Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-07-2011, 04:29 PM   #106
Pentaxian
dosdan's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,697
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Jeff Charles Quote
an image pushed 6-10 EV always have more noise than one pushed only 2-3 or not pushed at all
True, if you're pushing from base ISO, but not if your pushing from above the "plateau", but it needs further comment. Assuming that you're use ISO80 as the base ISO, 6 stops (2^6) = ISO5120, while 10 stops = ISO81920. 6 stops is just usable, but the later is too far for any APS-C camera and for most FF cameras too, regardless of what method you use.

1. If there is no NR, the difference in pushed vs. upping-the-ISO operation should only be a max. of 0.3 stops (see the 3rd point in first message in this thread - this is from Guillermo Luijk - Falk Lumo's figure is about 0.5-0.6 stops).

2. With the K-5 there is on-sensor-chip NR above ISO1600. So, for example, a 5 stops push from ISO80 -> ISO2560, will probably have a slightly greater difference due to the introduction of this NR into the mix.

Now some don't mind this NR; others do. Since it occurs on the chip before demosaicing, the visual degradation from its use is reduced. However if you want to avoid this on-chip NR completely when operating above ISO1600, just push from ISO1600 (underexpose & boost the EV in PP). This will give a slight SNR improvement over pushing from base ISO and will get around the limited EV adjustment range of some current raw converters. (Note: all above-ISO1600 settings in-camera are digital multiplications anyway.)

So, instead of selecting ISO3200 or ISO6400 when shooting raw, leave it on ISO1600 and use +1EV or +2 EV boost in PP instead. This will then allow you to apply your own type of NR in PP.

By the way, the 0.3 stops is the maximum difference for a push from ISO100 to ISO1600. So in smaller pushes like a 2 stop push from ISO100 -> ISO400 or from ISO400 -> ISO1600, there is even less difference. So while this sensor benefits slightly from upping the ISO, the difference is not much at all.

Dan.


Last edited by dosdan; 04-07-2011 at 05:49 PM.
04-11-2011, 10:27 AM   #107
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 29
QuoteOriginally posted by dosdan Quote
By the way, the 0.3 stops is the maximum difference for a push from ISO100 to ISO1600. So in smaller pushes like a 2 stop push from ISO100 -> ISO400 or from ISO400 -> ISO1600, there is even less difference. So while this sensor benefits slightly from upping the ISO, the difference is not much at all.
It's about 2/3 stop of DR what ISO 1600 buys over ISO 100 (dxomark).

However, I don't know how pattern noise (the little that there is with this sensor) is influenced, if at all, by the change of ISO. When doing supermassive pushing, any change in this can make or break the image.
04-12-2011, 01:45 AM   #108
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Budapest
Posts: 821
QuoteOriginally posted by Pompous Moronox Quote
It's about 2/3 stop of DR what ISO 1600 buys over ISO 100 (dxomark).

However, I don't know how pattern noise (the little that there is with this sensor) is influenced, if at all, by the change of ISO. When doing supermassive pushing, any change in this can make or break the image.
In practice I couldn't really notice much difference... maybe it's just my eyes.

Full size examples (not for those still on slow internet):
Shot at ISO 1600
Shot at ISO100 and pushed 4 stops (equivalent to ISO1600)

I also have some old night cityscape shots and pushed shots aren't really much worse than "proper" shots.
04-12-2011, 02:34 AM   #109
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,887
I miss the ISO in a way. I tried some astro shoots back in January and couldn't go longer on shutter time due to earth rotation so I figured maybe if I try to up the ISO? But na, what's the point.


Last edited by Gimbal; 04-12-2011 at 10:54 AM.
04-12-2011, 07:28 AM   #110
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by simico Quote
In practice I couldn't really notice much difference... maybe it's just my eyes.

Full size examples (not for those still on slow internet):
Shot at ISO 1600
Shot at ISO100 and pushed 4 stops (equivalent to ISO1600)

I also have some old night cityscape shots and pushed shots aren't really much worse than "proper" shots.

The pushed image is clearly noisier, but not to any huge degree.

however the issue is how much leeway do you have for post processing in the pushed image compared to the "shot at 1600" image
04-12-2011, 02:16 PM   #111
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
The pushed image is clearly noisier, but not to any huge degree.
One has to be careful in pushing ISO in PP. One trap in LR is black level. If it isn't set to zero prior to pushing then the result is ugly. Moreover, Pentax clips the black at higher ISO levels which results in darker (but less noisy) shadows. Eventually, when pushing a lot, one would need a per-color option to clip the blacks which LR does not offer. W/o this option, dark tones tend to become tinted.

If done properly, there shouldn't be a visible difference between a pushed and high ISO image with the K-5.

So, the perfect PP software for "ISOless" sensors has yet to appear.
04-12-2011, 06:43 PM   #112
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote

So, the perfect PP software for "ISOless" sensors has yet to appear.
So has the perfect sensor
04-13-2011, 01:34 AM   #113
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Budapest
Posts: 821
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
One has to be careful in pushing ISO in PP. One trap in LR is black level. If it isn't set to zero prior to pushing then the result is ugly.
I used an early alpha version of Raw Therapee 3, every parameter was set to zero. The only change was to set +4 EV for the pushed image.

Coming from the K-m and having seen (and developed for comparison) many K-7 raw files, I'm happy to take either pics - they are unbelievably clean for ISO1600. I seldom use minimal NR even on ISO3200 shots.

04-17-2011, 11:02 PM   #114
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,941
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
W/o this option, dark tones tend to become tinted.
Doesn't the "Shadow tint" slider in the "Camera Calibration" panel address this?
04-18-2011, 04:22 AM   #115
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Doesn't the "Shadow tint" slider in the "Camera Calibration" panel address this?
Maybe. Frankly, I don't know what this slider does.
04-26-2011, 10:56 AM   #116
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
Hey Falk, some thing maybe you can answer ...

Regarding light as packets ( Photons ) - Given that light is simply a range of frequencies of electromagnetic energy then why aren't radio waves, or X-rays measure in packets?
04-26-2011, 12:12 PM   #117
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
One has to be careful in pushing ISO in PP. One trap in LR is black level. If it isn't set to zero prior to pushing then the result is ugly. Moreover, Pentax clips the black at higher ISO levels which results in darker (but less noisy) shadows. Eventually, when pushing a lot, one would need a per-color option to clip the blacks which LR does not offer. W/o this option, dark tones tend to become tinted.

If done properly, there shouldn't be a visible difference between a pushed and high ISO image with the K-5.

So, the perfect PP software for "ISOless" sensors has yet to appear.
Falk, thank you for sharing that.

Can't also the camera settings result in tinting in the shadows. Say for example, one normally sets a -2ev to ensure unclipped highlights, then inadvertently underexposes the picture. Where this unexposure clips red for example, more than blue or green, wouldn't subsequent processing produce unnaturally tinted pictures, even wtih the perfect software?
04-26-2011, 12:41 PM   #118
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Falk, thank you for sharing that.

Can't also the camera settings result in tinting in the shadows. Say for example, one normally sets a -2ev to ensure unclipped highlights, then inadvertently underexposes the picture. Where this unexposure clips red for example, more than blue or green, wouldn't subsequent processing produce unnaturally tinted pictures, even wtih the perfect software?
You mean clipping in the black?

The dark tones do not exactly clip. They become very noisy. But you are right, if 2^-14 is underrun frequently enough, there could be a tinting effect when say green is pushed back to visible while red and/or blue stay zero. But I'd say that such surfaces are too noisy and should never become visible anyway. The tinting is more likely to occur if dark levels are clipped above zero.
04-26-2011, 11:02 PM   #119
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,941
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
Given that light is simply a range of frequencies of electromagnetic energy then why aren't radio waves, or X-rays measure in packets?
AFAIC, there's nothing "simple" about light, if you want to get to the bottom of things.

Quantization (e.g., regarding light as photons) applies to all electromagnetic waves. The wave/particle duality furthermore also applies to particles, such as electrons. Even they can behave as waves (-> de Broglie wavelength).
05-09-2011, 01:10 PM   #120
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
Anyone notice what the X100 does above ISO1600?


Fujifilm X100 CLEVER ISOs above ISO1600
QuoteQuote:
The good thing here is that unlike in most cameras, the Fuji X100 shooting above ISO1600 doesn't care of digitally mutiplying the RAW data by the corresponding factor of 2 before saving the RAW file. In this way, ISO3200 on this camera is just ISO1600 plus some metadata telling the RAW developer 'hey! this is supposed to be ISO3200, so display it to the uninformed user 1 stop brighter than it really is'.

What is the good news? the X100 RAW shooter above ISO1600 gets a correct exposure in the camera display and in-camera JPEG, but keeps in the RAW file all the highlights information that other cameras stupidly ruin just for multiplying the RAW data to achieve the illusion of high ISO.
Also,
QuoteOriginally posted by Entropy Quote
An interesting trick for faster shutter speeds might be:

Set sensor to base ISO.
Take a reading
Determine maximum sensor reading
Reset analog gain (ISO) so that the maximum sensor reading is just below full scale. (maybe 95%?)
Many of us wish for such a metering mode that simply doesn't highlights (or in the case of a shot with the sun, lets no more than one metering segment be clipped)

Last edited by Eruditass; 05-09-2011 at 01:42 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, cameras, dslr, ev, iso, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, noise, pentax k-5, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Post your "Park Bench" "or "Picnic Table" images tessfully Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 1351 6 Hours Ago 10:51 AM
Please explain "Sensor is Outresolving Some Lenses" Parallax Pentax K-5 21 11-24-2010 05:05 PM
Sensor shift during "long" exposures eclipsed450 Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 12-18-2009 12:51 PM
K10D "Sensor moving" possible problem? jaitas Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 05-07-2009 02:08 PM
"Green Clean" Sensor Cleaning System. NLAlston Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 2 05-16-2007 07:35 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:46 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top