Pentax full frame 35mm official announcement from Ricoh (K-1 36mp)

[Kym]

Dunno about Pentax 100 macro tho. Dunno nothing about this lens .. best to check it out yerself.

The Pentax 100mm macro is a D FA ... i.e. 35mm format

[robma47]

Its about time for a full frame, hope it lives up to expectations.

[Kym]

At least 5 new D FA lenses ... http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/japan...ns_Roadmap.pdf

[Lance B]

I am sure that the 15-30 f2.8 is a rebadged Tamron and if so, it is a real gem. Just got the Tamron for my Nikon D810 and love it, as good as the Nikon 14-24 but with a longer zoom range and VC! If you like wide angle, then I implore you to get the 15-30.

[Snpsht]

Given that over the last year or two I have purchased the famous Pentax "three amigos" (FA 31, FA43 and FA77 limiteds), which are all FF lenses and render truly wonderfully on an APSC and should be even better on their native format, and given the crop mode is available for my other lenses...or that I could simply crop off the unattractive bits in PP....I am sort of excited.

Haven't yet pre-ordered, but really don't know how long I'll be able to resist.

YAY PENTAX!!!!!

I'll be hanging onto my K-3, though, as it is an excellent camera in its own right.

[tduell]

Given that over the last year or two I have purchased the famous Pentax "three amigos" (FA 31, FA43 and FA77 limiteds), which are all FF lenses and render truly wonderfully on an APSC and should be even better on their native format, and given the crop mode is available for my other lenses...or that I could simply crop off the unattractive bits in PP....I am sort of excited.

Haven't yet pre-ordered, but really don't know how long I'll be able to resist.

YAY PENTAX!!!!!

I'll be hanging onto my K-3, though, as it is an excellent camera in its own right.

You'll probably give in sooner than later . With a good investment in good K mount FF lenses it's probably the way to go.
I'm currently telling myself that I'll wait until I see some proper tests and reviews. I'm particularly interested in how it handles higher ISOs.
I had a K-30, which I handed on to my son when I bought the K-3 II. I'm finding the K-3 II is a very nice camera which I'll keep, but it's not as low noise as the K-30.

Cheers,
Terry

[Snpsht]

Yes, I too have had that experience - when I bought the K-3, I passed my K-5 to my daughter in law who needed a DSLR for a uni course, and have missed its better low light performance.

Apparently the low light performance of the K-1 is exceptional.

I'm really liking the look of the articulating screen too as I am older, and getting an articulating screen into weird positions for a shot is preferable to trying to get my body into weird positions

....and the pixel shift will apparently compensate for some movement in the subject, so should be more useful for landscapes than the K-3II's version (which I haven't tried).

I may end up being an early adopter.

[Kym]

Hands on review of preview model... http://www.pentaxforums.com/articles...pressions.html

[tduell]

A comparison between K-1 and D810 has been published here http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pe...-vs-Nikon-D810.
I would think it is a bit premature as it can only rely K-1 specs that have been made available to date.
I can't comment on any errors related to the D810 but it omits to mention the software AA filter on the K-1 and I didn't see the GPS/astrotracer mentioned.

Cheers,
Terry

[Lance B]

A comparison between K-1 and D810 has been published here http://cameradecision.com/compare/Pe...-vs-Nikon-D810.
I would think it is a bit premature as it can only rely K-1 specs that have been made available to date.
I can't comment on any errors related to the D810 but it omits to mention the software AA filter on the K-1 and I didn't see the GPS/astrotracer mentioned.

Cheers,
Terry

I had to laugh when I read the summary, "It has better general image quality" referring to the Pentax K-1. I don't know how they can come to that conclusion when no one has done image comparisons! Credibility goes out the window, I'm afraid.

[tduell]

I had to laugh when I read the summary, "It has better general image quality" referring to the Pentax K-1. I don't know how they can come to that conclusion when no one has done image comparisons! Credibility goes out the window, I'm afraid.

Yes, it is a bit silly to be saying stuff like that. Ricoh have released a few sample images, but they don't allow comparisons to be made.
At best one can use this to look at the comparative specs, although there are errors in them as well.

Cheers,
Terry

[arthurking83]

.... Credibility goes out the window, I'm afraid.

Sounds like a page straight out of the Ken Rockwell manual for reviews!

I'd also like to know exactly what feature the K-1 has over the D810, that makes it a better camera for sports!
They give the K-1 a score of 100 points for sport shooting(and the D810 approx 90-ish .. hard to tell with the graphic) .. based on what shooting experience?

And if it does in fact score 100 points(out of what, mind you) .. how does that compare with sports specialist cameras such as a Nikon Dn series or Canon 1 series?

... Oh! I just had a look and the D5 scores just slightly under 100 on the graph .. maybe 99 or so.
So with that, they're saying that the K-1 is a better sports camera than a D5?

For credibility to "go out the window", an assumption has to be made that there was credibility to begin with.
From the comparison with the D5, that assumption is not looking likely!

[Lance B]

Yeah, I wondered about the 100 points for sports score as well. Knowing how Pentax's AF is never really all that fast and also their lenses aren't that fast to focus, one wonders how they can come up with the K-1 better for sports than the D810 which has blindingly fast AF when attached to my "sports lenses, like the 70-200 f2.8 VRII, 300 f2.8 VRII and 400 f2.8E FL VR, all of which are bread and butter "sports lenses".

Now, there is no way in this whole wide world that the K-1 would be better for sports than the D5!! That's just absurd.

The other factor is that Penax has no current fast f2.8 tele lenses (300 f2.8, 400 f2.8) which are the bread and butter lenses for sports. Yes, Pentax has just introduced the 70-200 f2.8, but as far as I know, no one has tested it on a K-1.

Maybe they need to give themselves a credinility factor of "0" in their scoring.

[arthurking83]

.....

The other factor is that Penax has no current fast f2.8 tele lenses (300 f2.8, 400 f2.8) which are the bread and butter lenses for sports. Yes, Pentax has just introduced the 70-200 f2.8, but as far as I know, no one has tested it on a K-1.

....

Their 70-200/2.8 is a rebadged Tamron without the VC.
Great lens, fast AF, but not as fast as the Nikon's 70-200's.

[tduell]

I see someone on PentaxForums found a website that has the same subjects shot by K-1 and D810 at a range of ISO.
These images might be helpful.
I haven't had time to have a good look as yet, I think the full sized images probably have to be downloaded to be properly assessed.
The links for the K-1 and D810 pages are as follows...

http://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=K-1

http://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=nid810

Cheers,
Terry

[Lance B]

Their 70-200/2.8 is a rebadged Tamron without the VC.
Great lens, fast AF, but not as fast as the Nikon's 70-200's.

Yes, I have heard that the Pentax is a rebadged Tamron, but the elements/groups are different, Tamron is 23/17 and the Pentax is 19/16. Is this simply attributed to no VC, that would make it a little different than simply a rebadged Tamron without VC. My point is, the Pentax 15-30 f2.8 is also supposed to be a rebadged Tamron 15-30 f2.8 VC but without VC, yet in this case the number of elements and groups is the same 18/13.

[tduell]

I see someone on PentaxForums found a website that has the same subjects shot by K-1 and D810 at a range of ISO.
These images might be helpful.
I haven't had time to have a good look as yet, I think the full sized images probably have to be downloaded to be properly assessed.
The links for the K-1 and D810 pages are as follows...

http://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=K-1

http://www.cyberphoto.se/info.php?article=nid810

Cheers,
Terry

I am having trouble deciphering these pages, the web site is swedish and assume the language is swedish.
It would appear that the test shots are not identical conditions.
I have grabbed the first of shots for each camera at ISO 12800, but there are two sets for each camera and I don't know what the different sets represent.
The subject is not exactly the same, as you will see from the website, but has the same items in almost the same arrangement.

The D810 image was shot 13/1/2014, f/8, 1/2500, 50mm, ISO 12800.
The K-1 image was shot 18/3/2016, f/8, 1/1000, 35mm, ISO 12800.
So I assume the lighting is different.
On the surface it would appear that the K-1 has lower noise than the D810 for these conditions, but there too many unknowns.
Anyone who can read swedish who can tell us about the description on the website for the two sets of test conditions at the range of ISO values for each camera?

Cheers,
Terry

[ameerat42]

TD.
Right click on the link, choose "search google for...", then when the results come up, click on
"Translate this page". This is for FFox. I think you can click a button for Chrome.
https://translate.google.com.au/tran...-1&prev=search

[Jorge Arguello]

Pentax has been a very appealing camera. I would like to try it.

[Kym]

http://petapixel.com/2016/03/21/test...-1-mud-shower/

Mud and water proof!