Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Showing results 1 to 25 of 300 Search:
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 21 Hours Ago  
Nippon Camera Ricoh/Pentax 2019 Interview
Posted By Class A
Replies: 798
Views: 33,025
Light gathering ability and image quality have typically more impact on the size of lenses than sensor size.

A "fast" lens needs to have a large front element even when the sensor size is small (f-stops must be interpreted in the context of sensor size for proper comparisons; an f/1.9 lens for the Q does not collect nearly as much light as an f/1.9 lens for FF (~ 1/20 of the light)).

High expectations towards image quality also increase the size and weight of lenses; just compare the FA 50/1.4 to the HD D-FA* 50/1.4.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 22 Hours Ago  
SWPP (Society of Wedding & Portrait Photographers) Trade Show, London
Posted By Class A
Replies: 25
Views: 1,148
Could you please create that thread and point us to it from here?

I'm intrigued. :)

I've been appreciating the efforts by Cactus for a long time now but since the RQ250 project was cancelled I wonder whether they'll be able to keep the momentum. The V6II + RF60X + Pentax-radio system surrogate + cross-brand options are great, but in its current form the system is confined to AA-powered speedlight-based lighting (with exceptions to which better solutions exist) which has its limitations. Surely not everyone will feel limited with that gear, but people who can imagine growing out of purely speedlight-based lighting will probably be more drawn to Godox these days.

P.S.: Many thanks for the update and the overall positive message. I look forward to seeing Pentax what they do best and continue to so for a long, long time to come!
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 2 Days Ago  
af-360fgz for off-camera with K-1?
Posted By Class A
Replies: 13
Views: 389
That's the right one.

Personally, I'd go for the AD200. It is the most versatile and powerful of the smaller Godox lights.

If you want a speedlight then you need to decide whether you want something AA-powered (TT600) or Li-Ion-powered providing much longer stamina (V850II/V860II).
I'm assuming both of these would give you HSS and TTL in combination with an XPro-P, but @inkista would be the expert. Note that none of the three lights I mentioned would support on-camera usage with P-TTL/HSS. The TT350P would, but it isn't more powerful than your AF 360 and has some further limitations.

BTW, I agree with inkista that "investing" (it's dead cheap as you can make it yourself) into a "Black Foamie Thing" is one of the best things you can do. I'm not advocating to throw money at a problem; you can have tons of fun with an on-camera flash and a BFT. However, if you already know that you want to do product photography or serious off-camera flash than I'd rather buy once than twice. Inkista is right, though, when going for an off-camera flash, you are not far away from wanting a light stand as well, plus light modifiers and suddenly you went from a casual on-camera flash user to a studio owner. :)
Forum: Travel, Events, and Groups 3 Days Ago  
Kiwi Pentaxians
Posted By Class A
Replies: 15,651
Views: 949,880
Does anyone still have medium format film aspirations? This Pentax 645 film kit with five lenses is currently available for $1950 (according to a Facepalm post).

P.S.: As this is about legacy gear in a severely restricted market, I hope the post doesn't violate forum rules. I'm most certainly not the seller. :lol:
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 3 Days Ago  
Godox; XPro-P & AD600Pro in HSS & TTL
Posted By Class A
Replies: 6
Views: 340
Trigger stacking was never officially supported.

That said, it still works with specific equipment combinations and settings. For instance, even a Godox XPro-C works with a Cactus V6II (firmware version 1.1.013.).

Personally, I wouldn't recommend trigger stacking and with the arrival of the XPro-P there is typically precious little need to continue using it, but if someone desperately wants to incorporate equipment that relies on V6II-support, it should still be possible. I'll do some testing myself in the future but as far as I can see, others already have done the job.

It may also be possible to use trigger daisy-chaining, i.e., connect a Godox X1R receiver with a Cactus V6II transmitter via a sync-cable. However, the involved speedlights would have to support a manual HSS mode and and the Cactus RF60X's manual HSS mode may be the only one that will work in this context. Theoretically, one could also do the daisy-chaining the other way round, and at least some Godox lights support manual HSS with some triggers, but my feeling is that it is all a bit too messy and a single system approach is to be preferred.
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 3 Days Ago  
af-360fgz for off-camera with K-1?
Posted By Class A
Replies: 13
Views: 389
If you want to keep using the AF-360FGZ then using two Cactus V6II radio trigger units would give you the best options (including remote power and zoom control, plus P-TLL and HSS).

At first, yes, but there are more powerful speedlights with better recycling times.

Well, that is going to be a royal pain, because I don't think any existing radio trigger would be able to wake up the AF 360 FGZ remotely. Unless that auto power off behaviour can be turned off, it would force you to consistently beat the 3min interval. I wouldn't want to build on such an approach.

In the light of all the above, you ought to ask yourself whether you want to invest money into two Cactus V6II units, or rather sell the AF 360 FGZ and get a Godox X-Pro trigger and whatever compatible speedlight/strobe you see fit instead.

A Godox-centred system would be much more future proof, in case you want to grow your off-camera ambitions as there are many more lighting solutions available from Godox compared to Cactus. A V6II + RF60X combination is really nice, but you wouldn't be able to add a studio- or location strobe in the future, as you can do in the Godox system. At least it doesn't look like that after the Cactus RQ250 project was cancelled.

Another alternative is to use the cheapest possible trigger system you can find -- which won't support remote power level control, i.e., nothing beyond simple triggering at shutter speeds that do not exceed 1/200s -- and experiment with that. If you catch the bug -- as you should :) -- you can always sell the cheap trigger system.
Forum: Travel, Events, and Groups 3 Days Ago  
Kiwi Pentaxians
Posted By Class A
Replies: 15,651
Views: 949,880
It went for $68. Did not pan out for the person who thought they could do better than $30 but still someone made an incredible bargain. :eek:
Forum: Product Suggestions and Feedback 4 Days Ago  
Supporting accurate in-camera focus validation
Posted By Class A
Replies: 3
Views: 382
The JPEG file embedded in a RAW file is highly compressed.

I haven't done any extraction myself but here are someone else's observations:
PEF file: 15.2MB.
Extracted JPEG file: 1.12MB.
PEF file exported to JPEG format at decent quality: 11.9MB.
In my view there is no comparison between reviewing an image at the back of the camera (by zooming into a highly compressed, low-quality version that is only meant to provide a preview and designed to be not too wasteful regarding space) vs reviewing a 100% view of either a rendering of the RAW file or a camera-produced JPEG file.
Forum: Pentax K-1 6 Days Ago  
First week with the K-1 II
Posted By Class A
Replies: 23
Views: 1,256
I think trying to cover all options through dedicated hardware controls is an unrealistic endeavour.

However, as most people don't need to have control over everything all the time, it makes sense to allow them to utilise the existing controls in the way they see fit.
Such an approach supports individual preferences as well as allowing one and the same individual to customise their experience depending on the situation.

I'd argue that the more customisable hardware controls are, the fewer you need of them to satisfy any given individual (acknowledging that the union of all individual preferences could not be satisfactorily addressed by a much larger set of controls).

I agree that phenomena like that do not instil a sense of craftsmanship. However, functionally, there shouldn't be any disadvantages. I've never heard the wheel rattle, for instance. I haven't used the grip that many times yet, though.

I don't think it should come as a surprise that even a company like Sony isn't infallible. :)
Forum: Pentax K-1 01-14-2019, 12:29 AM  
First week with the K-1 II
Posted By Class A
Replies: 23
Views: 1,256
Hi Ash,

first congratulations on your purchase!

I hope your K-1 II may provide you with as much joy and pride of ownership as my K-1 does for me.

I found it such a well-rounded, well-made photographic tool that it infused a good amount of fun into my photography again.
Is that silly? Perhaps, but I don't see anything wrong with being excited when somebody else (here the Pentax engineers) excel at their job and gift one with a tool that does much more than simply work.

I do find that the K-1 has considerable heft to it. Personally, I find the weight reassuring and believe it helps me to keep the camera steady. However, for someone concerned with weight in the camera bag and/or fatigue when using the camera, I believe it matters that a K-5 (which is not an extreme featherweight) only weighs 73% of the K-1 (batteries included).

With a battery grip attached and loaded with two batteries, my K-1 doubles as a dumbbell. :)

Yes, I feel it is unreasonably stiff excluding its use as a third dial to be adjusted via the thumb during shooting.
I can operate via the thumb but not really fluently.

Not a big deal for me, as I'm more than fine pressing a button to modify the function of the front/rear dials, but a bit of a lost opportunity.

Not sure my copy has an exceptionally stiff dial as others apparently do use it as a third dial for ISO, for instance, but perhaps they take the camera away from their eye to adjust the ISO setting via the third dial or just force the dial. :)

True, that's a lot of options, but on the whole I'd say customisability should be higher not lower. There is a lot one can customise already, but other cameras give one more freedom to reassign the function of buttons, etc. I don't think that flexibility can ever be a negative because if one doesn't need it, one just ignores that particular part in the menu system.

My grip wheel does the same. I don't think your's is faulty.

Just to be sure: My grip has no play against the camera body. It's just that the wheel retains a small play even when the grip is tightened. Perhaps the slight wheel play is intentional in order to prevent people from tightening the wheel so much that they cannot remove the grip anymore. As long as your grip sits tight, I wouldn't worry.

My ergonomic niggles would include that the tiny toggle switch above the eight-way (aka "four way") controller is just too small and almost hiding behind the ridge of the eight-way controller. In practice it is not a problem, though, as I very rarely need it and just use the side of my fingernail to actuate it. I also would have preferred the battery grip to replicate the layout of the camera buttons as closely as possible instead of the switcheroo move they made. I could go on a bit, but I realise that the camera was built to a budget under time constraints so not every ideal solution was available to the engineers.

Overall, I think the K-1 (II) is an excellent camera and it enriches my photography experience in a way that a Sony MILC never could.

P.S.: I do hold Sony in high regard and have multiple electronic devices from Sony in my home because of their excellent quality. I just don't like what they think passes as a camera. :)
Forum: General Photography 01-13-2019, 08:34 PM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
For sure marketing is overstating the case (not surprisingly).

I wouldn't have expected the tech press to turn such a blind eye towards obvious issues but one lives and learns.

You are preaching to the choir, as far as I'm concerned.

Small MILCs can be useful when paired with small lenses (although they won't beat a truly compact fixed lens camera, let alone a phone) but in particular full frame MILCs you'd expect to be used in combination with fast modern lenses. The latter tend to be both big and heavy. This not only negates the theoretical advantages of a lighter system, it also turns the small camera size into liability regarding handling/ergonomics.

The tech press is certainly known to entertain infatuations with new developments. Sadly, it is rare to come across reviewers who maintain a balanced picture, not letting their judgement be clouded by what is newer and/or understanding that their own preferences may not be shared by all their readers.
Forum: General Photography 01-13-2019, 08:26 PM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
Thanks a lot for all the links you provided. Very useful!

Regarding the first one, I'd again say that video usage is probably not quite comparable to simple operation, i.e., only using the sensor to produce an image for the viewfinder or back LCD. Maybe the differences aren't significant, but I wouldn't assume they are not.

That's a very interesting find. From the Canon EOS 80D knowledge base:
"If Live View shooting is used continuously for a prolonged period, the camera's internal temperature may rise, and image quality may deteriorate. Always exit Live View shooting when you are not shooting."
No quantitative data is provided but it is for sure interesting that Canon thought the impact could be sufficiently high and occur within the range of regular applications to warrant the above warning.

There is only a 4.5C difference between a stock D5100 and a passively cooled D5100 after 33 minutes of 30s exposures, which isn't that much after a pretty intensive usage. However, in a similar application scenario, a MILC could heat up similarly to the stock D5100 whereas a DSLR would heat up only mildly, if at all. That would then result in a 7C difference which we know would roughly double the dark current noise.

Overall, it seems that the potential issue of constant sensor heat up in a MILC during extended usage (not necessarily requiring a lot of shots) could have an impact on image quality that should not be dismissed outright.
Forum: General Photography 01-13-2019, 08:01 PM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
I have an overall positive outlook on Pentax.

However, this doesn't stop me from becoming concerned when I perceive Ricoh to be making mistakes.
For instance, I thought the K-01 was ill-conceived and expressed myself accordingly at the time. It wasn't completely without merit, but many mistakes were made in designing the K-01 and its commercial failure did not surprise me in the least.

I think that solely regarding the K-1 II as a positive because it makes the K-1 cheaper is short-sighted. First of all, even a K-1 II without mandatory noise reduction would have made the K-1 a cheaper buy. Second, the K-1 has been discontinued. All arguments based on the availability of the K-1, e.g., "buy a K-1 instead", "the K-1 has become cheaper", ignore that they only work for a limited time. Third, if Ricoh were to continue to use mandatory noise reduction of RAW files at relatively low ISO settings for all its future products then I'd regard that as very concerning. I do not think that this would be sustainable.

Could I kindly ask for this thread not to be used for discussing the K-1 II?
There is a large existing thread for that purpose and this particular thread was meant to focus on DSLRs vs MILCs.

I agree that mirrorless cameras are very interesting for companies because they are cheaper to make and could enable "DSLR -> MILC replacement sales" that otherwise wouldn't occur.

I wouldn't go as far as stating that MILCs are of no interest to customers, though. It is a game of trade offs as there are certainly advantages to MILC designs. My problem with a lot of the tech press is that they exaggerate negatives associated with DSLRs and are very forgiving regarding the negatives of MILCs.
Forum: General Photography 01-13-2019, 07:48 AM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
Of course, why wouldn't I?

While exposures over 4s may not be commonplace, they are certainly not extreme, IMO.

In any event, a review site should be examining all camera properties even if certain phenomena are only expected in rare situations. It should be up to the reader to decide how relevant a certain limitation is to them.

May I also add that there are many different review sites and some target specific readers only. I don't think it would be fair/appropriate to have the same expectations regarding scrutiny level towards all review sites. However, for a given review site, it is of utmost important to be consistent in their evaluation. A given site cannot perform evaluations at an microscopic level and make a huge deal out of a shortcoming for one brand and turn a blind eye to arguably more invasive issues for another brand. So, for instance, if a review site has a very principled view against the manipulation of RAW data, it should hold that view on all cameras it evaluates.
Forum: General Photography 01-13-2019, 07:34 AM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
NR (in the sense as assumed by Bill Claff) is not present for the Sony 7RIII until ISO 32180 but already starts at ISO 636 for the K-1 II.

As Rondec has pointed out, there are good reasons as to why these results need not be distrusted. I don't know much about what Sony's approach to removing unwanted artefacts is, but if their processing is limited to eliminating certain (in their view pathological) hot-pixel constellations then such isolated processing would not necessarily show up in Bill Claff's analysis.

This is not to say that the Sony processing is OK, for sure it sometimes eliminates real signal that it just mistakes for hot-pixel constellations. I'm against such (non-optional) RAW fixing as much as I'm against the K-1 II's RAW massaging. My only point is that there is no need to suspect incompetence or malice on behalf of Bill Claff.

Yes, but it isn't clear that the respective Sony processing would show in the conditions Bill Claff set for his tests. For one or another reason, the processing (if it takes place under the conditions he assumed/set) was not measurable using the method he applied.

I don't think that's a fair statement.

I rather assume he only looked at a limited range of shooting conditions he thought to be realistic. I don't think he claims to do a comprehensive sensor analysis.

From our perspective, it may seem regrettable that the K-1 II's processing is caught by his analysis whereas the Sony A7RIII isn't (despite having other flaws), but I don't think that proves any ill-intent on behalf of Bill Claff.

Well, as you can see both cameras process RAW files at some point in time. Virtually all cameras do at very high ISO settings.

The main discussion on pentaxforums, as I see it, was about the K-1 II starting to apply a pretty heavy-handed NR already at moderate ISO settings (starting at ISO 636).
Forum: General Photography 01-13-2019, 07:20 AM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
You could argue that but I believe many would disagree, as running into the limitations of the K-7's sensor does not require extreme situations or outrageous expectations towards dynamic range.

For sure, what constitutes "fringe scenarios" is a judgement call. However, I think we can all agree that shooting at -30C, for instance, is not a situation that many would encounter. Likewise, we could say that taking a very high ISO image after 30min of shooting video isn't a common scenario either. I'm not trying to make the case that there is a clear cut line between "normal" and "fringe scenarios", but I think that the concept of "rather uncommon scenarios" is relatively well-defined.

You state later

(emphasis is mine)
I meant "non-fringe" to be similar in spirit to your "realistic".

I'd disagree with such an assumption.

For instance, the striping of some MILCs can be excited by regular backlit scenes. These stripes may not occur very often, but backlit scenes are not uncommon and it is to be expected that a regular photographer (as opposed to deep sea diving photographer or extreme arctic explorer photographer) will encounter the issue at some point in time. I think "striping" is not comparable to an issue that would only occur when pursuing rather obscure photography applications.

I'd also say that once a certain DR has been reached across the board, it is fair to call out cameras that do not reach that common level. While pushing an exposure by five stops could have been considered unreasonable (or "fringe") in the past, I don't think that still applies today, for instance because HDR images have become quite popular and it is an advantage if one can simply push the shadows of a single exposure instead of having to combine several exposures.

Again, I'm not trying to establish absolutes, just arguing that it isn't impossible to define reasonable expectations towards camera performance in today's context.

Yes, that is certainly a good approach and I don't see any conflict to the other approach you are describing.

Yes, or we identify the affected realistic usage patterns after we have established in what range of situations issues should be expected.

So as soon as it is known when issues occur in what intensity, one can derive in what situations issues should become relevant and then the reader still can decide whether these situations are relevant to them or not.
Forum: General Photography 01-13-2019, 01:02 AM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
Interesting idea, but I'm not sure what is "best"; I guess it depends on the target audience.

I feel the CIPA conditions reflect serious photography better than a "many shots per on-time" approach does. A "on-time" could all too easily be converted into many images that wouldn't materialise in the context of serious photography.
As beholder3 put it, a snapshooter may get the so-called "real life" figures from a MILC, but a serious photographer might be closer to getting the CIPA figures.

I'm assuming that high-end cameras are more often used for serious photography and that testers do not always succeed in emulating the respective circumstances (to put it mildly) :).

So comparing DSLRs with MILCS in terms of "minutes of on-time" would yield figures that would be useful for snapshooters (or technicians interested in efficiency) but wouldn't be as useful as an approach that considers that one can use a DSLR during "off-time" as well.
Forum: General Photography 01-13-2019, 12:51 AM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
Ah, OK, I didn't look at this second-order temperature difference for a source of the 15C figure for two reasons:
  1. The end temperatures on the graphs are not entirely comparable. If you take the 35min figure from the first graph, the difference only amounts to 12C. I realise that the second graph appears to show an asymptotic behaviour so a temperature difference at the 48min mark would probably be close to 14C or so, but it just didn't occur to me that you had extrapolated like that.

  2. I don't think the 14C (or so) temperature difference is that relevant for the subject at hand. First, the comparison here is between a DSLR in video mode and a DSLR in regular shooting mode. I'd be more interested in temperature differences between DSLRs and MILCs when using the same shooting modes. Second, I'm sceptical about a video mode reflecting a regular MILC usage well. I speculate that using "LiveView" on a DSLR would be fairer, as the electronics wouldn't have to work as hard and the battery would probably heat up less.

Thanks. I did a search and figures seem to vary between 6-10C for each doubling. Interesting to know, for sure.

For sure.

What would be really interesting, though, is a quantitative analysis regarding
  • how much a MILC (typically, or a particular one) heats up its sensor more than a DSLR in regular and/or wildlife shooting conditions.

  • at what point (e.g., regarding ISO settings) the respective increase in dark currents will visibly affect images.

If detrimental effects are only to be expected in fringe conditions then I don't think it would be fair to proclaim a general problem.

Full disclosure: I very much prefer optical viewfinders so I'm interested to learn about disadvantages of mirrorless systems (other than EVF issues) so that I can warn others that not everything will be greener at the MILC side. If almost everyone adopted MILC systems then an OVF may become a very niche feature. So I'm all in favour of identifying potential problems associated with MILCs, but I'd like to know whether the problems are realistically relevant. For instance, whether the sensor heat up is real (w.r.t. MILC vs DSLR) and then second, whether it is photographically relevant for non-extreme situations.

P.S.: Thanks a lot, @beholder3, for sharing your data here. I think it is a really useful start to the discussion.
Forum: General Photography 01-11-2019, 10:31 PM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
Where did you find the 15C figure?
The graphs show temperature deltas of 22C and 7C, I guess there is another source that I'm currently missing?

Where does the "+15C -> 4X dark current noise" conclusion come from?

I'm not disputing anything, I'm just curious about the sources and the technical details.

Of course, the continuous sensor operation does not only heat up the latter but also drains the battery. On top of that, there is either a back LCD or an EVF to power even when the photographer just composes a shot or checks whether a scene is worth photographing.

I wonder whether some of the disparity between the low CIPA battery life figures for the Nikon Z6 (310) and the reports of much higher performance in the field (e.g. 600) are down to (strange?!?) shooting habits of people who claimed the much higher performance? Did they perhaps take every picture possible and did not spend much time on preparing the shot before pressing the shutter release button?

EDIT: The CIPA measurement procedure stipulates a 30s interval between images taken. During these "breaks", a MILC will typically consume more energy than a DSLR.

Sorry if this seems off-topic, but I think it is related in that it is something "bad" about MILCs and some of the lost battery life goes into heating up the sensor. :)
Forum: General Photography 01-11-2019, 10:19 PM  
Mirrorless cameras and sensors - the good, the bad and the really ugly
Posted By Class A
Replies: 32
Views: 1,000
Well, a step towards the right direction would probably be to design the camera so that portability (compactness and lightness) are overriding priorities.
I believe -- without having anything concrete to go on but assumptions -- that it should be possible to achieve better cooling of the sensor by sacrificing some weight and size.

Sadly, one reads too little about the intrinsic downsides of mirrorless cameras and the solutions they often imply (e.g., OSPDAF).
One could forgive some of the press to gloss over some of the more technical downsides, if they didn't make a fuzz about issues that probably have a smaller visual effect.

Non-stabilised video operation should heat up the sensor just as much.

If Ricoh were concerned with image noise, they'd have to exclude or limit the use of video as such (including extended use of LiveView).

I suspect the real reason is that their sensor-based image stabilisation is optimised for still photography. For the latter scenario it is not important to achieve smooth transitions between corrective movements, on the contrary, jerky movements can help to increase the effectiveness of the mechanism. I think it is likely that if Ricoh wanted to support proper video stabilisation, they'd have to come up with a different stabilisation algorithm that yields good results during continuous operation.

I've read that Sony's video stabilisation doesn't (always?) yield pleasing results, so perhaps it is this kind of performance that Ricoh does not seem good enough for video stabilisation?
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 01-11-2019, 05:56 AM  
X-Rite Custom Camera Profiling for Capture One Pro
Posted By Class A
Replies: 7
Views: 337
What curve (in "BASE CHARACTERISTICS") has C1 chosen when you look at images with the new profile?

A different curve choice may already improve the contrast.

You may also make some adjustments -- e.g., contrast, tone curve, levels, etc. -- and then save these adjustments together with the camera profile selection as a style to be applied during image import.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 01-10-2019, 10:20 PM  
X-Rite Custom Camera Profiling for Capture One Pro
Posted By Class A
Replies: 7
Views: 337
I don't see why not.

Just set the K-1 II to produce DNG files and use those for calibration purposes (with a linear curve as per instructions).

Once you have restarted C1, the new K-1 II profile should be one of the available camera profiles.

I guess you'll have to continue shooting DNG files, as I presume C1 won't accept K-1 II .PEF files.

I don't see any downsides to using the DNG format, on the contrary.
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 01-09-2019, 11:15 PM  
Pentax K-5iis+Cactus V6II+Viltrox JY680CH=HSS success
Posted By Class A
Replies: 63
Views: 6,502
Very nice last series!

Looks like you used a warming gel. If so, was it a colour-correcting gel, such as one full cut CTO?
Forum: Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 01-09-2019, 11:03 PM  
Photographing BB-8
Posted By Class A
Replies: 4
Views: 376
Nice one, @mcgregni!

Very nice example of how much fun one can have at home and learn about lighting at the same time. :)

Personally, I wouldn't have let allowed the blue, gridded flash to create a direct reflection on the toy. Not a question of right or wrong, just a personal preference and, more importantly, something to consider one's stance on. :)
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 01-09-2019, 09:25 PM  
DP Review puts K-1 Mark II as second worst camera of 2018
Posted By Class A
Replies: 838
Views: 29,738
Hi falconeye, what a delight to see you posting at pentaxforums. I missed you and will be missing you again, once you disappear again. :)

If that had been their objective, they could have done a much better job.

First of all, I hoped better from Pentax as well. I agree with Chris that the K-1 is the better buy and I wouldn't recommend an "upgrade" to the K-1 II either. I agree with pointing out that the K-1 II wasn't an impressive upgrade and that introducing mandatory denoising of RAW(!) data is indeed "not the way to go".

Well, it should be their journalistic duty to include Pentax whenever relevant.
Unfortunately, DPReview has a habit of leaving Pentax off the list, even if it would have been important for accuracy to include them.

DPReview has a habit of mentioning Pentax when they can make a negative remark. I won't 100% exclude the notion of "confirmation bias" on my part, but I can provide you with tons of evidence where DPReview has not done justice to Pentax and where they let get other brands away with similar or worse downsides.

BTW, I'm not viewing the video as "Chris and Jordan's private inofficial opinions" because it aired on the DPReview channel and a lot of DPReview staff were present and did not make corrective statements. This has to be viewed as being sanctioned by DPReview and hiding behind a "that's their personal view" pretext is pretty lame, if there is not at least a disclaimer that DPReview does not endorse the statements made.

With one subordinate clause (seven words), he acknowledged that the K-1 "was" an "innovative fantastic product with beautiful image quality".

The rest of his statements are all (potentially just sloppily) worded to transport incorrect messages:
"This camera isn't bringing anything to the table."
critically omits "new" as in "isn't bringing anything new to the table".
"The fact that you can take your old camera and upgrade it to this [K-1 II]
really speaks at what they do at this company."
turns a positive into a negative.

Even for minor upgrades, it isn't common that a manufacturer allows one to spend an upgrade price to acquire the perks of a new model instead of having to sell one's old model and pay the full new price for the new model.

The fact that the PCB of the K-1 has to be replaced with a new one to turn it into a K-1 II means that it is inappropriate to use the existence of the upgrade option as evidence of how little difference there is between the cameras. Is the K-1 II a disappointing update? In my view, yes, but still the reasoning by Chris is wrong and could be viewed as populist in nature.

Chris also, probably unintentionally, denigrates the Pentax brand and Pentaxians by attributing the "zealousness" of Pentaxians to "loyalty":
"You are loyal to your company, I think that's commendable"
I'd say that many Pentaxians are not sticking to the brand due to some blind or ill-conceived "loyaltiy" but because the Pentax products work for them (and better than other products would).

Chris essentially implies that Pentaxians continue to buy Pentax products and vocally disagree with unfair treatment of the brand, because they have bought Pentax in the past and want to culture their "loyalty".

Maybe Chris hasn't reflected about the implications of identifying Pentaxians with "loyality" but I think there can be no denying that this tacitly sends the message that if only technical merit would count, they'd choose a Sony or Fuji as well (I guess Nikon also makes their "darlings" list).

Note that DPReview, in their "2019 camera and lens manufacturers' New Year's resolutions", use the phrase "...we respect the way that many of them react to anything short of uncritically gushing praise for their favorite camera maker...". This would be "tongue in cheek" in private communication but as part of an official article, it's an insult. Yes, one could be super relaxed about it, but there is no denying that, overall, their narrative portrays Pentax as a brand that is not to be taken seriously and Pentaxians as irate sheep. If that's not what they want, they should change the way they write about Pentax/Pentaxians.

Chris finishes with
"So unfortunately, this is the worst camera."
which is simply a wrong statement. No self-respecting journalist should say something like that. I respect Chris a lot. I'm grateful that he overall appreciated the K-1 a lot in his review. I'm not so impressed by how he handled the K-1 II "award" and that he called "every entry-level DSLR the "worst camera of 2018". I think that's an outrageous statement to make. We've come to expect the mirrorless love from DPReview but I thought Chris was better than that.

I know that you want to help Pentaxians to not ruin their image (if that's possible :)).

However, I don't accept that the "award"/video passes as a joke because it has the blessing of DPReview and Chris has to realise that his choice and his wording will be used by fanboys all over the internet to throw mud at Pentax.

Note that DPReview don't seem to regard the whole thing as "joke" either, if they make retractions about "unofficial" verdicts made during the video.

To clarify: I don't care in the least that people do not approve of my camera brand choice. I'm only in favour of actively counteracting the unfair treatment of Pentax by DPReview because I'm concerned about the brand. Pentax sales are low as they are. There is no need to present Pentax in a worse than adequate light.

In your benevolence towards Chris/Dpreview, I believe you also have to acknowledge that "Othering" is a common phenomenon and that viewing numbers/website hits are DPReview's success metric. A controversial statement is good for DPReview but bad for Pentax. I don't think Pentaxians should stay quiet in order to avoid this situation (and I know fully well that you didn't suggest the latter).
Search took 0.04 seconds | Showing results 1 to 25 of 300

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:08 AM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]