I'm pretty sure both KP and XT-10/20 are outstanding bodies, each for their own reasons, so whichever I get I'm sure to notice a qualitative jump in handling, AF, shooting options, ISOs and IQ-whether JPG or Raw-from my old 2012 K01 and 2011 X10.

So in the meantime what's a good way to learn about Lightroom? Any books or courses to recommend? Any Linux alternatives after all these years? I stopped using Windows a while back since apart from games and Adobe stuff 97% of what I do on my desktop can be done freely and privately in Linux...

Lastly if any of you see good deals on EU KPs do let me know!

Thanks everyone.

[BigMackCam]

Regarding your suggestions about LR, I really wish to thank you for those as they have challenged the way I thought about PP. I probably should have bought and read a LR book back when I started, this would have helped me setup a workflow which would have reduced the perceived weight/annoyance I currently have with PP...

BigMackCam & Jatrax: It is true that I could use scripting/presets to automatically import and process the files, I hadn't really looked into that!

Sure you can!

First, bring up one of your unprocessed photos in LR's Develop module. Then, make a set of basic adjustments that will get you to a decent-looking output result. Try to keep those adjustments fairly generic - stick with things like contrast, clarity, vibrance / saturation, noise reduction, sharpening, lens corrections - that kind of thing. Here's a very basic set of adjustments you could try:









Then, in the Prestets area on the left hand side, click the "+" button:



Set up the name of the new develop preset and select the items you want to include in it:



Then, click the Create button and you'll have your new preset ready to use.

When you next import RAW photos, set the Develop Settings (under Apply During Import in the Import window) to your new preset (you only need do this once - further imports will use the same preset until you choose something else) and all the photos will have the preset applied as they're imported:



Of course, you can set up numerous develop presets like this and apply them to photos from different cameras, or for different types of shot, but it's best to keep it simple

[Ron Boggs]

OK, I'll stand up and confess to shooting JPEG's and actually selling them to magazines and other print media. Not pro, but very active amateur with perhaps 800 sold and published images through the decades.

If you are using the default Bright setting or Natural setting you are underwhelmed with the JPEG's. Me too! You'll find that the Reversal Film setting will make a tremendous difference for the positive IF you are shooting outdoor images. For those who don't know what Reversal Film is...that's slides...just what all the publication-quality images were shot on for decades (outdoor images anyway). The Reversal Film setting does not provide lots of sliders for adjustment however. Basically, the factory presets are designed to be close to the rendering of slide film and they don't give you room to mess it up with your own choices.

Lately, I've taken a liking to the Landscape setting for outdoor shooting. It has maximum adjustment capabilities for Saturation, Contrast, Sharpness, Fine Sharpness etc. The rendering ends up not terribly unlike the Reversal Film setting but with more leeway for me to tinker it my own way.

How can I sell JPEG shots to unsuspecting editors? Editors don't give a damn how I shot the image. They just need the shot they want in a large enough file for quality glossy reproduction. I convert anything I'm sending to a publication to TIFF's to get 4 or 5 times larger file size.

Why not shoot RAW? After decades of shooting slides, I'm conditioned to getting it right in camera. If I miss the exposure it's a throw away, not a fix it in post. Just as if I missed focus...not repairable in post. Generally, extending the dynamic range into unnatural combinations isn't what editors are looking for. It's kind of like going HDR on the image making it look somehow "massaged." Lest we all forget, highlights are by definition hot spots and shade is in-fact dark. The limited range of highlight/shadow recovery available with JPEG's keeps me "honest" so I don't start combining toned down highlights and pumped up shadow zones into one image. Even our eyes don't work like that. And don't try to convince yourself that JPEG's don't allow for adjustment of exposure zones or white balance. They are completely adjustable, just not as wildly adjustable as RAW images (something about headspace here for true technical types). But the point of shooting JPEG's is to avoid adjusting in post anyway!

Note that I'm not just a dummy on the topic. Back in the '90's I was senior editor of a full-color glossy magazine for a few years. We had a $50,000 drum scanner and some very skilled photoshop gurus (pre-Lightroom). And I worked with these folks daily--they weren't hidden away in a back room somewhere. I "get" the technical side of digital images better than most JPEG'rs. I just don't care for computer time in my life. I've chosen to live in the national forest with mediocre satellite internet and no cell service, so I haven't fully embraced the whole modern digital world. That hasn't seemed to hurt my ability to shoot a publishable JPEG!

(I've also sold for publication many medium format transparencies scanned on a cheap flat-bed scanner with mediocre dynamic range...under 4 if I remember right. But I tend to shoot images with flatish exposure range so it's less an issue for me than others. My fine art printer in Cali once asked incredulously, "do you ever shoot in sunshine?" That tells you part of why I can "get away with" shooting JPEG's. Essentially, I don't shoot anything with sunlight unless it's within a couple hours of dawn and dusk when the dynamic range of the scene in front of me is less extreme. This is partly why the pro's always recommend dawn and dusk. Midday is for macro work or other situations where I have total control of lighting.)

Enjoy shooting JPEG's if that's what you want to do! But also, take control of when and how your render light and how you adjust your camera. Just because an image can be fixed in post doesn't mean it should be! Maybe wait and shoot when the light tones down a few stops!

[surfar]

Surfar : Thank you for your input, I'm glad to hear from someone who had a similar approach! I agree about not selling everything but keeping all these lenses would be overkill for me, especially in my endeavour to streamline and work on 1 or 2 focals at most. Plus losing automatics on X mount would probably frustate me, in that case I could as well get old M lenses for cheap and sell the FA/DAs...
What X lenses do you have? The 35 and 10-24 look like they would make a perfect pair to work on composition... On Pentax I'd be looking at the 15 and FA43 which lay dormant in a drawer (or perhaps the 20-40 + FA 50 1.7? )
I checked the XE series, they seem nice result-wise but the body is so small and are not really cheaper than XT. They are however easily found 2nd hand in my price range. I don't really care for video or 24mpx but I'd like to ask how do you feel about losing IBIS when using the Fuji? This is really the main stumbling point for me with Fuj

Ok, Adamora has the XE-2s for $349silver $419 black on a runout deal.Xtrans 2 sensor 16mp.

At present,i own 16-50/50-230 plastic mounts,great in good light and 18mm f2 and 27mm f2.8.I will be selling the 16-50 and buying the new 15-45 retractable,its an XC series which denotes plastic mount.I deal walkaround for my XE-3.
Fuji lenses cost a bit,however theres an adapter by Fringer that connects EFand EFs Canon mounts to the X mount.Heres a way to get some pretty good glass at reasonable used prices.It works with some good Tamron/Sigma lenses too.I'm eyeing off Sig 150-600 or Tam 18-400.As well as some Uwa.
As far as body stabilisation goes,some of the lenses are stabilised and monopods are good for what i do.The 2 primes i own(unstabilised) are light and shoot great handheld as does the shorter zoom(stabilised).

[DrawsACircle]

Hi everyone,

thank you for your valuable feedback which helped in balancing my personal issue with Pentax JPEG. Last night I spent some time in the KP section and discovered that I am not the only one hesitating between KP & Fuji because of the JPEG/LR conundrum. I guess deep inside I know that KP is probably the better, longer-lasting and more reliable camera Vs the XT10/20. Reading your replies I also realized my gripe with LR is mostly due to the fact that I didn't really use the software properly, however JPEG shooting is and will still be a major part of my shots because simplicity, because of one less step from a hobby point of view.

I also discovered last night that the KP deal on Amazon canada doesn't apply for EU orders, which challenges my choices since KP here in EU is almost twice the price (999 EUR amz.fr Vs 560 EUR on amz.ca) and I am not spending that much on a camera right now.

DrawsACircle : Hehe that video is actually the one that instilled doubts and made me post this thread! I love his picture style. Peeking mode looks very useful and having 3 wheels is very interesting. He says it's much cheaper in Sweden, I wish he would share the links!
[B]


All in all the KP is nice but it seems I will either have to go 2nd hand (though unlike the Fujis almost no 2nd hand KP are available here) or find someone in Canada to get it for me and send it over. Last option if I want to stay with Pentax would be K70 but again I feel it's very expensive over here for an entry level, around 650 EUR with currently no 2nd hand offers. It does fit my budget but I would probably feel frustrated paying that much for it, especially after owning the K7.

Lastly if any of you see good deals on EU KPs do let me know!

Thanks everyone.

Could be cyberphoto.se, 670€ for a KP body