[Ron Kruger]

I heard that the K-5 can activate its ultrasonic dust shaker to create an ultrasonic sound field and then takes great bat action shots from the sound reflections. I the total dark! In bat scene mode, the camera even tries to emulate a genuine bat sound field to appear friendly to other bats

I wanted to try it. But I couldn't find the menu setting to activate it in the total dark

Clever!

While there may be occasions when a higher ISO is useful for me, I shot almost everything at the lowest ISO possible, because I've found that, regardless the "effective" ISO range, everything (not just noise) is better at lower ISOs.
The K5 does get my interest because it does go a bit lower than my K20D, and the images I've seen so far at ISO 80 look pretty good.

[JohnBee]

Clever!

While there may be occasions when a higher ISO is useful for me, I shot almost everything at the lowest ISO possible, because I've found that, regardless the "effective" ISO range, everything (not just noise) is better at lower ISOs.
The K5 does get my interest because it does go a bit lower than my K20D, and the images I've seen so far at ISO 80 look pretty good.

Actually recent testing(on my end) suggests that the K-5 retains more detail at ISO200 than at the lower 100/80 settings.

Also, I don't think there is any less noise at ISO 100/80 than at 200 to speak of.
However, I have not done much testing to that effect.

[Ron Kruger]

Thanks JohnBee. Please keep me posted about the low ISO preformance of the K5 as you gain more experience with it.

[JohnBee]

Thanks JohnBee. Please keep me posted about the low ISO preformance of the K5 as you gain more experience with it.

A recent step forward

K-5, ISO51200, f/8, 1/250s

Very little PP in contrast to earlier samples.
Looks like there might be a little more to extract out of the K-5 @ 51K yet.
Also... don't quote me on this, but I was able to do a little highlight recovery on this file. Judging by what I'm seeing, it feels like there might be 1/2 a stop of headroom.

---

Last edited by JohnBee; 05-01-2011 at 10:46 AM.

[raz]

Can you post the hi res file for this ? I want to see fur.
Thanks

[dgaies]

Can you post the hi res file for this ? I want to see fur.
Thanks

Or even just a 100% crop for now.

Also, it might be helpful to post the same crop for the ISO 200 shot (or whichever one showed the most detail this time) as a reference.

[falconeye]

I find it easier to assess final IQ at 200%. though I thought it looked really good.

Would you happen to have a lower ISO DNG or JPG of this scene?

Yes, your version looks better than my backward-compatible LR2 version.

I've no shot at lower ISO and the same distance. So sorry, cannot help.

[kittykat46]

A recent step forward

Very little PP in contrast to earlier samples.
Looks like there might be a little more to extract out of the K-5 @ 51K yet.
Also... don't quote me on this, but I was able to do a little highlight recovery on this file. Judging by what I'm seeing, it feels like there might be 1/2 a stop of headroom.

Are you sure you got the right photo ?
That doesn't look like High-ISO at all, let alone ISO 51200.

One test that's worth doing, apart from straight High-ISO comparisons, is how High-ISO files respond to PP, but will need RAW files to work with.

We all do Highlight or Shadow recovery or +/- exposure compensation on RAW files from time to time. I find the K-7 has very limited latitude for such PP at High-ISO. It would be interesting to see with the K-5, though I suspect it will be Very Good.