Web Analytics RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: K-1 II has Worse IQ than K-1 and is Not Recommended by DPR

Tuesday, May 08, 2018

K-1 II has Worse IQ than K-1 and is Not Recommended by DPR

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentax-k-1-ii-review/11

I am not surprised with the conclusion for what I have inspected and found with different Mark II samples these days.
Time (UTC +0800):
標籤： , , , , ,

Comments (9)

Loading... Logging you in...
Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout
  • Logged in as
-1 Vote up Vote down
A reader's avatar

A reader · 358 weeks ago

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61130971

The forum members are saying that DP replaced the test sample at ISO 12800 with another one. Mark II now compares favourably with the others including the original K1.

The truth is out there somewhere?!
2 replies · active 357 weeks ago
Loading...
+2 Vote up Vote down
RiceHigh's avatar - Go to profile

RiceHigh 110p · 358 weeks ago

But that still can't help blurry JPEGs and RAWs at low and mid ISOes.
-1 Vote up Vote down
A Reader's avatar

A Reader · 357 weeks ago

Different lenses were used in the K1 and Mk II tests. Also different camera settings were used in these 2 tests also. One would question if DPR ever does their tests in a consistent manner which is key as usually test results from different cameras are compared against each other. It does make DPR lose their credibility (at least to me) somehow.
0 Vote up Vote down
joergens.mi's avatar

joergens.mi · 358 weeks ago

it's DPR review. Is this a valuable review. There have been a lot of curiosities with the last one for prntax. And there are a lot of remarks with this one. different optics,.... and wording
0 Vote up Vote down
joergens.mi's avatar

joergens.mi · 358 weeks ago

It seems to be that they silently changed the ISO 12800 file, and they didn't mention it. ( https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61130971 ) ( https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/190-pentax-k-... ) That ist the studio photo on which the based theri criticism

Is this good journalism.
+1 Vote up Vote down
Tomcat's avatar

Tomcat · 357 weeks ago

This is the end? Pentax just cannot afford a fiasco with its possibly most imporant model.
Blurring RAWs at low to mid ISOs is the worst case for a high-res camera which is popular for landscape photography, where all details count.

It doesn't help, if one or two minor glitches may have happend in the testing itself or not. These are debated briefly in a thread to death and then forgotton quickly. Once the key message and the scores are out, they are almost carved into stone, and these already have echoed in all news, blogs, and vlogs.

If I was Ricoh, I would be very quick in releasing a Mk III, to trigger a re-test this way. It doesn't even have to have a new sensor or so. Just a new model name, and a new chance at testings.

and NO RAW blurring any longer. Get that damned accelerator thing out of the camera again. Else it may accelerate the downfall of the entire camera division.
1 reply · active 357 weeks ago
0 Vote up Vote down
08amczb's avatar

08amczb · 357 weeks ago

Just keep in the market the Mark I and add the new AF algorithms in a firmware update.

+ Add the KP features like maximum shutter speed in auto ISO and fix the AF point visibility problems.
+1 Vote up Vote down
joergens.mi's avatar

joergens.mi · 357 weeks ago

Have a look here,
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61144073

Richard Butler • dpreview Admin • We will be re-shooting the scene. In reply to Ian Stuart Forsyth
1 reply · active 355 weeks ago
0 Vote up Vote down
Tomcat's avatar

Tomcat · 355 weeks ago

Now they reshot the scene. This was for voiding some complaints about actually irrelevant side issues with the testing itself, having to do with comparability between Mark 1 and 2. But a reshooting doesn't change the problems and issues with the Mark 2 hardware itself, of course. So it is hardly a suprise, that the K-1 II is still not recommended by DPR, i.e. still not even deemed worthy getting a silver award. DPR gave a meager score-bump by one symbolic point, probably in the hope that this will silence the complainers.

Still, the core issue still persists: Forced RAW denoising / detail reduction also for lower ISO, still unchanged after the very recent firmware upgrade.

Probably, Ricoh is afraid, that making the denoising optional via firmware will cause another re-shoot, then with denoising switched off (as this is the expected standard use case for most users), but this may reduce the final score further or will make the test scenes look worse than before.

So let's not expect the Denoising / Blurring function to be turned to optional.

Post a new comment

Comments by

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)