Has anyone used their Pentax K-5 for concerts?

Anvh · 12-04-2012, 12:39 PM

But you're saying higher ISO's now and those are vey valid.
When you're using ISO 2000 like what you said then you're missing out sadly.

I still need to look into it but some say that ISO above 1600 are gained by the firmware and not the hardware, if that's true then in theory you can use ISO 1600, push it to ISO 6400 with lightroom and get the same result as shooting with ISO 6400

snake · 12-04-2012, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

But you're saying higher ISO's now and those are vey valid.
When you're using ISO 2000 like what you said then you're missing out sadly.

I still need to look into it but some say that ISO above 1600 are gained by the firmware and not the hardware, if that's true then in theory you can use ISO 1600, push it to ISO 6400 with lightroom and get the same result as shooting with ISO 6400

Underexpose by a corresponding number of stops, then raise by those number of stops in PP and see what you come up with.

Anvh · 12-04-2012, 02:58 PM

It's not a hard test to do but i don't have the time sadly this month.

rawr · 12-04-2012, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

When you're using ISO 2000 like what you said then you're missing out sadly.

But as John said, raising the ISO in the shoot will let you hold a higher shutter speed, thus avoiding blur, or getting an effect you want.

Any IQ trade off with high-ISO may be worth it, especially since you can't fix motion blur in post, but you can do a pretty good job fixing noise in post.

So it's not worth limiting the K-5 to 1600 ISO when shooting gigs, IMHO. At 1600 ISO, K-5 SNR is 29.1dB, and SNR falls quite slowly to 24.5db at 6400 ISO.

K-5 (and K-x) high ISO IQ does degrade, but doesn't fall off a cliff past 1600 ISO.

Name: snr-kx-k5.gif
Views: 442
Size: 11.2 KB

Name: snr-kx-k5.gif
Views: 442
Size: 11.2 KB

Last edited by rawr; 12-04-2012 at 03:23 PM.

john5100 · 12-04-2012, 03:29 PM

Sometimes motion blur is a good thing. I played with it here and I think it worked but I wouldn't want it all of the time. I was going for a pseudo film look.

Anvh · 12-04-2012, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by rawr

But as John said, raising the ISO in the shoot will let you hold a higher shutter speed, thus avoiding blur, or getting an effect you want.

Sure where did i said that was a problem?

John said he used ISO2000 and for that value it's a different matter.

Why go there with the denoise while you can use ISO1600 without denoise, the differnce in exposure is too small to effect the shutter blur if so then under expose the ISO1600 shot a tad.

Also if all ISO's above 1600 are trully ISO1600 photos pushed by the firmware then the answer to your motion blur is to use ISO1600 and simply underexpose and fix the exposure in post.

rawr · 12-04-2012, 04:05 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

Also if all ISO's above 1600 are trully ISO1600 photos pushed by the firmware then the answer to your motion blur is to use ISO1600 and simply underexpose and fix the exposure in post.

Meh. Why not just let the camera do it's job?
For the K200D that approach makes sense, but not the K-5.

Anvh · 12-04-2012, 05:09 PM

Because the K5 actually not just push the image but it also denoise them, that's a no for RAW files if you ask me...
And so if you can get more out if it if you process at home then thats worth it maybe.
It will have a bigger effect then having an AA filter or not.......

rawr · 12-04-2012, 07:13 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

the K5 actually not just push the image but it also denoise them... that's a no for RAW files if you ask me

Any effect of 'forced NR in RAW' is extremely subtle, and the whole issue should be of little concern to anyone worried about maintaining the [imaginary] integrity of their RAWs. K-5 high-ISOs still have enough noise in them, that's for sure, especially past ISO 5000 or so and in dim light. It's not like Lightroom's NR sliders have no job anymore due to the 'inbuilt denoise' in K-5 RAW files!

mikeSF · 12-04-2012, 07:30 PM - **1 Like**

I do concerts with my K5. A few of these may be K20D, but you get the idea.

Mike Oria Photography | Concert Photography

john5100 · 12-05-2012, 09:26 AM

Really beautiful work Mike!

Into The Lens · 12-05-2012, 11:00 AM

I don't know if it's the same for you folks, but at most venues where I shoot concerts (mainly little clubs and bars), I sometimes end up not looking at my meter all that much. Once my aperture, speed and ISO are set, I generally stay within the same range and meter once in a while from looking at some of my shots in the view finder. I spot meter and use auto WB when the show starts and leave it at that. I would never have done this with film but with DSLRs and the better dynamic range it's possible. I really love the K-5. I think I'm in love, I dunno. I might have to see a professional about that.

mikeSF · 12-05-2012, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by john5100

Really beautiful work Mike!

thanks!

mikeSF · 12-05-2012, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by Into The Lens

I don't know if it's the same for you folks, but at most venues where I shoot concerts (mainly little clubs and bars), I sometimes end up not looking at my meter all that much. Once my aperture, speed and ISO are set, I generally stay within the same range and meter once in a while from looking at some of my shots in the view finder. I spot meter and use auto WB when the show starts and leave it at that. I would never have done this with film but with DSLRs and the better dynamic range it's possible. I really love the K-5. I think I'm in love, I dunno. I might have to see a professional about that.

good advice. Unless the spots are moving or other lights changing intensity, i do the same. Just to protect the odd hot spot, i tend to shoot with a little bit of negative EV compensation and bring things up in post. Marc Sabatella turned me onto a great trick for concerts of underexposing in order to get a faster shutter to counter motion blur (in flash-less photography); as a result, in dark venues, i expose to the left as a rule, then pump up exposure as much as a couple of stops in post. The sensor on the K5 really allows this with minimal noise.

Into The Lens · 12-05-2012, 12:47 PM

Originally posted by mikeSF

good advice. Unless the spots are moving or other lights changing intensity, i do the same. Just to protect the odd hot spot, i tend to shoot with a little bit of negative EV compensation and bring things up in post. Marc Sabatella turned me onto a great trick for concerts of underexposing in order to get a faster shutter to counter motion blur (in flash-less photography); as a result, in dark venues, i expose to the left as a rule, then pump up exposure as much as a couple of stops in post. The sensor on the K5 really allows this with minimal noise.

BTW, in my previous post, I meant in Live View, not view finder. (sorry for the confusion)

So, technically speaking, do you spot meter on faces, check a few shots in live view to see what they look like, then bring down the EV Compensation to -1 or -2? Is that how you'd do it?

Just one thing I need to understand here is, when people say underexpose 1 to 2 stops (negative EV compensation), does this mean bringing down the EV to -1 or -2 or 1/3 = 1 stop. I don't use the EV compensation since like I said I usually look at a few shots on the live view screen to see how they turn out to help me set things up. So if I'd compensate to -2 EV and meter to the center of the meter and take a shot, I guess it would show underexposed in Live View, right? Since I would rely on the Live View screen to "meter" my shots it wouldn't be possible to "negative EV compensate" in my case! I'll try this approach next time I shoot. I can see how I could shoot at higher speeds using this trick now. Very interesting.

Oh and BTW, great shots indeed Mike. And thanks for your help too.

12-04-2012, 03:17 PM	#49
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Anvh When you're using ISO 2000 like what you said then you're missing out sadly. But as John said, raising the ISO in the shoot will let you hold a higher shutter speed, thus avoiding blur, or getting an effect you want. Any IQ trade off with high-ISO may be worth it, especially since you can't fix motion blur in post, but you can do a pretty good job fixing noise in post. So it's not worth limiting the K-5 to 1600 ISO when shooting gigs, IMHO. At 1600 ISO, K-5 SNR is 29.1dB, and SNR falls quite slowly to 24.5db at 6400 ISO. K-5 (and K-x) high ISO IQ does degrade, but doesn't fall off a cliff past 1600 ISO. Last edited by rawr; 12-04-2012 at 03:23 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Has anyone used the O-GPS1 for nightsky photography?	CDW	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	4	11-17-2011 03:15 AM
Anyone buy their K-5 from ajrichard.com?	Designosophy	General Talk	14	09-23-2011 10:11 AM
has anyone used this hood for DA 35mm f2.4?	sany	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	05-27-2011 05:20 PM
Has anyone used their DSLR w/ macro to capture a 35mm negative?	geekette	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	22	05-02-2011 06:28 PM
Has anyone used a stabilized Sigma lens with their Pentax yet?	ftpaddict	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	09-06-2009 12:43 PM

12-04-2012, 12:39 PM	#46
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	But you're saying higher ISO's now and those are vey valid. When you're using ISO 2000 like what you said then you're missing out sadly. I still need to look into it but some say that ISO above 1600 are gained by the firmware and not the hardware, if that's true then in theory you can use ISO 1600, push it to ISO 6400 with lightroom and get the same result as shooting with ISO 6400

12-04-2012, 01:25 PM	#47
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183	Originally posted by Anvh But you're saying higher ISO's now and those are vey valid. When you're using ISO 2000 like what you said then you're missing out sadly. I still need to look into it but some say that ISO above 1600 are gained by the firmware and not the hardware, if that's true then in theory you can use ISO 1600, push it to ISO 6400 with lightroom and get the same result as shooting with ISO 6400 Underexpose by a corresponding number of stops, then raise by those number of stops in PP and see what you come up with.

12-04-2012, 02:58 PM	#48
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	It's not a hard test to do but i don't have the time sadly this month.

12-04-2012, 03:29 PM	#50
john5100 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,725	Sometimes motion blur is a good thing. I played with it here and I think it worked but I wouldn't want it all of the time. I was going for a pseudo film look.

12-04-2012, 03:51 PM	#51
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by rawr But as John said, raising the ISO in the shoot will let you hold a higher shutter speed, thus avoiding blur, or getting an effect you want. Sure where did i said that was a problem? John said he used ISO2000 and for that value it's a different matter. Why go there with the denoise while you can use ISO1600 without denoise, the differnce in exposure is too small to effect the shutter blur if so then under expose the ISO1600 shot a tad. Also if all ISO's above 1600 are trully ISO1600 photos pushed by the firmware then the answer to your motion blur is to use ISO1600 and simply underexpose and fix the exposure in post.

12-04-2012, 04:05 PM	#52
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Anvh Also if all ISO's above 1600 are trully ISO1600 photos pushed by the firmware then the answer to your motion blur is to use ISO1600 and simply underexpose and fix the exposure in post. Meh. Why not just let the camera do it's job? For the K200D that approach makes sense, but not the K-5.

12-04-2012, 05:09 PM	#53
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Because the K5 actually not just push the image but it also denoise them, that's a no for RAW files if you ask me... And so if you can get more out if it if you process at home then thats worth it maybe. It will have a bigger effect then having an AA filter or not.......

12-04-2012, 07:13 PM	#54
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Anvh the K5 actually not just push the image but it also denoise them... that's a no for RAW files if you ask me Any effect of 'forced NR in RAW' is extremely subtle, and the whole issue should be of little concern to anyone worried about maintaining the [imaginary] integrity of their RAWs. K-5 high-ISOs still have enough noise in them, that's for sure, especially past ISO 5000 or so and in dim light. It's not like Lightroom's NR sliders have no job anymore due to the 'inbuilt denoise' in K-5 RAW files!

12-04-2012, 07:30 PM - 1 Like	#55
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	I do concerts with my K5. A few of these may be K20D, but you get the idea. Mike Oria Photography \| Concert Photography

12-05-2012, 09:26 AM	#56
john5100 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,725	Really beautiful work Mike!

12-05-2012, 11:00 AM	#57
Into The Lens Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Between clever and stupid Photos: Albums Posts: 216	I don't know if it's the same for you folks, but at most venues where I shoot concerts (mainly little clubs and bars), I sometimes end up not looking at my meter all that much. Once my aperture, speed and ISO are set, I generally stay within the same range and meter once in a while from looking at some of my shots in the view finder. I spot meter and use auto WB when the show starts and leave it at that. I would never have done this with film but with DSLRs and the better dynamic range it's possible. I really love the K-5. I think I'm in love, I dunno. I might have to see a professional about that.

12-05-2012, 11:56 AM	#58
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	Originally posted by john5100 Really beautiful work Mike! thanks!

12-05-2012, 11:59 AM	#59
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,620	Originally posted by Into The Lens I don't know if it's the same for you folks, but at most venues where I shoot concerts (mainly little clubs and bars), I sometimes end up not looking at my meter all that much. Once my aperture, speed and ISO are set, I generally stay within the same range and meter once in a while from looking at some of my shots in the view finder. I spot meter and use auto WB when the show starts and leave it at that. I would never have done this with film but with DSLRs and the better dynamic range it's possible. I really love the K-5. I think I'm in love, I dunno. I might have to see a professional about that. good advice. Unless the spots are moving or other lights changing intensity, i do the same. Just to protect the odd hot spot, i tend to shoot with a little bit of negative EV compensation and bring things up in post. Marc Sabatella turned me onto a great trick for concerts of underexposing in order to get a faster shutter to counter motion blur (in flash-less photography); as a result, in dark venues, i expose to the left as a rule, then pump up exposure as much as a couple of stops in post. The sensor on the K5 really allows this with minimal noise.

12-05-2012, 12:47 PM	#60
Into The Lens Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Between clever and stupid Photos: Albums Posts: 216	Originally posted by mikeSF good advice. Unless the spots are moving or other lights changing intensity, i do the same. Just to protect the odd hot spot, i tend to shoot with a little bit of negative EV compensation and bring things up in post. Marc Sabatella turned me onto a great trick for concerts of underexposing in order to get a faster shutter to counter motion blur (in flash-less photography); as a result, in dark venues, i expose to the left as a rule, then pump up exposure as much as a couple of stops in post. The sensor on the K5 really allows this with minimal noise. BTW, in my previous post, I meant in Live View, not view finder. (sorry for the confusion) So, technically speaking, do you spot meter on faces, check a few shots in live view to see what they look like, then bring down the EV Compensation to -1 or -2? Is that how you'd do it? Just one thing I need to understand here is, when people say underexpose 1 to 2 stops (negative EV compensation), does this mean bringing down the EV to -1 or -2 or 1/3 = 1 stop. I don't use the EV compensation since like I said I usually look at a few shots on the live view screen to see how they turn out to help me set things up. So if I'd compensate to -2 EV and meter to the center of the meter and take a shot, I guess it would show underexposed in Live View, right? Since I would rely on the Live View screen to "meter" my shots it wouldn't be possible to "negative EV compensate" in my case! I'll try this approach next time I shoot. I can see how I could shoot at higher speeds using this trick now. Very interesting. Oh and BTW, great shots indeed Mike. And thanks for your help too.