The P-TTL of the K-01 is even More Pathetic? (Or Is It the Silly Ambient Light Metering Instead?)

Read this latest K-01 user report (at the DPR) and it is soon learnt that the on-board P-TTL was doing a bad job for the daylight fill flash, everything is washed out seriously:-



The user then told that the camera was put in Full Auto. With an Auto ISO of 200 chosen (by the camera) together with an aperture of f/5.6, I don't think the result should turn out to be as poor as that, as for the flash settings. However, the 1/60s Tv seems to be rather low if the scene was actually brighter (if it was near the sunny-16 brightness, say). So, it might be the new super multi-segment "intelligent" ambient light meter (now under full Live View mode) has been fooled and went nuts and overexposed the scene so that almost the whole frame was burnt. Otherwise, once again the K-01 onboard P-TTL flash is really Pathetic, which could be even worse than the one found on our Pentax DSLRs! :-o

After all, the infamous Pathetic-TTL problem of Pentax will never end, as it seems to be! >:-[

Useless K-01 "Preview" at Dpreview

Just for the sake of reporting the news, I write this post. But the preview won't give us any new information and everything it presents is well known. Btw, the link is still included below but I suggest that you'd better skip this in order to save some time of yours! (This is at least my own feeling after going through it!)

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/pentaxk01

The camera is a pre-production unit as told and there is not even any beta sample, not even one! Well, we knew that the K-01 has been marketed worldwide for weeks already but DPR guys still get the beta unit in their hands? Pardon? What's Pentax UK doing? Or, DPR has just been too lazy to give it a trial before they have finally decided to publish such an useless report until today, "Just"?! >:-(


Read Previous K-01 Reviews by Others (to See the Differences):-

Steve Huff's Full Review on the K-01

K-01 "Unboxing" at Mapcamera with Some Samples (Large but Not Full)

New Pentax Reviews for K-01 and 645D

K-01 1st look by Steve Huff (Video Review)

Another K-01 1st Review with a Few Full Samples

A Production K-01 Vs K-5 JPEG/ISO Shootout Test (Re-Tested)

Posting Rules for Making Blog Comments (Updated)

I have been hoping everyone who posts here is self-disciplined and as an adult, everyone should know what should be done and what shouldn't and what are the right things and what are wrong. But yet I could still see quite some repeated uncivilised comments by some individuals with name-callings/personal attacks or even foul languages in their replies posted at the "Comments" section. Nevertheless, a large number of those have automatically been caught by the IntenseDebate system by default, as those words are clearly not allowed for most sites and by common standards.

After all, I do hope that anyone here can enjoy the highest degree of freedom in providing his/her opinions, which are to be expressed freely. Particularly, this ideal of mine can be achieved easily here as I have no commercial nor money interest of any at my this pure hobby site. In fact, as many people could see, I often have greatest tolerance to people who jumped on me and I did not lose my temper and still replied to them with due respect and good manners and still let their comments remained unless they were really over the top.

What I want to tell is that I shall continue to insist my basic principles above and all I want is to keep a site at where all we Pentaxians can share our opinions and anything about Pentax, with the greatest degree of freedom in speech but everyone is hopefully to be self-disciplined and with due respect to each other. In this connection, I post the rules here which are copied from another blog of mine. Indeed, all those are very trivial and are the most basic things. Anyway, here they are:-

Posting Rules at RiceHigh's Pentax Blog

1. You have to write on-topicly according to the topic of each Blog post;

2. You bear all the responsibilities and liabilities personally by yourself for what you wrote;

3. Be civilised and human. Don't write in offensive language and in particular no foul language nor personal attack/name calling are allowed;

4. In case of any dispute that may arise, I reserve the rights of final judgement and the rights of settlement by whatever means as deemed necessary and appropriate;

5.* Please don't try to SPAM this site. If you have your point(s) to raise. Make it clear for only a limited number of times but NOT to REPEAT it *endlessly* in a way that all the replies are yours but actually with the same repeated viewpoint(s) in all of your replies within a short period but without anything new;

6.* Using Nickname in replying is welcome and that's actually how the Internet works. However, please don't try to use different nicknames, pretend and reply consecutively as I don't think this is ethical or at least honest enough - My humble advice;

7. Rules will be reviewed periodically and are subject to change accordingly as deemed necessary;

8. Everyone who posts here hereby agrees with the above rules and should be bound by them. In case of anyone who violates any of the aforesaid rules, I reserve the rights to edit/delete the comment(s) and/or temporarily or permanently ban the user.

*Newly Added; Last Updated: March 22, 2012.


Related:-

Pentax Fanboys' Club! (New Blog)

Blog Disclaimer

Compatibility of DA Lenses on Full Frame

In the course of studying the possibility of a Full Frame Pentax DSLR system and how ready the current Pentax lens system (i.e., the DA lineup) would be, I have done an extensive research to find out most of the relevant information in the Internet that have been there so far, as well as to do some tests on my own, all of which are summarised as below:-

DA Prime	Compatible? (Yes/No)	Reason for No
DA 14/2.8	No	Dark Circle, Sample Shot Here
DA 15/4 Limited	No	Dark Circle
DA 21/3.2 Limited	No	Dark Circle
DA 35/2.4	Yes, Sample Shots Here and Here (Mine)	-
DA 35/2.8 Macro	No	Heavy Vignetting
DA 40/2.8 Limited	Yes	-
DA 40/2.8 XS	Yes, Sample Shots Here
DA* 55/1.4	Yes	-
DA 70/2.4 Limited	Yes, Sample Shots Here and Here (Mine)	-
DA* 200/2.8	Yes, Sample Shots Here	-
DA* 300/4	Yes, Sample Shot Here	-

DA Zoom	Compatible? (Yes/No)	Reason for No
DA 10-17/3.5-4.5	No	Dark Circle to Heavy Vignetting from 10 to 14mm
DA 12-24/4	No	Dark Circle to Heavy Vignetting from 12 to 16mm
DA 16-45/4	No	Dark Circle to Heavy Vignetting from 16 to 20mm
DA* 16-50/2.8	No	Dark Circle for the Whole Zoom Range, Sample Shots Here
DA 17-70/4	No	Dark Circle for the Whole Zoom Range
DA 18-55/3.5-5.6	No	Dark Circle to Heavy Vignetting from 18 to 28mm, see Sample Shots Here
DA 18-250/3.5-6.3	No	Dark Circle for the Whole Zoom Range
DA* 50-135/2.8	No	Heavy Vignetting from 50 to 100mm
DA 50-200/4-5.6	No	Dark Circle for the Whole Zoom Range
DA 55-300/4-5.8	No	No Dark Circle or Vignetting Only at 200mm
DA* 60-250/4	No	Heavy Vignetting from 85 to 250mm, see Sample Shots Here

So, there are five primes and one zoom that can be "used". And, not any of the wider DA lenses can be used. But it seems that Pentax has lately decided that their new DA lenses should be made to be Full Frame compatible as the latest DA zoom, the DA 55-300, has shown to be usable on Full Frame. The newer DA* 60-250, unlike other DA tele zooms, has an image circle covers Full Frame also, although the vignetting is serious from 135mm and onwards.

As Pentax has stopped updating their DA lens roadmap since March, it also seems that some important lens lineup revisions are in progress. I hope that they are actually planning for the Full Frame, from all signs that can be seen so far (and also this unconfirmed "leaked" lens roadmap as well).

Nevertheless, do note that when it is "compatible" it just means there is no dark circle nor heavy/obvious vignetting. However, whether the image quality at the image corners are yet acceptable to good would be somehow subjective as using a DA lens on Full Frame is surely not officially tested and guaranteed (at least up to this moment).

Original References (Now More Reference Links are Added/Quoted in the Above):-

http://forum.xitek.com/showthread.php?threadid=489970 (Simplified Chinese)

http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=733914 (Simplified Chinese)
http://info.xitek.com/product/200906/12-20723.html (Simplified Chinese)

http://pentaxforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31629

http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2008/10/da-18-55-on-full-frame.html

http://nekonomestill2.blog32.fc2.com/blog-entry-107.html

Disclaimer: Not all the data contained in the above reference links are totally verified by myself and thus there is no guarantee of any after all !

My advice is to be more conservative for those reports in the above links that there is not any sample photo to support the claims, e.g., when both xitek reports tell that the DA 18-55 has no vignetting and is usable starting from 23mm, my own actual shooting test shows that at 28mm, there is still obvious vignetting, which is clearly shown in my sample photos posted. All in all, I am afraid those "testers" were either using a DA lens on a film body but *just* looking through the viewfinder to verify before they told (but they'd forgot that the finders are mostly not 100% in coverage!) or that they were shooting negative and just viewed the final prints (which are not 100% coverage neither) and then came up with their conclusions too early! :-o :-(


[First Post: October 17, 2009; Last Updated: March 22, 2012]

DA40 XS Lens Tested on Film

Thanks to Frank (aka Fengwei), who has carried out this test with the lens mounted on his MZ-S with film a bit earlier, we could know that this XS lens is actually completely full frame compatible!

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/178336-da40xs-lens-tested-film-mz-s-da40xs-kodak-gold-200-a.html

I think he has done a good job which is beneficial to the Pentax community. After all, I consider his this quick test to be useful and valuable since no one has checked this and published the result before.

Furthermore, I would like to take this chance to make an apology to Frank as the last time I was mistaken that he was a camera dealer and that he had been breaking the Pentax NDAs for times which he had agreed and signed and subsequently he felt offended for what I'd supposed. Now, provided that for what he has declared here for the last time is true, possibly he is just a super die-hard Pentax fans and keen supporter who has bought almost every Pentax new item ever released these years such that the dealer could leak every new product information to him and let him play with all those beta units. Nonetheless, I still believe that the dealer broke the signed Pentax NDA for so many times these years then. But never mind, as Frank has also pointed out, this is not the fault of him as he has never signed any agreement with Pentax, which I agree. After all, it's always good for us to learn those leaks, only if there exists people like Frank, and his "brave" dealer as well! ;-D

Okay, let's talk back about the implication of the test result, i.e., the XS lens actually covers full frame. There are two possibilities for why's that: 1. Pentax has been too lazy and/or cost conscious to re-design the lens for APS-C and they just opted to use an existing old optical design of them and just re-packaged it so as to make it smaller, lighter and thin; and/or 2. They do really plan for the Full Frame in the Future!

Besides, I have done back a quick technical comparison between the specs of DA40 Limited and that of the XS lens. It seems that both of them are 5 glass elements in 4 groups and the maximum magnification / minimum focusing distance are exactly the same. As it is now also verified that the XS lens is also having a full 135 image circle, the chance of the same optical formula is employed is actually quite high.

Last but not least, my ever-updating summary about the full frame compatibility of DA lenses has been updated in conjunction.

New Full Frame Review and Samples (of 5D3 and D4, Respectively)

Mobile01's 5D3 1st Look:-

http://www.mobile01.com/newsdetail.php?id=11700
(in Traditional Chinese, Google Translation Here)

This review is quite useful IMO, it demonstrates most of the new features of the 5D3 and how they could be different, as compared to the 5D2 and amongst different modes - watch those embedded videos. Furthermore, there are many original full samples for download.

Next, we have a new set of D4 sample pics at the DC Fever. There are "tons" of full samples and they are hot and new!

http://www.dcfever.com/cameras/viewsamples.php?set=716

It's time to measurbate and then decide that if the 16MP D4 pics are actually "much" better than those produced by the K-5, which are actually in the same pixel count.

The Hoax Continues? Pentax K-z?

Further to the last story, the rumour continues!



Via: Photo Rumors.

But, the grammar is still wrong! The word "colors" should be "color" this time, in order to make it correct, as noun adjective should be singular! :-o Moreover, the word "select" is not a noun. As such, if it is used as a verb, it should be placed at the beginning!

It seems that someone has just read my last comment and intentionally added back the "s" but he has not been aware that it is yet incorrect in this case!

Nonetheless, if this is really true but not a hoax, those Pentax marketing guys should really go back to primary schools to re-learn the ABC of English and grammar! :-o And, in Germany, I'm afraid that they have to create another name for the same camera, too, as KZ simply means Concentration Camp over there! :-o

Update (3-22):-

Just seen this new post by Adam, owner of the Pentax Forums:-

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/179741-pentax-k-z.html

It is told that "more details about this will be revealed tomorrow...".

Now, I believe that this new camera should be real. It is because it has already been quite a long time for Adam for working closely with Pentax as well as other business partners like B&H and other camera dealers. As such, he could be considered as an insider essentially and his words about unrevealed new Pentax stuff could be treated more seriously.

New K-01 User Samples Start to Appear at the Japanese Photoble

http://pentax.photoble.net/?s_cat01=&camera=PENTAX+K-01&lens=&act=DSP

Most photos were made with the new 40mm XS lens. More and more photos are being uploaded to the server. Happy and endless measurbations to go! ;-) Feel free to comment on the IQ, colours of images and whatsoever!


Related:-

Pentax K-01 Samples - A Flickr Set

New DA Limited Lens Tests at DxO

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Pentax-Prime-Lens-Series

The direct lens test pages for the pancakes are as follows:-

SMC DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited

SMC DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited

SMC DA 40mm F2.8 Limited

SMC DA 70mm F2.4 Limited

Well, the results of those wider lenses are not that good. I have the DA21 and 70 pancakes and would agree that resolution wise the DA21 is really not "sharp" enough but it is not that worst neither, IMHO.

Note also that the T-stop measurement and scoring (which affects the overall test score) is not completely fair to all those Pentax Limited primes, which are known to be slow actually, for what they were meant to, i.e., for the compact and lightweight design.

K-5 Vs NEX-3 IQ Shootout (Same Lens, Same Scene, Different Bodies/Sensors)

1. K-5 image - DA21 lens, ISO 100, 1/250s, f/6.7, Natural/Saturation +1, Fine Sharpness 0, AWB, autofocus (checked with both PMAF and LV CDAF - same focus point there!), resized to 3,999 pixels in width, EXIF preserved:-


(Click to Enlarge in a New Tab/Window)

2. NEX-3/5 image - DA21 lens, ISO 200, 1/500s, f/6.7, Landscape/Contrast -1, Sharpness 0, AWB, manual focus w/ peaking at/from 1X to 7X and then 14X, resized to 3,999 pixels in width, EXIF preserved:-


(Click to Enlarge in a New Tab/Window)

P.S. The scene was actually with warm sunlight from the left hand side when the time was near early evening. The NEX image turned out to be a bit too yellowish for the whole frame than my eyes could see whilst the K-5 one is just too white for the buildings and a bit too blue for the rest.