New K-7 Comparometer images

PentaxPoke · 07-29-2009, 03:27 PM

I have seen some references to this in recent threads, but nothing has risen above the "noise level" yet.

Imaging resources has posted new images for the K-7 in the "comparometer."
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

Take a look at the "New Indoor" images vs. any other camera. Look at ISO 3200 for example. The K-7 blows away the K20d, and even is pretty close to FF cameras like the D700! For example, take a look at the Chardonnay bottle sitting on the table. On the K-7 it is sharp. On the 50D, the blotchy chroma noise and smoothing makes it hard to read. The label is also sharper with the K-7 than the D90. To me, the difference is in smoothing and chroma noise, and not focus.

Maybe the breathless posts about K-7 noise can start to diminish now?

rawr · 07-29-2009, 03:56 PM

Originally Posted by PentaxPoke

Maybe the breathless posts about K-7 noise can start to diminish now?

We'll see. I still have some breath saved up on the K7 noise issue. Those shots in particular are the sort of studio high intensity lighting that don't really tell us much about high ISO noise and low-light handling.

Run your eye over some of the comparative camera shots outdoors at night over at neocamera.com to see big real-life high ISO differences between some of the cameras you mention and the K7, esp in shadows, darker areas etc.

Eg:

Nikon D90 Review | NeoCamera.com
Pentax K-7 Sample Images | NeoCamera.com
etc

So yeah, the jury is still out for me on the issue.

PentaxPoke · 07-29-2009, 04:07 PM

the sites that you list do not have any 1:1 comparisons. There is no way to compare the two cameras when the subjects and lighting conditions are not the same.

Even in the "studio lighting conditions" you mention, the k20d images are clearly worse than the K-7. In other words, even in perfect lighting, the k20d is worse.

*Sailor* · 07-29-2009, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by PentaxPoke

the sites that you list do not have any 1:1 comparisons. There is no way to compare the two cameras when the subjects and lighting conditions are not the same.

Even in the "studio lighting conditions" you mention, the k20d images are clearly worse than the K-7. In other words, even in perfect lighting, the k20d is worse.

Thanks much for posting the link. Are these RAW images converted with no modification to JPEGs for website exposition or were they recorded in JPEG using the default settings of the camera? I'm lazy, so after making the comparisons you suggested, I only gave the website a perfunctory look and didn't uncover this info.

Thanks again,

Jer

PentaxPoke · 07-29-2009, 05:08 PM

Originally Posted by Sailor

Thanks much for posting the link. Are these RAW images converted with no modification to JPEGs for website exposition or were they recorded in JPEG using the default settings of the camera? I'm lazy, so after making the comparisons you suggested, I only gave the website a perfunctory look and didn't uncover this info.

Thanks again,

Jer

According to the EXIF, it says NR was "OFF" on the K-7.

illdefined · 07-29-2009, 05:19 PM

Originally Posted by PentaxPoke

the sites that you list do not have any 1:1 comparisons. There is no way to compare the two cameras when the subjects and lighting conditions are not the same.

Even in the "studio lighting conditions" you mention, the k20d images are clearly worse than the K-7. In other words, even in perfect lighting, the k20d is worse.

Poke, do you have a K20D as well as a K-7? honestly, don't try some self-comparisons at home, it will truly break your heart.

Pentax (really Samsung) definitely compromised the stills on the K-7 sensor for video. its just a fact. once the big reviews come out, the empirical testing will bear this out.

PentaxPoke · 07-29-2009, 05:24 PM

Originally Posted by illdefined

Poke, do you have a K20D as well as a K-7? honestly, don't try some self-comparisons at home, it will truly break your heart.

Pentax (really Samsung) definitely compromised the stills on the K-7 sensor for video. its just a fact. once the big reviews come out, the empirical testing will bear this out.

Yes, I do own both, and I posted some detailed comparisons here on this forum showing that the K-7 is significantly better than the k20d in chroma noise. Heart not at all broken.

Also, I consider Imaging Resources a pretty good site for empirical testing. Their consistency is better than most I have seen. The only "big review" I haven't seen yet is dpr. Well, we can all predict what dpr is going to say..:blah blah disappointing jpeg blah blah. They are quite consistent and predictable. If a camera doesn't oversharpen at low ISO, oversmooth at high ISO, and oversaturate at all ISO, they are not impressed.

*Riktar* · 07-29-2009, 05:43 PM

First off a disclaimer:

I can tell you everything I know about Digital photography over a long lunch.

That being said this is a QUESTION, not a CHALLENGE.

I looked at the photos (New Indoor) on the comparison. It seems the picture is cleaner from the K-7 than the K20D.

But why is the title Digital Photography Pocket Guide more readable on the K20D? The way I am seeing it the word Digital is unreadable on the K-7 yet quite readable on the K20D the "model" is holding in her hand?

Were the same lenses used on both cameras?

*Sailor* · 07-29-2009, 05:50 PM

Originally Posted by illdefined

Poke, do you have a K20D as well as a K-7? honestly, don't try some self-comparisons at home, it will truly break your heart.

Pentax (really Samsung) definitely compromised the stills on the K-7 sensor for video. its just a fact. once the big reviews come out, the empirical testing will bear this out.

May we see the results of your in-home comparisons?

Thanks,

Jer

Raybo · 07-29-2009, 06:28 PM

Look at the watch and the book and THAN tell me everything is equal about the images.

Something does not look right to me.

illdefined · 07-29-2009, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by PentaxPoke

Yes, I do own both, and I posted some detailed comparisons here on this forum showing that the K-7 is significantly better than the k20d in chroma noise. Heart not at all broken.

agreed, the chroma noise is better on the K-7, but the luminance noise is significantly worse. there is luminance noise in the mid-shadows at ISO 200.

Also, I consider Imaging Resources a pretty good site for empirical testing. Their consistency is better than most I have seen. The only "big review" I haven't seen yet is dpr. Well, we can all predict what dpr is going to say..:blah blah disappointing jpeg blah blah. They are quite consistent and predictable. If a camera doesn't oversharpen at low ISO, oversmooth at high ISO, and oversaturate at all ISO, they are not impressed.

sure, but what will sting much worse is DPR's and others' conclusion on final RAW testing.

Mindflux · 07-29-2009, 07:12 PM

Originally Posted by Riktar

But why is the title Digital Photography Pocket Guide more readable on the K20D? The way I am seeing it the word Digital is unreadable on the K-7 yet quite readable on the K20D the "model" is holding in her hand?

Were the same lenses used on both cameras?

Yes, yes. Look at her watch too. On the 3200 ISO image you can actually tell the time on the K20D shot but not so much on the K-7 shot.

Mister Guy · 07-29-2009, 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by Mindflux

Yes, yes. Look at her watch too. On the 3200 ISO image you can actually tell the time on the K20D shot but not so much on the K-7 shot.

Looks to me to be different processing settings. Compare the lips, the settings are definitely treating reds differently, which is having a negative effect on the book itself.

Mindflux · 07-29-2009, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by Mister Guy

Looks to me to be different processing settings. Compare the lips, the settings are definitely treating reds differently, which is having a negative effect on the book itself.

Are you sure this just isn't the WB performance between both cameras?

kittykat46 · 07-29-2009, 08:46 PM

Different parts of the photo give different results for the K-7 vs. K20D, which is why I think the test is not that tightly controlled.
First of EXIF says the K-7 has 0 E/V, the K20D has +0.7 E/V. Advantage to K-7 for more accurate metering.
The mannequin's watch and the book she is holding have more detail on the K20D. - Advantage K20D
The beads she is wearing and the lapel on the jacket have more detail and less noise (both luminance and chromatic noise) on the K-7 - Advantage K-7.

I think there are subtle difference in DOF and focus point between the two. Possibly a different lens or different copy of the same type of lens.

I end up with the same conclusion on the K-7 and K20D.
They both have very, very similar picture quality. A bit of advantage here for the K20D, a bit of advantage there for the K-7.
I just don't bother with the questions any more. As far as real-world photography goes, the two are equally excellent in picture quality.

The K-7 just wins hands down in many other usage performance aspects.