Fortunately, and somewhat unusually for me, I will not find it hard to resist
With respect to low-light performance, I am already blown away.
When we get back from a trip I typically do a quick pass through the downloaded
images, everything that looks interesting and salvageable gets a one-star.
I periodically go back and do a slow one-by-one look at the multiple thousands
of images with particular attention to the one-stars.
Meg and I are usually together on trips, we often take shots of the same thing.
Her camera is a form of Panasonic rebranded as a Leica, fairly recent.
So I have a chance to do a side-by-side comparison of two shots, K-1 vs Leica
D-Lux. In low light situations, the K-1 RAW images in Lightroom are so so much
cleaner before any noise reduction processing, and they clean up nicely. The
Leica images are basically not usable. The iPhone does better. It is a nice
reminder for me that I need not be looking for some different better camera.
(Yes, the implication also is that I need to get Meg off her Leica and onto
something like the K-3ii. Been there, done that, she prefers the compact P&S.
Which works well for her in normal lighting conditions.)
> On Feb 14, 2018, at 10:09 AM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote:
> Jan van Wijk wrote:
>> The leaked specs at pentaxrumors.com look somewhat genuine to me.
>> And if true it is not a major upgrade:
>> - 2 stops higher ISO up to 819200 (same as KP I guess)
>> - improved high-ISO noise handling
>> - Improved pixel-shift
> Here's the link:
> The Pentax K-1 Mark II camera will have PRIME IV 14-bit imaging processing
> chip with the original Accelerator Unit (a RICOH developed processing device)
> that effectively suppresses noise and reproduces fine-details with rich
> colors even at high ISO levels. The Accelerator Unit was first introduced in
> the Pentax K-70, followed by the Pentax KP and is now being introduced in the
> K-1 Mark II marking the 3rd generation.
> Read more:
>> No reason to upgrade my 3 months old K1 :)
> Yup, only two stops better low light performance.
> Although if that is just for processing JPEGS and not better raw performance,
> and they didn't improve any other performance significantly, then yeah, not
> very compelling.
>> Regards, JvW
>> Jan van Wijk; http://www.dfsee.com
>> Flickr : jvw_pentax
> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com (postbox on min4est) http://red4est.com/lrc
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
> the directions.
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow