Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-27-2012, 05:47 AM   #16
Veteran Member
GabrielFFontes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Posts: 647
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
What is the practical side to shoot in such condition? No light, no photography.
0EV + 6400ISO + 1.4 lens = 1/40 shutter speed
Flash photography also?

10-27-2012, 05:55 AM   #17
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Or those birders with long slow telephotos chasing small birds in shady undergrowth. Etc
I can sign that after my month, with a slow lens with a TC, chasing small birds in foliage. The sheer darkness often kills the AF totally while the possibility of getting a good shot still is around.
10-27-2012, 06:17 AM   #18
Veteran Member
westmill's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Stoke on Trent
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,146
It seems to me that sensativity has improved greatly. I had a time in a church while doing a wedding when the k5 simply would not focus on a particular shot. The K5 2 would obviously not have strugled. It is obviously a big improvement. Possibly even more importantly it should not misfocus under ambient light conditions. However... as far as accuracy goes though... It still retains the huge sensors so its simply not possable for it to be accurate in a precission sort of way. I just think its such a shame it was not implemented in the original K5.
10-27-2012, 06:32 AM   #19
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Well the winner is that you do gain speed in working.

Situations where I find my self shooting in:

sportsfields, but probably others will find it the same: 1/400th, iso6400 and f4 on the DA*300mm. (I don't have my EV calculator on this laptop). The K-5 slows down in AF-speed a lot, where the othe K-5 with Sigma 70-200 has more light to work with and is a little faster but still slow.

And on another occasion, alomost no light to name off, but I had to take images for this charity game:

settings with DA*300mm: f4 1/400th and iso 20.000

So I would wonder what the gain was in real life and not in a dark room.

10-27-2012, 07:32 AM   #20
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,294
QuoteOriginally posted by GabrielFFontes Quote
0EV + 6400ISO + 1.4 lens = 1/40 shutter speed
Flash photography also?
As for me, ISO1600 is acceptable with big reservation. ISO6400 and 1.4 (I know only DA55/1.4 and FA50/1.4 with such aperture) + 1/40 = using SR and unacceptable IQ. Sigma 30/1.4 - I don't think that it's good lens.

That's why I don't see any advantage....
10-27-2012, 08:11 AM   #21
Veteran Member
GabrielFFontes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Posts: 647
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
As for me, ISO1600 is acceptable with big reservation. ISO6400 and 1.4 (I know only DA55/1.4 and FA50/1.4 with such aperture) + 1/40 = using SR and unacceptable IQ. Sigma 30/1.4 - I don't think that it's good lens.

That's why I don't see any advantage....
Wow, really? With a K-5?
1600 ISO with a tiny touch of Topaz Denoise is perfectly clean! No kidding, it looks like ISO 200 or something like that!
You must be printing only billboards! hahaha
10-27-2012, 08:18 AM   #22
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,294
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
This was performed in an area with at most 0EV (the Pentax spot meter doesn't go any lower). The K-5 couldn't focus at all on any part of the scene, while the K-5 IIs locked on every time. Note that we were focusing on the floor, not the bed.

Pentax K-5 vs K-5 II / IIs low light autofocus test - YouTube

Headphones may be needed
Did the same with K200D + FA24*/2- from semi-dark corridor to dark room - f4.5, ISO200, 1.6 s.
Close to your test condition. No AF light.
AF works. No any problem to lock.

The owners of K200D or K20D - you can make the same...
10-27-2012, 08:22 AM   #23
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
As for me, ISO1600 is acceptable with big reservation. ISO6400 and 1.4 (I know only DA55/1.4 and FA50/1.4 with such aperture) + 1/40 = using SR and unacceptable IQ. Sigma 30/1.4 - I don't think that it's good lens.

That's why I don't see any advantage....
Then you have a pretty low limit for ISO. I've used ISO 6400 without issues on my k-x. I know people use up to ISO 10,000 on the k-5 and still come out with fantastic shots.

10-27-2012, 08:25 AM   #24
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,294
QuoteOriginally posted by GabrielFFontes Quote
Wow, really? With a K-5?
1600 ISO with a tiny touch of Topaz Denoise is perfectly clean! No kidding, it looks like ISO 200 or something like that!
You must be printing only billboards! hahaha
K-5 is noisier camera at low ISO than K200D. And I never use denoise software, it kills the picture.
I don't care about noise at all. But above ISO1600 - K-5 is unacceptable for me.
10-27-2012, 08:36 AM   #25
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
bwDraco's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,015
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
K-5 is noisier camera at low ISO than K200D. And I never use denoise software, it kills the picture.
I don't care about noise at all. But above ISO1600 - K-5 is unacceptable for me.
This just isn't true. The K-5 has very low read noise, much lower than the K200D. The DxOMark score of 82 and tested dynamic range of 14 stops cannot be explained otherwise.

--DragonLord
10-27-2012, 08:39 AM   #26
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
Also you don't have to go that long back in time to find DSLR's that had ISO400 that is comparable to the K-5 at ISO1600.
10-27-2012, 08:46 AM   #27
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
Also you don't have to go that long back in time to find DSLR's that had ISO400 that is comparable to the K-5 at ISO1600.
I must be easy to please, as I find my K-7 acceptable at ISO1600 most of the time... I guess I'll be in heaven with a K-5 II
10-27-2012, 08:47 AM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
bwDraco's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,015
I confidently use my K-5 at ISO 6400...

--DragonLord
10-27-2012, 09:15 AM   #29
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,294
QuoteOriginally posted by DragonLord Quote
This just isn't true. The K-5 has very low read noise, much lower than the K200D. The DxOMark score of 82 and tested dynamic range of 14 stops cannot be explained otherwise.

--DragonLord
MUCH LOWER?


The shadow noise is important for DR of DSLR.
SNR18% - is ratio signal/noise for average gray scale (18%). Almost clear shadows.
DR of K-5 is better if we use SNR18%. If we really shoot in bad condition - SNR18% is useless. We should look at data of 50-100%.

Let's have a look at K-5 and K200D at full SNR - it's very interesting:

gray scale at ISO100.
30%: K-5 - 39.8 dB, K200D - 39.1 dB
40%: K-5 - 40.9 dB, K200D - 40.3 dB
50%: K-5 - 41.7 dB, K200D - 41.2 dB
60%: K-5 - 42.4 dB, K200D - 42 dB
70%: K-5 - 42.9 dB, K200D - 42.6 dB
80%: K-5 - 43.3 dB, K200D - 43.1 dB
90%: K-5 - 43.7 dB, K200D - 43.6 dB
100%: K-5 - 44 dB, K200D - 44 dB

We can see that the difference in shadows are almost negligible. Not higher than 1%.

But very interesting results for higher ISO...

IS800
90%: K-5 - 35.6 dB, K200D - 36.1 dB
100%: K-5 - 36.1 dB, K200D - 36.5 dB
(and K200D is a bit better at ISO800 in shadows at all points)

ISO1600
90%: K-5 - 33.1 dB, K200D - 33.4 dB
100%: K-5 - 33.5 dB, K200D - 33.9 dB


K-5 is better at ISO80 with 3% better result. K200D has no ISO80.
But...at ISO100-400 - almost no any serious difference. K-5 is a bit better.
at ISO800-1600 are the same situation, but K200D is a bit better.

Last edited by ogl; 10-27-2012 at 09:32 AM.
10-27-2012, 09:20 AM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,848
QuoteOriginally posted by DragonLord Quote
I confidently use my K-5 at ISO 6400...

--DragonLord
For web use I can clean up 6400 just fine, but for a decent sized print it will definitely show. At 6400 I am converting to B&W and using the grain as part of the "mood" of the image.
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, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax, pentax k-5, test
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Low light AF/AL speed test Hey Elwood Pentax K-5 4 02-07-2012 09:05 PM
Video with low light on K-r-need help. LightMeter Pentax K-r 4 11-15-2011 03:46 PM
Pentax K-5 low light AF torture test zaiko Pentax K-5 15 07-08-2011 08:30 AM
K5 low light video on youtube FunkyMonk Pentax K-5 16 02-04-2011 07:31 AM
Low-light video dshack Video and Pentax HDSLRs 9 04-13-2010 06:44 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:28 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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