K 7 iso 3200

snooked · 07-11-2009, 07:32 AM

Snail Kite. Looks like the snail kites are sitting on eggs now.

1 - ISO 3200 No Noise Reduction
2 - ISO 3200 Noise Ninja
3 - ISO 3200 Noise Ninja 100% Crop

Would not use ISO 3200

Sigma 150 300mm lens, sky was total overcast.

Ed

Ash · 07-11-2009, 08:06 AM

Did these images need to be 'pushed' in PP at all?
There is significant noise despite the fact that the images appear well exposed (or have been pushed to the right exposure).

I've shot a few at ISO 3200 with my K20D, and although I don't use it often (for obvious reasons) I don't get as much noticeable noise as long as ETTR is implemented. I definitely don't use ISO 3200 for shots with lots of negative space or shadow areas...

rawr · 07-11-2009, 08:24 AM

I'm not loving that noise at all. Ughhh!

And if anything ninja made the appearance of it worse, on the body of the bird and the background. Smudged it all up into big globs.

I don't like ninja - even noiseware community edition does better (for me).

Pentaxor · 07-11-2009, 10:16 AM

that shot is horrible. could you provide us the exifs? I've seen shots with the K-7 under lowlight at 3200 that is way better than that. what lens did you use,btw?

KungPOW · 07-11-2009, 10:31 AM

"tests" like this mean very little.

There is more to getting a quality high ISO shot then cranking the ISO to 3200, shooting away, and expecting Noise Ninja to clean up the mess.

You need to "shoot to the right" with all high iso shots. If you don't know what I mean, stop "testing" and learn how to use the gear you have.

krypticide · 07-11-2009, 12:36 PM

Noise Ninja really smeared away the detail. I like the noise in the first shot much better.

PentaxPoke · 07-11-2009, 01:00 PM

snooked, when you say "no noise reduction" do you mean that the NR was turned off on the K-7? I think the user NR settings are different on the K-7 than the k20d. The k20d seems to do more NR at the system level, and so the user default is "NR. off". I recommend using the K-7 default NR setting.

One other question: Was the camera really warm when you took that shot? Sensors are sensitive to heat, and the noise in any digital camera goes up with increasing temperature. I have read that the noise can double for ever 8 degrees C. This can be a problem sometimes in the summer with a black camera in the hot sun. I haven't seen this tested with these cameras.

Slowpoke Rodriguez · 07-11-2009, 01:18 PM

My question is for those who say you must expose to the right when taking high ISO pictures. Consider this a voice from the "I don't get it" peanut gallery. Here goes...

When would I choose to shoot at 3200 pushed to right by a stop instead of just shooting at 1600 properly exposed? This is my fundamental "I don't get it" with the mandate to expose to the right. For me, ISO is the final factor in the exposure decision making process. Meaning, I may have good reasons for wanting a specific aperture or shutter speed, and I use film speed to allow me to get there.

To use the above picture of the falcon as an example, the subject is in motion, therefore shutter speed was likely the photographer's primary concern. I can't see the EXIF data, so I am going to make a working assumption here that proper exposure at 3200 and max aperture permitted a shutter speed of 1/250th. If the photographer should expose to the right by a stop, this would mean shooting at 1/125th. If he has to shoot at 1/125th to get a good picture, wouldn't he just as easily shoot with proper exposure at 1600, which would also call for a shutter speed of 1/125th?

What am I missing?

Ash · 07-11-2009, 02:21 PM

Rodriguez,

There are numerous threads and discussion on this issues. Have a look here:
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/g...ake-sense.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/g...ose-right.html
http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/g...histogram.html
and there are many others if you do a search...

It's not as simple as EV+1 on an ISO 1 stop down - it's all about pushing the histogram to the right (without blowing out important highlights - check the blinkies!) at the lowest ISO setting you can have for the shutter speed you need for the shot. But do have a look at these discussions, they would probably answer all your questions on the issue...

Yohan Pamudji · 07-11-2009, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by KungPOW

"tests" like this mean very little.

There is more to getting a quality high ISO shot then cranking the ISO to 3200, shooting away, and expecting Noise Ninja to clean up the mess.

You need to "shoot to the right" with all high iso shots. If you don't know what I mean, stop "testing" and learn how to use the gear you have.

No, you don't need to "shoot to the right with all high ISO shots". The original shot is quite bright for an ISO 3200 shot, and if anything has already given the camera a leg up in terms of keeping noise to a minimum. Exposing brighter than it already is on top of that? Come on.

Complaining about underexposure--ok, I can go with that. But now we're not even allowed to take a shot at the proper exposure?

To the OP: wow that Noise Ninja job is awful. Have you tried NR Low in-camera? From test shots I've seen it strikes a good balance between noise reduction and detail retention. It particularly does a good job reducing the chroma noise that's so visible in your original shot.

**arpaagent** · 07-11-2009, 03:13 PM

The shot looks OOF and pushed in PP if you ask me. My ISO 3200 is much more useable than this...

Yohan Pamudji · 07-11-2009, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by Ash

Did these images need to be 'pushed' in PP at all?
There is significant noise despite the fact that the images appear well exposed (or have been pushed to the right exposure).

Originally posted by arpaagent

The shot looks OOF and pushed in PP if you ask me. My ISO 3200 is much more useable than this...

Wish the OP would come back to confirm/deny whether this was pushed in post. I wouldn't be surprised if it was, but no sense in us arguing back and forth without knowing the facts.

pingflood · 07-11-2009, 05:47 PM

Holy crap, that looks worse than 12,800 on my 50D.

Talk about pattern noise. I hope it was underexposed.

PentaxPoke · 07-11-2009, 07:48 PM

The OP's shot is not at all indicative of K-7 noise. Something is fishy here.

Here are some high ISO shots from several posters on this site:

My K-7 vs K-20d High ISO comparisons

Dr_who · 07-11-2009, 11:09 PM

The close up crop on the wing also contains no EXIF information. Original Raw or Jpeg or it says nothing.

07-11-2009, 07:32 AM	#1
snooked Forum Member	K 7 iso 3200 Snail Kite. Looks like the snail kites are sitting on eggs now. 1 - ISO 3200 No Noise Reduction 2 - ISO 3200 Noise Ninja 3 - ISO 3200 Noise Ninja 100% Crop Would not use ISO 3200 Sigma 150 300mm lens, sky was total overcast. Ed

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version E-mail to a Friend	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Black & White This is what ISO 3200 used to look like!	brkl	Post your photos!	5	01-10-2010 02:35 PM
iso 3200	jolee1990	Pentax Beginner's Corner Q&A	10	12-22-2009 07:26 AM
K-x vs K7 at iso 3200	artemapei	Pentax DSLR Discussion	21	11-18-2009 07:05 PM
ISO 3200! Only PP in lightroom	metroeloise	Post your photos!	3	12-12-2008 06:25 PM
Tests iso 200 to iso 3200 with k100d	Deni	Post your photos!	0	06-20-2007 05:17 AM

07-11-2009, 08:06 AM	#2
Ash Community Manager Loyal Site Supporter	Did these images need to be 'pushed' in PP at all? There is significant noise despite the fact that the images appear well exposed (or have been pushed to the right exposure). I've shot a few at ISO 3200 with my K20D, and although I don't use it often (for obvious reasons) I don't get as much noticeable noise as long as ETTR is implemented. I definitely don't use ISO 3200 for shots with lots of negative space or shadow areas...

07-11-2009, 08:24 AM	#3
rawr Pentaxian	I'm not loving that noise at all. Ughhh! And if anything ninja made the appearance of it worse, on the body of the bird and the background. Smudged it all up into big globs. I don't like ninja - even noiseware community edition does better (for me).

07-11-2009, 10:16 AM	#4
Pentaxor Pentaxian	that shot is horrible. could you provide us the exifs? I've seen shots with the K-7 under lowlight at 3200 that is way better than that. what lens did you use,btw?

07-11-2009, 10:31 AM	#5
KungPOW Pentaxian	"tests" like this mean very little. There is more to getting a quality high ISO shot then cranking the ISO to 3200, shooting away, and expecting Noise Ninja to clean up the mess. You need to "shoot to the right" with all high iso shots. If you don't know what I mean, stop "testing" and learn how to use the gear you have.

07-11-2009, 12:36 PM	#6
krypticide Pentaxian	Noise Ninja really smeared away the detail. I like the noise in the first shot much better.

07-11-2009, 01:00 PM	#7
PentaxPoke Pentaxian	snooked, when you say "no noise reduction" do you mean that the NR was turned off on the K-7? I think the user NR settings are different on the K-7 than the k20d. The k20d seems to do more NR at the system level, and so the user default is "NR. off". I recommend using the K-7 default NR setting. One other question: Was the camera really warm when you took that shot? Sensors are sensitive to heat, and the noise in any digital camera goes up with increasing temperature. I have read that the noise can double for ever 8 degrees C. This can be a problem sometimes in the summer with a black camera in the hot sun. I haven't seen this tested with these cameras.

07-11-2009, 01:18 PM	#8
Slowpoke Rodriguez Forum Member	My question is for those who say you must expose to the right when taking high ISO pictures. Consider this a voice from the "I don't get it" peanut gallery. Here goes... When would I choose to shoot at 3200 pushed to right by a stop instead of just shooting at 1600 properly exposed? This is my fundamental "I don't get it" with the mandate to expose to the right. For me, ISO is the final factor in the exposure decision making process. Meaning, I may have good reasons for wanting a specific aperture or shutter speed, and I use film speed to allow me to get there. To use the above picture of the falcon as an example, the subject is in motion, therefore shutter speed was likely the photographer's primary concern. I can't see the EXIF data, so I am going to make a working assumption here that proper exposure at 3200 and max aperture permitted a shutter speed of 1/250th. If the photographer should expose to the right by a stop, this would mean shooting at 1/125th. If he has to shoot at 1/125th to get a good picture, wouldn't he just as easily shoot with proper exposure at 1600, which would also call for a shutter speed of 1/125th? What am I missing?

07-11-2009, 02:21 PM	#9
Ash Community Manager Loyal Site Supporter	Rodriguez, There are numerous threads and discussion on this issues. Have a look here: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/g...ake-sense.html http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/g...ose-right.html http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/g...histogram.html and there are many others if you do a search... It's not as simple as EV+1 on an ISO 1 stop down - it's all about pushing the histogram to the right (without blowing out important highlights - check the blinkies!) at the lowest ISO setting you can have for the shutter speed you need for the shot. But do have a look at these discussions, they would probably answer all your questions on the issue...

07-11-2009, 02:53 PM	#10
Yohan Pamudji Senior Member	Originally posted by KungPOW "tests" like this mean very little. There is more to getting a quality high ISO shot then cranking the ISO to 3200, shooting away, and expecting Noise Ninja to clean up the mess. You need to "shoot to the right" with all high iso shots. If you don't know what I mean, stop "testing" and learn how to use the gear you have. No, you don't need to "shoot to the right with all high ISO shots". The original shot is quite bright for an ISO 3200 shot, and if anything has already given the camera a leg up in terms of keeping noise to a minimum. Exposing brighter than it already is on top of that? Come on. Complaining about underexposure--ok, I can go with that. But now we're not even allowed to take a shot at the proper exposure? To the OP: wow that Noise Ninja job is awful. Have you tried NR Low in-camera? From test shots I've seen it strikes a good balance between noise reduction and detail retention. It particularly does a good job reducing the chroma noise that's so visible in your original shot.

07-11-2009, 03:13 PM	#11
arpaagent Site Supporter	The shot looks OOF and pushed in PP if you ask me. My ISO 3200 is much more useable than this...

07-11-2009, 04:37 PM	#12
Yohan Pamudji Senior Member	Originally posted by Ash Did these images need to be 'pushed' in PP at all? There is significant noise despite the fact that the images appear well exposed (or have been pushed to the right exposure). Originally posted by arpaagent The shot looks OOF and pushed in PP if you ask me. My ISO 3200 is much more useable than this... Wish the OP would come back to confirm/deny whether this was pushed in post. I wouldn't be surprised if it was, but no sense in us arguing back and forth without knowing the facts.

07-11-2009, 05:47 PM	#13
pingflood Veteran Member	Holy crap, that looks worse than 12,800 on my 50D. Talk about pattern noise. I hope it was underexposed.

07-11-2009, 07:48 PM	#14
PentaxPoke Pentaxian	The OP's shot is not at all indicative of K-7 noise. Something is fishy here. Here are some high ISO shots from several posters on this site: My K-7 vs K-20d High ISO comparisons

07-11-2009, 11:09 PM	#15
Dr_who Senior Member	The close up crop on the wing also contains no EXIF information. Original Raw or Jpeg or it says nothing.