|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
10-02-2016, 06:48 AM
|
| |
As per previous discussion, the consensus seems to be that you really couldn't tell the difference between a difference of 5 points or less on the DxO tests. You probably should not be reading too much into the numbers of those at the top, they don't mean much.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-18-2016, 07:12 AM
|
| |
I read that on the DxO website, on a page since taken down. When people point out the flaw in their methodology, they just change their story.
The light source description used to read that it was a light source similar to what you would typically find in windowless basement at a social function using off the shelf household lighting. The fact that they changed the temperature without any description of when the change was made and what is old an what is new data, also makes much of their previously done work suspect.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-17-2016, 08:43 AM
|
| |
But much of the time I have to adjust my exposures with the histogram in any case, so it ask becomes moot.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-17-2016, 07:03 AM
|
| |
ISO is about how people and cameras deal with lower than optimal light levels. So in that sense it hasn't changed. There were ways of processing, using larger grains in your emulsion, under-exposing and pushing your developing, all methods of dealing with low light. With digital, it's all done in camera, but it's the same struggle. An electronic struggle not a chemical struggle, but not so different really in terms of overall effect.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-16-2016, 11:01 AM
|
| |
I have often wondered if DxO fudge part of their data, or took shortcuts... it's one of those mysteries of the universe. :D
You have to remember, they shoot in a windowless space with nothing but one incandescent light. Which they claim is some kind of typical photography set up.
My understanding is the reason their values are so crooked is their lack of blue spectrum light in their test environment.
Under blue light, an APS-c sensor can be pushed theoretically to almost 100 MP. Under red light it will struggle to achieve 10 Mp. Here in lies my perceived problem with DxO. By limiting their light sources to red-yellow spectrum, they create an un-natural environment that will create much less resolution than out door shooting conditions. If DxO says your lens is good to 6 MP, I guarantee you it will be on a K-3 good to at least 18 Mp if the light source is blue spectrum. DxO, like any source is only useful if you are understanding exactly what they are talking about. If you're shooting a red flower under normal household lighting, then their evaluation may be dead on. If you're using any full spectrum light source, like oh, the sun, or any white balanced LED or Florescent source, it's all nonsense.
Just my take.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-16-2016, 08:21 AM
|
| |
At least for you it's worth it. Others may not agree. My guess is, that if you are a working pro, with a really good income, and you need one of the specialty lenses Canon supports, then it's good deal. However, for the average guy, cost is still an issue. From my perspective, the Canon shooters I see all the time have something I don't. Really good high paying jobs and lots of disposable income. But for the average guy, if you can't afford the high end gear Pentax is a much better option. All I hear when i read posts like that is "I'm rich beyond your wildest dreams and i can buy whatever I want."
Selection is only a factor, if you actually partake of that selection. If Pentax gear covers your needs, knowing there's all kinds of specialty gear available from Canon makes no difference at all.
I also find it odd, when folks talk about Canon specialty lenses, to one of my Canon user buddies, when I'm able to drop my 40XS and 21 ltd. into a small case and stick it in my pocket constitutes specially gear. Small portable equipment that can go anywhere and produce superb images. Pentax has some niche products that if Canon had them would be promoted as special lenses. The fact that you would treasure what Canon does well, and not mention the things Pentax does well, that Canon doesn't, means your post is somewhat biased right off the bat. Simple fact, Canon does more of what Pentax doesn't do, but Pentax does some things Canon doesn't do such as affordable WR, in body SR and Pixel shift and still has stop more DR than the best Canon, compared, best model to best model. If those things Pentax does are up your alley, as in my case, "Canon does more specialty lenses" is just "blah , blah, blah".
In my experience, of the 20 or so guys I casually hang out with from time to time, 3 Canon shooters have switched to Nikon recently because of the DR in their landscape issues. So I see this as a really big thing for Canon. Most of the guys I shoot with have never changed brands and are happy to shoot with what they started with... except for Canon shooters. Just like Pentax lost users over AF speed and no FF, one of which has been rectified, Canon lost shooters over lack of Dynamic Range. At least in my neck of the woods. And since my K-5 still has as good DR as any Canon made, the K-1 appeals to me because it's an improvement over the K-5. I'm not interested in new gear to get the same as what I have.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-16-2016, 07:04 AM
|
| |
Is it just me or are the effects of Pixel Shift pretty spotty? I believe it was Imaging Resources who couldn't get much improvement with a test image even though they gave it the old college try. There seem to be un-explained parameters to getting an improved image with it.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-15-2016, 06:45 PM
|
| |
I married 3 so it's still pretty good. :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-15-2016, 06:37 PM
|
| |
IN other news, the Canon EOS 5D Mark IV has managed to climb all the way up to #14 on the list and has Dynamic Range almost equivalent to a K-5. Unfortunately my last two Canon shooting landscape buddies recently ditched all their Canon gear for Nikon D810s and Nikon gear. I told them something was coming from Pentax, but they wouldn't listen. :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
09-15-2016, 06:27 PM
|
| |
Those are pretty good numbers. When you consider that cameras differing by 4 points or less are often pretty much indistinguishable from each other, that means it;s pretty much on equal footing with the best that's out there.
|
