# New KP



## pez (Jan 26, 2017)

I in no way, shape, or form need this uber-cool camera. But I will have one. And it will be my new all time favorite camera!


----------



## jcdeboever (Jan 26, 2017)

Yup, I seen that this morning. Looks like a nice DSLR.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 26, 2017)

Wow, some great features. Electronic shutter up to 1/24,000 second...oh myyyyyy, that's a fast top speed! Lots of *dedicated dials and buttons* on the exterior move this more toward the pro-Nikon, pro-Canon type camera design ethos, more than the consumer-electronics type of menu-driven body so often seen on an APS-C camera. In-body stabilization for any lens mounted, another Pentax advantage, and now combined with the senosor-shift capobility to get higher-than-regular-MP shots. In-camera RAW-to-JPEG processing and tranferring to other devices via WiFi. All in all, this looks like a really nice camera.


----------



## smoke665 (Jan 26, 2017)

And I see no one has mentioned ISOs up to 819,200

Pentax KP Officially Announced - Pentax Announcements | PentaxForums.com

I'm with you @pez may have to upgrade the K3II, for this.


----------



## nerwin (Jan 27, 2017)

That is definitely one of the coolest DSLRs out there right now. Like the fact that it has sensor stabilization. You'd be able to mount old vintage lenses and still have the stabilization! 

But it's probably not wise for me to ditch my full frame Nikon gear to get this I take it?


----------



## pez (Jan 30, 2017)

nerwin said:


> That is definitely one of the coolest DSLRs out there right now. Like the fact that it has sensor stabilization. You'd be able to mount old vintage lenses and still have the stabilization!
> 
> But it's probably not wise for me to ditch my full frame Nikon gear to get this I take it?



All Pentax bodies have SR, but don't ditch anything... just get it


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 30, 2017)

Looked through the stats on the camera.. I kept saying.. wow.. that's great.  Holy cow.. that's fantastic.. then I got to the buffer.

7 frames per second.. love it!  But it's only good for up to 8 Raw / 28 JPG.

Ugh.  Seriously?  Why do camera manufacturers do this?  7 Frames per second isn't nearly that useful if you only get basically 1 second out of it before the camera stalls and the buffer needs to clear.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 30, 2017)

One article I read on the KP suggested that the camera was deliberately "held back" a bit on some specifications, to possibly make room for a subsequent full-bore type camera in the Pentax lineup. At the suggested retail price of $1,099 USA, it still looks like a very capable camera, and at a fair price. How long will it take to write an eight-frame raw file buffer to a FAST memory card? The answer to that question might make the 8-frame raw buffer more palatable to many potential buyers. And honestly, there are probably lot of people who will shoot fast sequential action in .JPG mode and will be (mostly) happy with that.

There are many more-important specifications than raw buffer depth. And keep in mind, Nikon did basically the SAME thing with the D7100 in RAW mode...basically one second's worth of raw images, and then a pretty pokey write-to mechanism, in the CAMERA itself, limited the data transfer speed to like 45 Mbs or whatever it is, per second. That was an example of Nikon making the decision to install pokey hardware in a $1200 camera a few years ago. Action shooters carped about it, but many others were okay with it, or made due and went to JPEGs for long, sequential, rapid-fire action.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jan 30, 2017)

Derrel said:


> One article I read on the KP suggested that the camera was deliberately "held back" a bit on some specifications, to possibly make room for a subsequent full-bore type camera in the pentax lineup. At the suggested retail price of $1,099 USA, it still looks like a very capable camera, and at a fair price. How long will it take to write an eight-frame raw file buffer to a FAST memory card? The answer to that question might make the 8-frame raw buffer more palatable to many potential buyers. And honestly, there are probably lot of people who will shoot fast sequential action in .JPG mode and will be happy with that.
> 
> There are many more-important specifications than raw buffer depth. And keep in mind, Nikon did basically the SAME thing with the D7100 in RAW mode...basically one second's worth of raw images, and then a pretty pokey write-to mechanism, in the CAMERA itself, limited the data transfer speed to like 45 Mbs or whatever it is, per second. That was an eample of Nikon making the decision to install pokey hardware in a $1200 camera a few years ago. Action shooters carped about it, but many others were okay with it, or made due and went to JPEGs for long, sequential, rapid-fire action.



I shoot sequential action in JPG mode on my D600 now as well.  But man would love a 24 mpx, 7 frame per second, usable in low light camera with a great buffer so I could shoot RAW.  Especially considering all the other features this thing has... really could have been a home run.  I was jumping for joy till I hit that thing about the buffer, then it was.. ahh.. crap.  Lol


----------



## smoke665 (Jan 30, 2017)

robbins.photo said:


> Looked through the stats on the camera.. I kept saying.. wow.. that's great. Holy cow.. that's fantastic.. then I got to the buffer.
> 
> 7 frames per second.. love it! But it's only good for up to 8 Raw / 28 JPG.


 
     I was likewise impressed, mainly over the ISO capability till I read further. It's been a learning curve on the K3II but now that I've had time to get used to it, I'm mostly happy.  The K3II features ISO up to 51,200 vs the new KP 819,200, but frankly I've never had the need to even get close to the maximum on the K3II.

     Resolution on both is the same 24.3, with an APS-C sensor. The KP features the 5 Axis SR II vs the SR on the K3II which would be nice, and the KP features the updated CPU Prime IV vs the Prime III in the K3II, both of these would be a nice addition, though again not enough to warrant me to upgrade.

     One thing I found misleading was on shutter speed, the mechanical shutter only goes to 1/6000, to get the 1/24,000 you have to go to the Live View (screen) mode. Pentax AF uses Phase Shift in the view finder which works great in low light, the Live View screen uses Contrast Detection, which can really hunt a lot in low light. The K3II features up to 1/8000 on either mode.  The other biggy they aren't making much notice of is the KP, is at present, only rated  for 100,000 shutter clicks vs the K3II's 200,000. You mentioned "Burst" there's another big difference the K3II is rated at up to 8.3 FPS (Buffer, 60 JPEG/23 Raw) vs the KP's  7 FPS (Buffer, 28 JPEG/8 Raw).

     At first I was bummed about the lack of the pop up flash on the K3II, but frankly I've learned to live without it. The new KP has a built in stereo microphone, but surprisingly the K3II has a direct port for HDMI, and the new KP requires an adapter????? That doesn't make a whole lot of sense, and why would they go backward on the USB port from a 3.0 on the K3II to a 2.0 on the KP.  Yes the  new KP has a tilting screen, but it's smaller then the K3II (and I have trouble seeing it already).

     In other  backward moves, the KP no longer supports power zoom (on the K3II), only offers one card slot (not 2 like on the K3II), no built in GPS (on the K3II though I've yet to use it), and a change from all magnesium alloy on the K3II to a combination of magnesium and plastic.  The addition of the WIFI on the KP is nice I really miss that, but I can't find any information on if the KP will support tethering. Something that isn't available on the K3II unless you put in a Flucard, and they can supposedly be a little flaky. Last but not least, the battery life went from 750 shots on the K3II to 450 on the KP.

     So all in all, after reading more, I think I stay with the K3II for now.


----------



## pez (Jan 30, 2017)

It's basically a really cool midrange camera with some innovative/ new features, like the new sensor and the e-shutter. Not a replacement for the K3/ ii.  That is coming in the fall, according to the rumor mill and leaks.

Sent from my SM-N920V using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## smoke665 (Jan 30, 2017)

pez said:


> nerwin said:
> 
> 
> > That is definitely one of the coolest DSLRs out there right now. Like the fact that it has sensor stabilization. You'd be able to mount old vintage lenses and still have the stabilization!
> ...



True, but only the K1 and the KP have the 5 axis. 

Also I understand that it's not a replacement for the K3II, but frankly I don't really see where it fits (see my post above on the comparisons). Yes it has a couple of cool features but also lacks a lot of good features the K3II has. It's like they were in a big rush to push something/anything on the market. Like I said earlier I'll keep my K3II for now.


----------



## pez (Jan 30, 2017)

It's no K3, and won't replace mine. However, I have  K70, which also has some features which surpass the K-3/ii, such as high ISO performance, and has pixel shift like the K3ii- for cheap. I love mine and use it as a knock-around camera. It's really a fun camera that produces great results which is also very good for astro and macro. The KP has a completely new sensor and fantastic high ISO performance (for crop sensor), and a metal body (supposedly)- which might be the justification for the price (almost twice the K70)?
Here is a discussion on the PF site about where the KP is supposed to fit in.


----------



## smoke665 (Jan 31, 2017)

pez said:


> I have K70, which also has some features which surpass the K-3/ii, such as high ISO performance, and has pixel shift like the K3ii



Yup the first in the Pentax lineup to break 100k ISO.



pez said:


> The KP has a completely new sensor



Read differing opinions on this one on Pentax Forums. One seemed to indicate they shared somewhat the same sensor. One article claimed it was new design (by a yet unknown manufacturer), both reportedly are 24.3 mp. One thing there is no confusion about is the CPU. The PrimeIV with image acceleration is way different then the Prime III of the K3II.



pez said:


> fantastic high ISO performance



This is a wait and see. Early indications are that the high ISO may not really be useable, but that the CPU change may provide better response at the lower ISO up to 50K or so. In the same article you referenced the examples of the KP and K3II showed side by side comparisons at 51,200 ISO and the KP won hands down, but the examples of the KP at 819200 ISO were horrible. Also, while 819200 is higher than any Pentax has gone before but it's also under the Nikon D500's top setting of ISO 1,640,000. 



pez said:


> and a metal body (supposedly



Not quite true. The KP is reportedly a Magnesium Alloy (Front, Back, Bottom) Plastic (Top Plate).

As to the direction Pentax is taking, as usual no one knows. Pretty much agreed now that the KP is not a replacement for the K3II. There is speculation that Pentax is now looking at splitting the high/mid-range with the KP more aimed at mid-range market, and a new (higher priced model) as a replacement for the K3II that would fill the gap between KP and the K1 for a professional model APS-C body, and still be priced significantly under the Nikon D500.

One thing is certain, if I upgrade the K3II in the future, I need to start saving my pennies, because the wife's gonna have a hissy!


----------



## pez (Jan 31, 2017)

I would submit that no one expects max ISO to be in any way usable from... any camera? Is a D500 usable @ 1,640,000? I have doubts of ever needing to use even 51,200. Pentax describes the sensor as a new generation sensor. I guess that might mean anything... Whatever it all means, I'm gonna give it a whorl and see what happens. Perhaps I'll hate it and wish I'd gone ahead and bought a K-1


----------



## smoke665 (Jan 31, 2017)

@pez Pentax appreciates you LOL I think you'll definitely see a big improvement at 51,200 and below, such that you might actually start using the higher ISO. For those shooting wildlife with telephotos, I'd think the combination of the ability to actually use a higher ISO coupled with the improved in camera stabilization would be a win-win.


----------



## pez (Jan 31, 2017)

Hahaha yeah, Pentax lerves me. Counting film, I have ten Pentax bodies (including two K-o1's, just because)... 

EDIT: 11 bodies. I forgot about the Q


----------



## pez (Feb 27, 2017)

It arrived this afternoon! 






phone photo...


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 27, 2017)

And no posts yet???


----------



## pez (Feb 27, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> And no posts yet???



Limited palette here at my night job... I'll see what I can do lol


----------



## pez (Feb 28, 2017)

Waay away, with 300mm, for the heck of it. iso6400, cropped...


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 28, 2017)

If this was out of camera then I can already see improved rendering at 6400 over my K3II


----------



## pez (Feb 28, 2017)

Yes, only minor tone adjustments, and cropped a lot.

Sent from my SM-N920V using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 28, 2017)

Any noise adjustment in camera or post? I've been experimenting with the High ISO Noise Reduction option in the K3ii menu. It seems to help, especially on Chroma Noise.


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 28, 2017)

pez said:


> It arrived this afternoon!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I hate you, now I want one


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 28, 2017)

jcdeboever said:


> I hate you, now I want one



Seriously, didn't you just get a new toy???? LOL


----------



## jcdeboever (Feb 28, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> > I hate you, now I want one
> ...



I did but I like the looks of that puppy. Lol. Not getting one, new funds going towards glass and a second used X body of some sort.


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 28, 2017)

@jcdeboever come on over to the dark side (Pentax) we are a small and "very select" group.


----------



## pez (Feb 28, 2017)

Well, I didn't realize that I still had the camera set to default JPEG, so it wasn't a RAW and may well have had noise reduction applied. I thought it looked pretty good, considering it's an out of camera JPEG... I am really liking the ergonomics on this camera! I was very iffy about it from the ad photos, but everything definitely works together. I'm slowly getting the buttons optimized for my needs and learning the dials. That front dial is no problem at all- was especially concerned about it- it fits in with the traditional shutter release location quite well. Once I put the largest grip on it, the feel became just right. It's going to be an extremely fun camera to use!


smoke665 said:


> If this was out of camera then I can already see improved rendering at 6400 over my K3II


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 28, 2017)

@pez on the K3ii (also on K3) i can't find a definitive answer on if the High ISO noise reduction works on a raw file. I recently tried mine with it on and off.  To me the raw files with it on looked like there was less color noise.


----------



## pez (Feb 28, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> @pez on the K3ii (also on K3) i can't find a definitive answer on if the High ISO noise reduction works on a raw file. I recently tried mine with it on and off.  To me the raw files with it on looked like there was less color noise.


I don't think there is any noise reduction in raw, certainly not by default. But pretty much always in jpeg. I didn't think any tweaking was available in raw in the camera except after the exposure if you convert it to a jpeg.

Sent from my SM-N920V using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## smoke665 (Feb 28, 2017)

I know some settings will affect the raw and some JPEG only. In the case of Highlight/Shadow correction, the highlight correction does affect the RAW file - basically the camera underexposes by a stop (it tells you that it is using for example ISO200 when it is actually exposing at ISO100), calculates the maximum highlight value(s) and then offsets (scales by histogram shift) the data so that the highlights are just clipped before writing the file. It works most of the time, unless the highlights are already clipped even with a stop of underexposure. You can get the same effect by underexposing and then correcting in post-processing.  The shadow correction on the other hand only affects JPEGs - it tweaks the response (alters the gamma mapping) at the dark end, expanding the blacks. In the case of High ISO noise reduction, there's nothing in the book, and one source says it affects the raw file, and another claims it doesn't. As I said it "appears" to me that it decreases the color noise, but not the noise.


----------



## pez (Mar 1, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> I know some settings will affect the raw and some JPEG only. In the case of Highlight/Shadow correction, the highlight correction does affect the RAW file - basically the camera underexposes by a stop (it tells you that it is using for example ISO200 when it is actually exposing at ISO100), calculates the maximum highlight value(s) and then offsets (scales by histogram shift) the data so that the highlights are just clipped before writing the file. It works most of the time, unless the highlights are already clipped even with a stop of underexposure. You can get the same effect by underexposing and then correcting in post-processing.  The shadow correction on the other hand only affects JPEGs - it tweaks the response (alters the gamma mapping) at the dark end, expanding the blacks. In the case of High ISO noise reduction, there's nothing in the book, and one source says it affects the raw file, and another claims it doesn't. As I said it "appears" to me that it decreases the color noise, but not the noise.



Wow, this issue is apparently multi-faceted. I posed the question over on Pentax Forums and got some interesting answers...


----------



## smoke665 (Mar 1, 2017)

@pez

And now you see, what I was saying. The settings that I verified that do/do not work on the raw are from Pentax documentation, various references in sites like Imaging Resources, and trial and error. On settings that do, I haven't been able to beat the camera by choosing one of the manual settings (low, medium, high) vs auto in terms of picture quality.  That's probably because of my experience level and a lack of understanding on the actual effect of each setting. I posted a link a few days ago in the Pentax section here that is one of the most detailed reads I've seen on how Pentax works. If you haven't read it, I would suggest do so. Pentax K-3 II Review - Exposure
One other thing I noticed here was that some features such as saturation, hue adjustments in camera were not applied to the raw image but we're included in the Metadata such that LR will give you the option of applying those features.

Footnote: Part of the problem is that there is some speculation that even with this feature turned off - there is at least some noise reduction applied that would affect the raw file.


----------



## pez (Mar 5, 2017)

In the menu, under noise reduction, for Slow Shutter speed NR and also for High-ISO NR, there is Auto, custom, and Off. If it still applies NR on the off setting, that would constitute a breach honesty on the part of the manufacturer...

Sent from my SM-N920V using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## smoke665 (Mar 6, 2017)

pez said:


> In the menu, under noise reduction, for Slow Shutter speed NR and also for High-ISO NR, there is Auto, custom, and Off. If it still applies NR on the off setting, that would constitute a breach honesty on the part of the manufacturer...
> 
> Sent from my SM-N920V using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app



Maybe we are talking semantics here, but by virtue of the sensor design, the improved CPU and software, your KP is able to offer significantly less noise then my K3II from the start. 

I still haven't been able to get a definitive answer on the High ISO Noise Reduction feature and it's affect if any on the raw file. I posted this question on the PF and got one response. The respondent claimed "it did not" affect the raw file, but when I asked for him to cite references for that claim there's been no other response. The respondent did confirm what I already knew:

Highlight Correction "WILL" affect the raw file, because it underexposes the image, but I'm still not sure his explanation that it increased ISO to compensate is correct. Seems to me that a highlight blown because of oversposure would still be blown.
Slow Shutter Speed "WILL" affect the raw file. The explanation given by the respondent that it (takes and extra exposure and subtracts hot pixels from the image) is not verified. This is the first explanation I've seen of how the feature works.


----------



## pez (Mar 7, 2017)

Well anyway, the KP is way fun to use, and all the little things it does well add up to a truly great walk around camera. The 20-40 Limited makes a perfect companion for it, BTW.


----------



## pez (Mar 16, 2017)




----------



## Solarflare (May 10, 2017)

Whow ! These are really good product images !


----------



## jcdeboever (May 10, 2017)

Handsome hardware.


----------



## pez (May 10, 2017)

That's the largest grip on it. I've since gone to the medium one. I love the night display mode for astro and general night photography. 

Sent from my SM-N920V using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## pez (May 10, 2017)

Solarflare said:


> Whow ! These are really good product images !


Thanks! 

Sent from my SM-N920V using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app


----------



## pez (Jun 6, 2017)

I was set up for some coin shots for a friend and couldn't resist another KP shot, but with the small grip (shot with K70+35Ltd)


----------

