Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Rupert · 05-17-2011, 07:15 AM

Squirrels love it! Shooting against a bright background, the Squirrel can turn out way too dark, but processing to pull him/her up to proper exposure is a snap with the K5.

Also don't hear much about the excellent metering of the K5, it is vastly better than my K20D.

Care for some apple?

[IMG]

[/IMG]

JohnBee · 05-17-2011, 07:17 AM

Originally posted by jstevewhite

Are the stripes in the dark area sensor banding?

I'd say most likely yes.

jstevewhite · 05-17-2011, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by JohnBee

I'd say most likely yes.

I was just hesitant to brand it such. My K20D has ugly color noise and splotching, but it doesn't band up like THAT. That's not pretty.

JohnBee · 05-17-2011, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by jstevewhite

I was just hesitant to brand it such. My K20D has ugly color noise and splotching, but it doesn't band up like THAT. That's not pretty.

I think that could depend on how far the shadows are(pulling up). But my K20's will breakdown and exhibit banding and low frequency noise(pretty messy) when pushed far enough. However, without knowing the limits on the 7D image it may be difficult to know what's going on. Though if memory serves me right, I think the 7D had better noise handling than the K20D didn't it? I can't quite remember but I think that's what I saw when looking over some Imaging resource samples back in the day.

Either way, I guess the banding could be fixed in post processing.
Which still wouldn't make it a K-5 in terms of performance, but should be usable I guess.

jstevewhite · 05-17-2011, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by JohnBee

I think that could depend on how far the shadows are(pulling up). But my K20's will breakdown and exhibit banding and low frequency noise(pretty messy) when pushed far enough. However, without knowing the limits on the 7D image it may be difficult to know what's going on. Though if memory serves me right, I think the 7D had better noise handling than the K20D didn't it? I can't quite remember but I think that's what I saw when looking over some Imaging resource samples back in the day.

Either way, I guess the banding could be fixed in post processing.
Which still wouldn't make it a K-5 in terms of performance, but should be usable I guess.

I got occasional banding on the K20D - which is why I didn't push shadows often - but not like that. It was broader, like one indefinite band for four or five of those in that image.

I don't often do cross-brand comparisons (I can't use Pentax glass on the othern', so why would I care) but I thought I remembered seeing a shootout that showed most of the last-gen APS-c machines were close as dammit for noise in RAW. I don't pay any attention to noise measures in JPG at all (you're just seeing the NR algorithm in the camera), and many such reviews do.

krypticide · 05-17-2011, 09:00 AM

Coming from the K-7, the additional DR even at high ISOs is just amazing. There's a lot more leeway in post processing.

Sent from my EVO 4G with MIUI

Col · 05-17-2011, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by jstevewhite

I was just hesitant to brand it such. My K20D has ugly color noise and splotching, but it doesn't band up like THAT. That's not pretty.

Definitely Canon chip technology, has you seen this comparison of sensor performance?

Nikon DX vs Canon APS-C: Dynamic Range | TestCams.com

jstevewhite · 05-17-2011, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by Col

Definitely Canon chip technology, has you seen this comparison of sensor performance?

Nikon DX vs Canon APS-C: Dynamic Range | TestCams.com

Oh, yeah, saw those. Great stuff. I'd like to see the same thing done with a Canon FF and the K-5, just for fun; for real-world comparisons.

Designosophy · 05-17-2011, 01:10 PM

Originally posted by Col

Definitely Canon chip technology, has you seen this comparison of sensor performance?

Nikon DX vs Canon APS-C: Dynamic Range | TestCams.com

Great videos. I didn't know about the Canon cross-hatch noise problem.

<rant> It was pretty grating the way the presenter pronounced Nikon as knee-con and posterization as pah-stir-ization. I know, as a Japanese word, knee-con is closer to actual pronunciation (it should actually be knee-cone), but in their English ads, Nikon pronounces their own name nigh-con, and I'd trust them to pronounce it as it should be pronounced. And posterization is an old graphic design term derived from early poster printing techniques that applied color in solid areas without gradation. It's poster-ization. Not pah-stir-ization. </rant>

jstevewhite · 05-17-2011, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by Designosophy

Great videos. I didn't know about the Canon cross-hatch noise problem.

<rant> It was pretty grating the way the presenter pronounced Nikon as knee-con and posterization as pah-stir-ization. I know, as a Japanese word, knee-con is closer to actual pronunciation (it should actually be knee-cone), but in their English ads, Nikon pronounces their own name nigh-con, and I'd trust them to pronounce it as it should be pronounced. And posterization is an old graphic design term derived from early poster printing techniques that applied color in solid areas without gradation. It's poster-ization. Not pah-stir-ization. </rant>

I don't mind nee-kon so much, but pah-sterization was *killin* me.

Eruditass · 05-17-2011, 02:06 PM

Originally posted by jstevewhite

Oh, yeah, saw those. Great stuff. I'd like to see the same thing done with a Canon FF and the K-5, just for fun; for real-world comparisons.

Like this?

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/140726-k5-vs-5d-mark-ii-wow-k5-insane.html

jstevewhite · 05-17-2011, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by Eruditass

It's supposed to pronounced Nee-Kon, apparently.

Like this?

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/140726-k5-vs-5d-mark-ii-wow-k5-insane.html

Oh, right! I remember that now. Thanks for the reminder!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Example of AF, DR, high ISO and high shutter speed on K-5	benisona	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	11-30-2010 02:25 PM
People High ISO K7	milesy	Post Your Photos!	6	10-11-2010 01:36 AM
K7 at high ISO	zelovoc	Pentax DSLR Discussion	30	09-14-2010 07:23 AM
K-7 high ISO vs K20D high ISO	supa007	Pentax DSLR Discussion	72	05-10-2010 04:24 PM
K10D at 6 months - ISO and Kelvin matters	dmdctusa	Photographic Technique	2	09-02-2007 02:46 PM

05-17-2011, 07:15 AM	#16
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Squirrels love it! Shooting against a bright background, the Squirrel can turn out way too dark, but processing to pull him/her up to proper exposure is a snap with the K5. Also don't hear much about the excellent metering of the K5, it is vastly better than my K20D. Care for some apple? [IMG] [/IMG]

05-17-2011, 07:17 AM	#17
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by jstevewhite Are the stripes in the dark area sensor banding? I'd say most likely yes.

05-17-2011, 07:26 AM	#18
jstevewhite Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,407 Original Poster	Originally posted by JohnBee I'd say most likely yes. I was just hesitant to brand it such. My K20D has ugly color noise and splotching, but it doesn't band up like THAT. That's not pretty.

05-17-2011, 08:00 AM	#19
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by jstevewhite I was just hesitant to brand it such. My K20D has ugly color noise and splotching, but it doesn't band up like THAT. That's not pretty. I think that could depend on how far the shadows are(pulling up). But my K20's will breakdown and exhibit banding and low frequency noise(pretty messy) when pushed far enough. However, without knowing the limits on the 7D image it may be difficult to know what's going on. Though if memory serves me right, I think the 7D had better noise handling than the K20D didn't it? I can't quite remember but I think that's what I saw when looking over some Imaging resource samples back in the day. Either way, I guess the banding could be fixed in post processing. Which still wouldn't make it a K-5 in terms of performance, but should be usable I guess.

05-17-2011, 08:06 AM	#20
jstevewhite Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,407 Original Poster	Originally posted by JohnBee I think that could depend on how far the shadows are(pulling up). But my K20's will breakdown and exhibit banding and low frequency noise(pretty messy) when pushed far enough. However, without knowing the limits on the 7D image it may be difficult to know what's going on. Though if memory serves me right, I think the 7D had better noise handling than the K20D didn't it? I can't quite remember but I think that's what I saw when looking over some Imaging resource samples back in the day. Either way, I guess the banding could be fixed in post processing. Which still wouldn't make it a K-5 in terms of performance, but should be usable I guess. I got occasional banding on the K20D - which is why I didn't push shadows often - but not like that. It was broader, like one indefinite band for four or five of those in that image. I don't often do cross-brand comparisons (I can't use Pentax glass on the othern', so why would I care) but I thought I remembered seeing a shootout that showed most of the last-gen APS-c machines were close as dammit for noise in RAW. I don't pay any attention to noise measures in JPG at all (you're just seeing the NR algorithm in the camera), and many such reviews do.

05-17-2011, 09:00 AM	#21
krypticide Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,079	Coming from the K-7, the additional DR even at high ISOs is just amazing. There's a lot more leeway in post processing. Sent from my EVO 4G with MIUI

05-17-2011, 11:30 AM	#22
Col Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Stansted Essex Photos: Gallery Posts: 614	Originally posted by jstevewhite I was just hesitant to brand it such. My K20D has ugly color noise and splotching, but it doesn't band up like THAT. That's not pretty. Definitely Canon chip technology, has you seen this comparison of sensor performance? Nikon DX vs Canon APS-C: Dynamic Range \| TestCams.com

05-17-2011, 12:34 PM	#23
jstevewhite Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,407 Original Poster	Originally posted by Col Definitely Canon chip technology, has you seen this comparison of sensor performance? Nikon DX vs Canon APS-C: Dynamic Range \| TestCams.com Oh, yeah, saw those. Great stuff. I'd like to see the same thing done with a Canon FF and the K-5, just for fun; for real-world comparisons.

05-17-2011, 01:10 PM	#24
Designosophy Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Northeast Philadelphia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,137	Originally posted by Col Definitely Canon chip technology, has you seen this comparison of sensor performance? Nikon DX vs Canon APS-C: Dynamic Range \| TestCams.com Great videos. I didn't know about the Canon cross-hatch noise problem. <rant> It was pretty grating the way the presenter pronounced Nikon as knee-con and posterization as pah-stir-ization. I know, as a Japanese word, knee-con is closer to actual pronunciation (it should actually be knee-cone), but in their English ads, Nikon pronounces their own name nigh-con, and I'd trust them to pronounce it as it should be pronounced. And posterization is an old graphic design term derived from early poster printing techniques that applied color in solid areas without gradation. It's poster-ization. Not pah-stir-ization. </rant>

05-17-2011, 02:01 PM	#25
jstevewhite Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,407 Original Poster	Originally posted by Designosophy Great videos. I didn't know about the Canon cross-hatch noise problem. <rant> It was pretty grating the way the presenter pronounced Nikon as knee-con and posterization as pah-stir-ization. I know, as a Japanese word, knee-con is closer to actual pronunciation (it should actually be knee-cone), but in their English ads, Nikon pronounces their own name nigh-con, and I'd trust them to pronounce it as it should be pronounced. And posterization is an old graphic design term derived from early poster printing techniques that applied color in solid areas without gradation. It's poster-ization. Not pah-stir-ization. </rant> I don't mind nee-kon so much, but pah-sterization was killin me.

05-17-2011, 02:06 PM	#26
Eruditass Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,207	Originally posted by jstevewhite Oh, yeah, saw those. Great stuff. I'd like to see the same thing done with a Canon FF and the K-5, just for fun; for real-world comparisons. Like this? https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/140726-k5-vs-5d-mark-ii-wow-k5-insane.html

05-17-2011, 02:09 PM	#27
jstevewhite Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,407 Original Poster	Originally posted by Eruditass It's supposed to pronounced Nee-Kon, apparently. Like this? https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/140726-k5-vs-5d-mark-ii-wow-k5-insane.html Oh, right! I remember that now. Thanks for the reminder!

Why K-5 DR and High-ISO matters.

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!