Pentax K1 FF excels in DR/quality. Too bad about the AF and lenses

On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 16:51:56 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

This is a truism for most people (like me) who've used Pentax. Forget about keeping up with the Nikon's of the world when it comes to AF and sports, etc. But if sheer image quality is what you want and you use some aftermarket lenses, Pentax is hard to beat since they've always done a great job with sensors.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-1/7

I'd really like this camera, but you're right about the AF. It's the
biggest issue I have with my K5 & K3 - it's truly awful for anything
moving. I just like fast things, and I have the wrong brand to shoot
that stuff. The other related issue is the burst rate. It's half the
K3's.

On 07/07/2016 15:11, RichA wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 July 2016 22:19:44 UTC-4, Bill W wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 16:51:56 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

This is a truism for most people (like me) who've used Pentax. Forget about keeping up with the Nikon's of the world when it comes to AF and sports, etc. But if sheer image quality is what you want and you use some aftermarket lenses, Pentax is hard to beat since they've always done a great job with sensors.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-1/7

I'd really like this camera, but you're right about the AF. It's the
biggest issue I have with my K5 & K3 - it's truly awful for anything
moving. I just like fast things, and I have the wrong brand to shoot
that stuff. The other related issue is the burst rate. It's half the
K3's.

Build quality, image quality and price make it a good buy, if you can overlook the other stuff. Some of the longer Pentax lenses are really good.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Chart...0,Pentax%20K-1
why would you bother?

On 08/07/2016 09:38, RichA wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 06:03:41 UTC-4, Me wrote:
On 07/07/2016 15:11, RichA wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 July 2016 22:19:44 UTC-4, Bill W wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 16:51:56 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

This is a truism for most people (like me) who've used Pentax. Forget about keeping up with the Nikon's of the world when it comes to AF and sports, etc. But if sheer image quality is what you want and you use some aftermarket lenses, Pentax is hard to beat since they've always done a great job with sensors.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-1/7

I'd really like this camera, but you're right about the AF. It's the
biggest issue I have with my K5 & K3 - it's truly awful for anything
moving. I just like fast things, and I have the wrong brand to shoot
that stuff. The other related issue is the burst rate. It's half the
K3's.

Build quality, image quality and price make it a good buy, if you can overlook the other stuff. Some of the longer Pentax lenses are really good.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Chart...0,Pentax%20K-1
why would you bother?

Why is the D800E higher than the D810?

Not sure if that's been fully explained. DXO came up with the same or
similar findings, that at ISO 100 (and above) the 800/E DR was slightly
higher than the 810, at the base ISO (64) of the 810, the DR was
slightly higher than the 800/E at ISO 100, hence the higher score
awarded by DXO.
The comment was made (I think by Bill Claff) that the D810 sensitivity
has been "shifted" to allow for base ISO 64, and I believe other tests
show that the D810 has slightly lower quantum efficiency, but it also
has higher full-well capacity (ie at ISO64 than ISO100 for the 800/E)
The chart data above shows differences which are trivial to the point
that you'd never see them.

On 08/07/2016 10:23, Me wrote:
On 08/07/2016 09:38, RichA wrote:
On Thursday, 7 July 2016 06:03:41 UTC-4, Me wrote:
On 07/07/2016 15:11, RichA wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 July 2016 22:19:44 UTC-4, Bill W wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2016 16:51:56 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

This is a truism for most people (like me) who've used Pentax.
Forget about keeping up with the Nikon's of the world when it
comes to AF and sports, etc. But if sheer image quality is what
you want and you use some aftermarket lenses, Pentax is hard to
beat since they've always done a great job with sensors.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-1/7

I'd really like this camera, but you're right about the AF. It's the
biggest issue I have with my K5 & K3 - it's truly awful for anything
moving. I just like fast things, and I have the wrong brand to shoot
that stuff. The other related issue is the burst rate. It's half the
K3's.

Build quality, image quality and price make it a good buy, if you
can overlook the other stuff. Some of the longer Pentax lenses are
really good.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Chart...0,Pentax%20K-1

why would you bother?

Why is the D800E higher than the D810?

Not sure if that's been fully explained. DXO came up with the same or
similar findings, that at ISO 100 (and above) the 800/E DR was slightly
higher than the 810, at the base ISO (64) of the 810, the DR was
slightly higher than the 800/E at ISO 100, hence the higher score
awarded by DXO.
The comment was made (I think by Bill Claff) that the D810 sensitivity
has been "shifted" to allow for base ISO 64, and I believe other tests
show that the D810 has slightly lower quantum efficiency, but it also
has higher full-well capacity (ie at ISO64 than ISO100 for the 800/E)
The chart data above shows differences which are trivial to the point
that you'd never see them.

Here's the DXO chart:
http://i.imgur.com/8mYb1Go.png