|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-20-2018, 06:11 AM
|
| |
You are having problems with nuances of English. This camera is Weather Resistant - not Weather Proof - it resists weather up to the specified point ... which you go beyond. Have fun in the Samsung Forum!
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-18-2018, 05:11 AM
|
| |
This is partly a misrepresentation of what is being said, and partly a misunderstanding of modern cameras. "One camera for all" is largely a modern myth. Back in the age of film, one could take a basic camera, and "tune" it. The Super Program I purchased in 1983 would have been a poor choice for shooting sports, but only because I never purchased a motor drive for it - I am a low volume shooter, and when it takes me a month to use a 24 exposure roll of film, a motor drive makes no sense. If I had been shooting sports, I would have purchased a motor drive, and I would have used 36 exposure rolls of faster film rather than the 24 exposure rolls of Kodachrome 25 I did use.
When the Nikon D850 came out, Nikon users celebrated that they finally had a camera that could meet all their needs. Before, a professional would have a D500 to shoot sports and a D810 to shoot landscapes - that is the nature of digital cameras. Pentax comes close to a two-camera solution with the K-3ii and the K-1ii .... the only thing lacking is that AF on the K-3 series reportedly isn't as good as what Nikon has, but you certainly cannot fault the K-1ii for that.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-17-2018, 11:17 AM
|
| |
Another gratuitous negative comment about Pentax. Remind us why you are here.
You made a comment about why professional artists value 'raw'.
I responded with a comment about some professionals valuing JPEG.
One standard is just as good as the other - the world does not revolve around your use case, or any use case. There should be room here for all. If Pentax doesn't meet your standards, this would be a great time for you to move over to the Sony forum.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-17-2018, 06:50 AM
|
| |
You are another one who demonstrates bias {in this case, against Pentax} with every breath. Find a productive use of your time.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-17-2018, 05:41 AM
|
| |
Statements like the one below are exactly why someone might agree with statement by Rondec.
Some of the finest photographers in the world shoot the Olympics for Getty, and yet news reports clearly state that this work is done in JPEG only.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-16-2018, 09:47 PM
|
| |
The main fact expressed by you in this section is a clear orientation towards PP. Others of us have a totally opposite orientation, and how one views capabilities like this will be shaped by how we feel towards PP.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-15-2018, 05:34 PM
|
| |
This should not be an issue of comparison to a 'like' camera. The question should be "If you saw this image all by itself, would you find it to be acceptable?" .... "Is this image a 'keeper'?"
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-15-2018, 11:58 AM
|
| |
I would agree that flash might still be needed for the more athletic events, such as the 50 foot dash down the aisle {my bride of 39 years may hold the world record} and the bouquet toss ... but I really doubt that it is needed for exchanging vows, and for otherslow-moving events such as First Communion and Confirmation.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-15-2018, 06:43 AM
|
| |
I tend to think in terms of 'steps' - of changes which eliminate impediments to what I do - instead of 'innovations' - and in that sense I have enjoyed three 'steps' since I moved up from Kodak Instamatic to 35mm in 1969 {incidentally, moving up to 35mm was not one of those 'steps' - it didn't affect my photography as much as these 'steps' did}:
1979: Going from rangefinder to SLR. Having a single focal length hindered my photography because it chained perspective to framing and because there were some photographs I missed because I couldn't back up enough.
1995: Going from manual focus to auto focus
2006: going from film to digital
I should mention that I never had a darkroom. For most of the film era, I shot Kodachrome and depended on professional development to provide my images. Today, I do as little PP as possible, because most of my discretionary time goes to my long-term project of converting film images to digital; inspecting at 100%, I find that most images have problems, such as scratches and mold spots for me to correct, so I have no desire to spend even more computer time on my hobby, so SOOC JPEG quality is very important to me.
Also, I am not a pixel peeker - I believe one should look at a photo as a whole, not though a magnifying glass - and I have never been a fan of corner-to-corner sharpness - if something is important, I will put it in the center of the image.
Last night my wife and I were at the dinner provided by her employer at the end of every academic year {she is a college administrator}. I took one discrete picture with the Pentax Q-7 I was carrying in my suit coat jacket. As the dinner progressed, I realized how I was irritated by the flash-flash-flash coming from the college PR person; the flash was annoying, and looking at my picture, I'm convinced she wasn't gaining anything. As digital has progressed, I have become increasingly convinced that flash is not needed in most circumstances, and in many - by creating shadows or washing out natural lighting - it makes things worse. With the stability provided by IBIS, I find that I hardly ever use flash any more - I would rather tolerate minor motion blur.
In that context, I firmly believe that the 'accelerator' will provide one last step for me {I am70 years old} - by making much higher ISO values useable to me, I gain ability to take pictures anywhere at anytime without motion blur or use of flash other than very rare fill flash. My view is not that of a professional artist like MJKoski, but I'm guessing there are a lot more like me, and hundreds of parents/grandparents will really benefit from cameras that deliver solid photographs without need of flash, expensive "f/2.8" lenses, or DarkRoom work.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-11-2018, 10:48 AM
|
| |
I made the same mistake. I was flabbergasted when the initial response to the Mark ii was "so what?", when few respondents even noticed the 'accelerator' in the list of new features.
Although the KP had been out for a year, K-1 users had apparently paid little attention to it. Apparently there is a big gap between KP users and K-1 users. Perhaps the queue issues prevented K-3 users from looking further. In retrospect, perhaps releasing a K-3iii with the 'accelerator' would have made more sense.
Personally, I believe the 'accelerator' is revolutionary, but it may make more sense at the K-70 end than at the K-1 end. Every year I see inquires from parents / grandparents wanting to improve the pictures they take of indoor sports, and every year I see them creep sadly away when person after person sings praise to long f/2.8 lenses, because it is hard to justify spending $$$$ for that single purpose. But put a regular 55-300mm lens on a K-70 in TAv mode, and you have a sub-thousand-dollar purchase that can meet that need .... and a camera upgrade was going to be needed fairly soon anyway. This is a use case that justifies the 'accelerator', involving people who aren't interested in accurately recording pimples nor in spending time with LightRoom. A camera which provides good looking JPEGs is just what they need .... but I'm not sure Pentax marketing caught many people's attention this past year.
I'm not a K-1 user, so I don't know if there are similar use cases justifying implementing the 'accelerator' in the K-1 .... especially if most K-1users enjoy LightRoom time.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-10-2018, 05:50 PM
|
| |
The thing is, the Mark ii is kind of a specialized camera - a Weather Resistant camera which does better, comparatively speaking, at higher ISO values. Lousy weather seems like exactly the conditions which would allow it to show what it can do.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-10-2018, 02:31 PM
|
| |
I'm not sure how you reached this conclusion.
You are jumping to conclusions. The Mk ii might be the wrong camera for an artist such as MJKoski; he doesn't have the same requirements as others professionals, such as those who cover news and/or sports and are required to submit JPEG results within minutes.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-10-2018, 07:30 AM
|
| |
That would require a switch to bypass the 'accelerator'. I doubt if that switch exists, because it would be another source of noise.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II
05-08-2018, 08:48 PM
|
| |
Fur of dead animals looks dead is not quite a "star eater" phenomenon; in fact, in the one case I know of photographing the heavens, all stars were present and accounted for - people are driving this completely beyond reasonable.
|
