Originally posted by Rondec For what it's worth, the K-1 sensor performs better at every iso than the D810. The fact that the D810 has an extra 0.2 EV of dynamic range available at iso 64 compared to the K-1's iso 100 is unimportant. (see DXO Mark graphs for details).
I have
no doubts that K1 has slightly better image quality than D810 and I don't need DXO graphs to confirm that.
For me DXO it's the last website that I look at when I'm interested in a camera or a lens. Their lab test
are equal to zero when comes to real life shooting. Just as an example, according to DXO, Canon 300mm f2.8L is sharper than 400mm f2.8L. In real life though, I found no real pro photographer that contradicts the conclusion of the guys from Lens Rental. I quote Roger Cicala's conclusion "Canon 400mm f/2.8 IS II: The Gold Standard. This is optically the best telephoto there is, and
all other lenses are measured by how close they can come to this one." I know Canon 300mm f2.8L lens very well because I rent it often. It's incredible fast and sharp even with 2x TC mounted on. But I had the chance to shoot with 400mm f2.8L lens also and it's spectacular. After I shoot with these 2 lenses (300mm f2.8L and 400mm f2.8L) I thought my 6D is on steroids.
That being said, back on topic.
I see 6D Mark II as a big upgrade for all Canon shooters which shoot with crop cameras and have L lenses in their backpack, 80D shooters included. Sure, there are better cameras at this price point, like D750 or K1, but as long as you don't print large or you don't need the best dynamic range, 6D Mark II can offer a lot of satisfactions and also a lot of money, as my 6D did for me (practically it paid itself, my lenses and the 5D Mark IV that I will pre order next week). There are lots of things to consider when you invest in a system, not just which camera has better image quality. You need to know:
- what do you plan to shoot with the camera you want to buy, professionally speaking
- what options do you have
regarding lenses; as far as I'm concerned, lenses are far more important than a camera
- what options do you have regarding flashes & accesories
- what options do you have regarding service & renting
- etc.
Having at my disposal any time of the day (anywhere I go) lenses, flashes & accessories that I want are more important than some 10-15% increase in image quality, which is not noticeable anyway by 90% of the clients. All these facilities comes with a bigger cost, I know, but these costs gives me a lot of options.
Not to mention that a 6D Mark II with:
- Tamron 15-30mm f2.8
- Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 (G2 version)
- Tamron 70-200mm (G2 version)
costs 6760$ in Romania, while Pentax K1 with the equivalent lenses costs 8116$. There is a 1356$ difference. With this difference you can buy a 7D Mark II or an 80D and cover also the wildlife. Despite everybody else say, with Canon or with Nikon (even with Sony or Fuji) you have third party support and options regarding cameras and lenses.