KP appears to be a winner!

Discussion in 'Pentax' started by michael_kuhne, Feb 16, 2017.

  1. Imaging Resource has put their first series of test images on their "comparometer" (compare images). These are shots of their still life image at various ISO settings. I compared the KP images at ISO 3200, 6400, and 12800, with the same from my Pentax K-5 IIs, K-S2, and with the K-1, K-3, and K-70. I have found it important to adjust eye distance to the screen, because of differences in image sizes perhaps due to output sizes from the different models. Otherwise, at a larger blowup size noise can appear greater than in a smaller image. Detail is affected too, which can look better preserved if smaller. To bring up a discontinued model, it is necessary to indicate "all cameras" at the top of the column. You have to click again on a selected ISO image to get the blowup. I looked for noise in areas where shadows were of similar depth. I looked at detail in numerous images on bottle labels, including the Greco-Roman figure and the printing on the Samuel Adams bottle.

    I found that my K-5 IIs performed surprisingly well, staying very close but not quite with the KP in noise at ISO 3200, and right with it in detail preservation! But at ISO 6400, the KP pulled away, yet with the K-5 IIs being still quite usable by my standard. At ISO 12800, the KP left the K-5 IIs well behind in every respect.

    The K-S2 exhibited very near as good noise control as the KP at ISO 3200, but already began to lose slight detail, the K-5 IIs being actually better. At ISO 6400, the K-S2 detail was definitely compromised, though noise was still handled fairly well. At ISO 12800, IQ was far behind the KP in every way.

    The KP and K-1 ran quite close at all 3 ISO settings in both low noise and detail preservation in these JPEG comparisons, but keeping in mind JPEG sharpening is conservative at default in the K-1 design. Even so, this is a very impressive outcome for the KP!

    The K-3 came in well behind the KP in both noise control and detail preservation at all 3 ISO settings.

    The K-70 ran close to the KP in noise control, but could not quite stay with it in detail preservation at ISO 12800.

    The KP also appears to have reduced or eliminated the tendency towards magenta colorcast at default seen other Pentax DSLR models. If this is true, you'll perhaps have to dial in more saturation with the KP to get a similar result!
  2. Good news. The KP is a very appealing camera. I would definitely have bought it, if I hadn't just bought a K-S2.

    If Pentax release a camera similar to the KP, but mirrorless/EVF based, I will definitely be buying it.
  3. Yes it looks nice but seems pretty pricy. If I ever get one I'll probably wait for the price to come down first.
  4. I agree about the price. It is already being offered at $1099 which is $100 less than at release announcement. The K-S2 is still available, now at only $500 and the K-70 is already down to $600. It has most of the advancements of the KP, but also with a more fully articulating LCD screen and a stronger built-in flash. I think the K-S2 will be phased out, the K-70 will settle at $500, and the KP will at around $800 or $900. It is certainly worth the extra money in my view, with its mostly metal body construction, quieter shutter, and interchangeable grip sizes, along with an available battery grip for using larger lenses plus an optional longer-lasting battery (same one I use in my K-5 IIs) and continuous vertical shooting. With the new forthcoming K-3 II replacement, Pentax should come out with an impressive quality lineup at reasonable prices for what you get.
    MattB.Net likes this.
  5. If Pentax release a camera similar to the KP, but mirrorless/EVF based and only half price, I will never buy it.
  6. I appreciate your sentiment John, and would have agreed with you a few years ago. I hope Pentax always makes a traditional SLR -- for some jobs there is no substitute.

    However, having tasted the mirrorless world with a K-01 and a Fuji X-E1, I love the focus accuracy of mirrorless and the ease of using manual-focus lenses. Getting accurate focus with an SLR started to feel like a Rube Goldbergian experiment, once you could focus directly on the imaging plane. It's like having a view camera ground glass in a handheld camera. And it works so much better than flopping the mirror out of the way for Live View.

    I couldn't care less about the rest of the "mirrorless" hype ... smaller cameras and shorter lens throws. I want K-mount, I want an eye-level viewfinder and a tilt screen, and I want accurate focus.

    That won't stop me from buying a KP or a K1. Just hoping for another option that works just as well.
  7. I'm leaning towards the KP myself. I was disappointed that it's sometimes referred to as the K-3II successor, and maybe it is. One of the reasons for sticking with APS-C is a more compact system. The KP is Pentax most compact full featured camera to date. I'm liking the KP more and more myself.
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2017
  8. One sticking point, 5 RAW?? buffer from the KP. This leads me to believe it's not the K-3II successor, even my lowly K-5IIs has a 20 something RAW buffer.
  9. Right. The concept of the KP is for lighter weight, slimmer, more compact advanced-built model for outdoor mobility. While burst shooting is there, doing a lot of that is not the emphasis, and indicates it is not a K-3 II replacement. Most likely we will see a K-3 II replacement within 6 months.
  10. While the swappable handgrip sounds like a good idea, I'm a bit put off by some reviewer's complaining that none of them are good. I can imagine a smaller grip working OK if you're only shooting small lenses. I think the K-7/K-5 grips are very good, most people seemed to agree at the time -- the idea that grips on newer bodies would be worse is not appealing.

    Ergonomically, I think I would miss the dedicated top ISO button and separate dedicated buttons for AE-L vs. AF-L.

    Why does the loss of the top-mounted ISO button bother me? Because on K-10, K-20, K-7, K-5, etc. you have great direct control of ISO with the eye to the viewfinder.

    1. change to Auto-ISO by holding ISO and hitting green button. Note that for this to work right, you need ISO and green buttons to NOT be on the same side of the camera -- one should be on the top, and one should be on the back.

    2. change to manual ISO by holding ISO and spinning an e-dial.

    On pentax bodies where ISO is on the rear 4-directional-pad, changing ISO with camera to eye isn't as smooth. It really seems instead to be intended to change while viewing the rear screen, as the change to/from auto-ISO involves navigating up/down with the 4-directional-pad.

    P.S. The new makes me not want to use this site.
    agardner58 likes this.
  11. "P.S. The new makes me not want to use this site."

    Welcome to the club, Andrew. Just to post this reply I had to go through 3 steps. Not to mention trying to find anything you used to find. Ugh..........
    agardner58 likes this.
  12. The problem withere 5 raw is you cant even exposure bracket or shoot panorama. It's simply to small.
    hinman likes this.
  14. Who knows at what price the KP will settle down the road. Comp. is ferocious. Absence of newer exciting long
    focal zooms from Tamron & Sigma for PX aren't helping either..! Anyhow, in case it was missed here; ADO as well
    as B&H, (and maybe others) are throwing in a 50mm DA 1.8 lens to the purchase. With the KP body (black)
    down to +/- 1050,-. Offer not to last...
    By the way: some months ago Ricoh had vaguely (no specifics given) "announced" the addition of another zoom lens.
    Since then: Nada. Anyone here know anything more..?
  15. ..."Offer not to last..." That was a few days ago. But "the beat goes on". Now, at B&H (others..?) the
    KP DSLR body goes for $987.25, silver or black. Includes Free DA 50mm f/1.8 Lens. Value: $105.26.
    Unfortunately, silence from the Pentax lens dept.
  16. If I ever unload my Sony K-5 along with an old Sony NEX 5N and if and only if, I manage to find extra money, I would like to get a KP to complement my usage with K-3. Ideally I like to have a K 3II and a KP. It is unfortunate that K-1 is the ideal candidate for me but I am already invested in Sony full frame and I can't jump back easily.
  17. I wanted a kp but it looks cheaply made,and the styling is ugly. I am leaning toward a k70 for same image quality, high iso on KP is pretty much useless. At 3200 iso its about equal to k70. Who needs 80000 iso that is pretty much useless?
    K70 better fits my needs too and less expensive.
  18. The K-P appears to be a great one body option for people who just want one camera body to cover all their photographic needs.

Share This Page