[biz-engineer]

Even on a poll regarding the use of astrotracer, most of pentaxians never used it or used it just a couple of times.

I don't know if others don't use astrotracer or composition adjust or pixel shift, but sometimes I do use those features. Obviously I don't shoot astro often because it's constraining (finding dark area, being there late night) but when I use the astrotracer I appreciate not having to taken many short exposures and crop frames or carry an additional tracking mount. I could also invalidate Canon unique features to make it worthless if my intention was to prove my point.

[Dan Rentea]

I don't know if others don't use astrotracer or composition adjust or pixel shift, but sometimes I do use those features. Obviously I don't shoot astro often because it's constraining (finding dark area, being there late night) but when I use the astrotracer I appreciate not having to taken many short exposures and crop frames or carry an additional tracking mount. I could also invalidate Canon unique features to make it worthless if my intention was to prove my point.

All I'm trying to say is that Pentax cameras, at least the ones released until now, are more oriented to landscape photographers than to sport, wedding or fashion photographers for example. Sure, you may shoot sport, wedding or fashion with Pentax cameras, but there are more versatile cameras that will do a better job. For landscape photographers or for the ones who like to use the oldest lenses possible, Pentax has great features that will make shooting experience nicer than using other cameras.

[biz-engineer]

Unfortunately the 1Dx III doesn't have a tilt screen, so sad

[Rondec]

All I'm trying to say is that Pentax cameras, at least the ones released until now, are more oriented to landscape photographers than to sport, wedding or fashion photographers for example. Sure, you may shoot sport, wedding or fashion with Pentax cameras, but there are more versatile cameras that will do a better job. For landscape photographers or for the ones who like to use the oldest lenses possible, Pentax has great features that will make shooting experience nicer than using other cameras.

Boy, you sound a bit like DP Review here. "For landscape photographers or for the ones who like to use the oldest lenses possible, Pentax has great features..."

The K-1 is a bit old at this point. I know the K-1 II came out more recently, but it is still primarily a K-1 with accelerator added. Even so, I would argue that for most photography that does not require a high frame it is a very nice camera that matches up well with any competitor's offerings in the same price range.

None of this takes away the fact that the 1Dx III is going to be amazing and there will be lots of folks shooting at the Olympics with one of these. As to how it matches up with the A9 II I would say is immaterial -- the bigger question is what lenses the photographer using it has. Canon sports photographers aren't going to be switching mounts quickly because they have invested thousands of dollars in lenses that work really well with EOS cameras and I expect Canon will continue to supply them with such SLRs for a long time to come.

[Digitalis]

Unfortunately the 1Dx III doesn't have a tilt screen, so sad

You have to do things the old fashioned way and tether your phone to the camera. No need to get on the ground and stain your silk shirts.

[Dan Rentea]

Boy, you sound a bit like DP Review here. "For landscape photographers or for the ones who like to use the oldest lenses possible, Pentax has great features..."

I know it's a little difficult for some to agree with me, but none of the above affirmations are intended to offend Pentax or Pentaxians. And both of the above affirmations are true unless you think that K1/K1 II are not great cameras for landscapes or for the ones who like to shoot with very old lenses from film era.

The K-1 is a bit old at this point. I know the K-1 II came out more recently, but it is still primarily a K-1 with accelerator added. Even so, I would argue that for most photography that does not require a high frame it is a very nice camera that matches up well with any competitor's offerings in the same price range.

If we are arguing, then I would argue also that for most photography that does not require a high frame you will need instead 36mp.

[Serkevan]

You have to do things the old fashioned way and tether your phone to the camera. No need to get on the ground and stain your silk shirts.

What, you guys don't bring a friend to carry your gear and get on the ground for you?

[biz-engineer]

I would argue also that for most photography that does not require a high frame you will need instead 36mp.

One of the things I've found powerful is using lists. Make a list of things that have a effect on photography, then rank by importance depending on photographic goal, select the top 3 most important features.
Your line of thinking is inspired by Canon. I can talk to any Canon rep and any Canon customer, they talk the same rhetoric, you are a Canon customer educated by Canon, taking Canon style photos. On the other side of the spectrum are folk using view cameras, they have no interest in rapid shooting situation even for a wedding shot! However what the view camera guy will produce on a static bride & groom wedding shot, no Canon with fast AF and fast burst rate will be able to match. Raymond Depardon said "those digital cameras are for people in a hurry, I'm not this kind of photographer, I have time". LAst time I was next to canon couple, they took 100 shots of the same poor bird, I took two shots, but I could hear the "brrrrr brrrr brrrrr brrr brrr brrrr" I felt like being beside machine gun in Rambo movie, I should have asked "did you manage to get the bird in the frame?" After seen that I understood why memory cards mega bytes are getting bigger and bigger.

[Rondec]

I know it's a little difficult for some to agree with me, but none of the above affirmations are intended to offend Pentax or Pentaxians. And both of the above affirmations are true unless you think that K1/K1 II are not great cameras for landscapes or for the ones who like to shoot with very old lenses from film era.



If we are arguing, then I would argue also that for most photography that does not require a high frame you will need instead 36mp.

I'm just saying the K-1 is a decent all-arounder. Nothing else. It does nothing well that the A9 or 1Dx series do well, which is fine.

As far as resolution goes, I think people make too big a deal about relatively small differences in megapixels. The difference between 24 and 36 and 42 megapixels is much less in practice (viewing/printing max size) than it what it sounds like on paper.

[Dan Rentea]

One of the things I've found powerful is using lists. Make a list of things that have a effect on photography, then rank by importance depending on photographic goal, select the top 3 most important features.
Your line of thinking is inspired by Canon. I can talk to any Canon rep and any Canon customer, they talk the same rhetoric, you are a Canon customer educated by Canon, taking Canon style photos. On the other side of the spectrum are folk using view cameras, they have no interest in rapid shooting situation even for a wedding shot! However what the view camera guy will produce on a static bride & groom wedding shot, no Canon with fast AF and fast burst rate will be able to match. Raymond Depardon said "those digital cameras are for people in a hurry, I'm not this kind of photographer, I have time". LAst time I was next to canon couple, they took 100 shots of the same poor bird, I took two shots, but I could hear the "brrrrr brrrr brrrrr brrr brrr brrrr" I felt like being beside machine gun in Rambo movie, I should have asked "did you manage to get the bird in the frame?" After seen that I understood why memory cards mega bytes are getting bigger and bigger.

My main camera is a Canon one, but I shoot with lots of cameras because I go out with lots of people using various cameras from different systems. When comes to education, I participated at 2 long term classes and after a not so easy exam I took my licence as a photographer, the one you need in Romania when you work with contracts/clients. As for Canon education, it did had a big impact on me the only workshop organized by Canon where I was lucky enough to participate, workshop which was conducted by an impressive photographer (at least in my opinion) named Jeff Ascough (below a picture of him from that workshop). I learned a lot of useful things regarding events mostly because he is a wedding photographer who hate formal shots and he likes to document the events catching pure emotions.



As for why I like Canon, the main reason is related to the lenses that Canon has. The new RF lenses are also amazing. The other reason is skin tones when shooting people. After editing images taken at the same time with different cameras, under the same conditions, the less work when comes to skin tones were the Canon files. Another reason would be the ecosystem. I can find or rent pretty much everything I can think of. And since you haven't managed to realize by now, the Canon brand or the number of fps are less important for events. Sure, it counts also the fps because weddings in Romania have some traditional dances where people are moving fast and they change position quickly (see below an example with a video of a traditional dance). And as I said in other topic, high resolution cameras for my workflow are less than ideal because I would have to work harder to get the shots and since I don't have clients who print their images at more than 30", K1, D810, D850, 5DsR, A7R III, etc. would be less than ideal. Same for action. You won't see a photographer at the Olimpics shooting with a 45mp or with a 61mp camera even if it has 20fps and 500 RAW buffer. It's because of the workflow and the photographer would have to work a lot more to get the fast action shots with high resolution cameras.

If you shoot one image and get it perfectly, then chapeau to you. I need to shoot 2-4 images even with static subjects because people blink among other things and while you may take just one shot and get consistent results, I can't because as I said, people blink among other things and I can't replicate the moment. As for K1, even if I would deal with resolution, I can't wait for it to focus in AF-C or to clear the buffer. I mean, I can wait, but as long as there are cameras that allows me to have a better workflow, then it has nothing to do with Canon because Nikon and Sony have options to choose from. If you stop for a second and be sincere to yourself you will realize that I'm not making up things. Some people compare K1 to any other camera out there and most of the time it "wins" no matter what area of photography involved. As I said, there are some categories where K1 shine (landscape, macro, products), but when action is involved, there are better cameras to choose from. These discussions are more "dramatic" here because Pentax has only one full frame and even when I asked in another topic about needs, only a few were sincere and all the others couldn't (wouldn't) separate Pentax K1 and the upcoming 45mp Pentax full frame from their needs and gave me answers based on what Pentax has or it will have.

And when we talk in a topic dedicated to speed about K1 features and when I say that K1 is more oriented to landscape than to wedding or action and is great also for some people due to compatibility with old lenses, what are your responses?
- you shoot one frame and Canon shooters shoot 100
- I sound like DPReview for complimenting Pentax for releasing a great landscape camera
- etc.

Sure, as I said millions of times, you can shoot wedding with K1, or with D610, or with 6D or with A7 II. But this doesn't mean that there aren't better cameras suited for weddings. Get over brand fidelity and replace Canon from my comments if it does sound bad to you with Nikon or Sony or Panasonic and more important, focus on what I'm saying instead of reading only Canon.

You Tube

You Tube

---------- Post added 01-13-20 at 01:40 PM ----------

I'm just saying the K-1 is a decent all-arounder.

Did I said it's a bad all-arounder? I said is specialized to certain areas of photography, not that it can't be used at weddings or sports.

It does nothing well that the A9 or 1Dx series do well, which is fine.

A9 and 1Dx does nothing well that K1 does for landscapes, yet I sound like DPReview when I say it.

As far as resolution goes, I think people make too big a deal about relatively small differences in megapixels. The difference between 24 and 36 and 42 megapixels is much less in practice (viewing/printing max size) than it what it sounds like on paper.

I said in another topic that resolution to me has to do with workflow not necessary to large prints and if 36mp is still overkill (for me) for weddings, a 45mp camera would be even less ideal.

[Rondec]

Did I said it's a bad all-arounder? I said is specialized to certain areas of photography, not that it can't be used at weddings or sports.



A9 and 1Dx does nothing well that K1 does for landscapes, yet I sound like DPReview when I say it.



I said in another topic that resolution to me has to do with workflow not necessary to large prints and if 36mp is still overkill (for me) for weddings, a 45mp camera would be even less ideal.

You sound like DP Review when you say that a K-1 is worthwhile if you like really old lenses or landscape photography. DP Review is famous for giving Pentax a "Qualified" Recommend. They are willing to recommend Pentax cameras to those who already own K mount lenses and aren't put off by their deficiencies.

Anyway, I think we are actually at a pretty similar place. There aren't any bad cameras out there these days, but we can say that certain ones are going to be better at certain applications than others.

[Dan Rentea]

You sound like DP Review when you say that a K-1 is worthwhile if you like really old lenses or landscape photography.

And this is something bad? True, I don't use old lenses at all, but given this particular case and given the fact that a lot of people say in this forum that one of the main reasons to shoot with Pentax is their compatibility with old lenses, again, I'm somehow "the bad guy" for pointing out 2 main advantages of Pentax cameras!?! Next time I will add speed among the most reasons to choose Pentax, hopefully, if the new APS-C will deliver.

[biz-engineer]

The new RF lenses are also amazing.

Thank for the detailed comment. Regarding the RF lenses, they are said to be amazing, like the Nikon Z ones. What I don't understand is why the MTF charts of the D-FA 28-105 and RF 24-105 are very close, D-FA 28-105 being even better at 105mm. I hear from internet reviewers all the time that the mirrorless lenses are so good, but when I compared Tamron SP primes (DSLR) to Nikon Z primes, the difference is very small, I don't have the chart in mind, but I think I even found out from the MTF charts that some of the Tamron SP for Nikon mount beat the Nikon Z primes. I also compared the MTF charts of the Tamron SP 24-70 and the Tamron SP 24-70 G2, both have MTF chart nearly identical, while Dustin Abbott says in his review of the G2 version that the G2 is a lot better than the first version. My conclusion was that reviewers will always tends to tell that the recently released product that they review is so much better than the previous one. T.Nothup said the RF 24-105 is one of the best standard zoon out there, but when I compare the MTF charts I find that the Z 24-70 is actually better. Reviewers also said that the Nikon Z 24-70 2.8 is the best, but when I compare its official MTF chart from Nikon to the MTF of the Z 24-70 f4, I find that the Z 24-70 2.8 is not better than the Z 24-70 f4. What to understand in all of this?

[Serkevan]

I think the key takeaway is that if one cannot take great images with recent gear from *any* brand, the problem is a bit behind the viewfinder

[Dan Rentea]

Thank for the detailed comment. Regarding the RF lenses, they are said to be amazing, like the Nikon Z ones. What I don't understand is why the MTF charts of the D-FA 28-105 and RF 24-105 are very close, D-FA 28-105 being even better at 105mm. I hear from internet reviewers all the time that the mirrorless lenses are so good, but when I compared Tamron SP primes (DSLR) to Nikon Z primes, the difference is very small, I don't have the chart in mind, but I think I even found out from the MTF charts that some of the Tamron SP for Nikon mount beat the Nikon Z primes. I also compared the MTF charts of the Tamron SP 24-70 and the Tamron SP 24-70 G2, both have MTF chart nearly identical, while Dustin Abbott says in his review of the G2 version that the G2 is a lot better than the first version. My conclusion was that reviewers will always tends to tell that the recently released product that they review is so much better than the previous one. T.Nothup said the RF 24-105 is one of the best standard zoon out there, but when I compare the MTF charts I find that the Z 24-70 is actually better. Reviewers also said that the Nikon Z 24-70 2.8 is the best, but when I compare its official MTF chart from Nikon to the MTF of the Z 24-70 f4, I find that the Z 24-70 2.8 is not better than the Z 24-70 f4. What to understand in all of this?

I don't look at Tony Northrup, Jared Polin, Dustin Abbott and so on. I do my own testing in the field. My needs are my needs, you have different needs and different options to analyze cameras/lenses, influencers have their own agenda... We buy what we need based on what we shoot and based on testing. At least this is what I do.

As for Tamron lenses, I like the G2 zoom lenses a lot. I like Tamron lenses in general more than I like Sigma. But when I see both of them filling the shelves of a local service from Bucharest I tend to avoid them even if some of them could be 2-5% sharper than the OEM lenses.

---------- Post added 01-13-20 at 05:33 PM ----------

I think the key takeaway is that if one cannot take great images with recent gear from *any* brand, the problem is a bit behind the viewfinder

Great images can be taken with any camera, from micro 4/3 to medium format. It's just that some cameras/lenses will give consistent results in certain situation than others.