The Pentax K-r has arrived!!!

audiobomber · 10-13-2010, 11:54 AM

Originally posted by creampuff

Noise comparison at 100% crop. Default camera settings, no pp or noise reduction done.

I assume you mean no additional noise reduction done, over and above the default NR setting? The K-x was factory set for Medium NR, starting at 800 ISO. If found that to be excessive. Any idea on the K-r's NR defaults?

Last edited by audiobomber; 10-13-2010 at 12:12 PM.

Adam · 10-13-2010, 12:03 PM

Five bucks says this will be the forum's "thread of the day"

tuco · 10-13-2010, 12:10 PM

Originally posted by creampuff

Noise comparison at 100% crop. Default camera settings, no pp or noise reduction done. Click image for larger size.
Please note the images were shot handheld, so the focus and alignment might be a little off but the difference in noise/grain is visible.

You said no need for a FF camera. But at 1600 we see noise. Some FF out there show no noise at 1600. But this is great and glad to see it.

taiweitai · 10-13-2010, 12:12 PM

Originally posted by Adam

Five bucks says this will be the forum's "thread of the day"

I wish to put $10 !

The ISO performance is just solid !

I am surprised that it comes with the matching color kit lens, aren't it supposed to be black just like the K-x?

BethC · 10-13-2010, 12:16 PM

Wow! Looks great at high ISO! Can't wait to see the K-5 shots!

Recercare · 10-13-2010, 12:24 PM

Judging from the pics in this thread it seems like the K-r is fantastic up to ISO 5000. At ISO 6400 - ISO 8000 the noise is visible but should be no problem with NR-software. Anything above ISO 8000 is really of no importance to me as I will never use it.....but it seems like even ISO 16000 is perfectly usable.

I am very very impressed.

Kind regards
.lars

**jpzk** · 10-13-2010, 12:24 PM

Creampuff ... Congrats on your presentation(s)! A job very well done ...

This is a very surprising and pleasant aspect of what the "little" K-r does at high ISO, something I long for in replacement of my K7. Not saying that the K7 isn't an able machine, to the contrary.

I noticed that you said ... "... wait for the K5 ..."; do you expect better ISO handling with the K5? I'd be very surprised if it can actually better the K-r in that department. We shall soon see when you've some pics taken with the K5.
Will you be able to make comparisons, side by side pics?

You also mentioned that the K-r AF was able to lock fast on a subject ... have you tried a couple of shots with moving subjects: people, cars ... ?

All those questions for one big reason: will I "upgrade" from a K7 to a K5 or to a K-r?!!

If the tests show that the K-r will perform as well as the K5 in "all departments", what's the use to get the K5 now?
Wouldn't that be a Pentax suicide to have the "little brother" perform as well as "Big Brother" ?

I realize that you cannot answer all of those questions with simple tests but at least I now have a darn good idea of what this camera (K-r) can do!!

Cheers!

JP

Last edited by jpzk; 10-13-2010 at 12:25 PM. Reason: spelling

deadwolfbones · 10-13-2010, 12:29 PM

Originally posted by tuco

You said no need for a FF camera. But at 1600 we see noise. Some FF out there show no noise at 1600. But this is great and glad to see it.

Care to point me to one? My D700 certainly does.

**jpzk** · 10-13-2010, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by deadwolfbones

Care to point me to one? My D700 certainly does.

I don't own a FF camera but, is that a fact that the D700 does show noise at ISO 1600?
I though for sure such a FF would not show much noise at all at that level ... just curious because I know nothing about full frame DSLR's.

Cheers.

JP

quarc · 10-13-2010, 12:46 PM

That pink colour is truly ugly; I really want one. God how many people would be provoced by that. I guess those extreme colours will not be available in Sweden, and I am waiting for my K-5, but if I run into something colourful like that at the right price I will be tempted :-)

pcarfan · 10-13-2010, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by frank

Here are a few sample photos converted from RAW, no other post processing done:

All taken by K-r and a DA35 macro.

Frank that iso 3200 shot is unbelievable, wow!...thanks for sharing.

Extremely looking forward to your report on the K-5.

P.S: Sorry about your experience with Pentax service.

**Ash** · 10-13-2010, 01:00 PM

Thanks for all this work creampuff. You've shown without doubt that this camera is a considerable advancement in high ISO results. ISO 3200 is acceptable at 100%! I couldn't get those results at ISO 1600 on my K20D.

Your synopsis on the K-r performance is very helpful. Thanks again mate.
Look forward to hearing about the K-5.

deadwolfbones · 10-13-2010, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by jpzk

I don't own a FF camera but, is that a fact that the D700 does show noise at ISO 1600?
I though for sure such a FF would not show much noise at all at that level ... just curious because I know nothing about full frame DSLR's.

Cheers.

JP

Sure it shows it. When I'm not slammed at work I'll find an example.

paperbag846 · 10-13-2010, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by wlachan

iso3200 looks too good to be true, my K-m is usable up to iso800 only. Now I hope K-5 won't be any inferior like the K-7 to the K-x (but somehow I think it will). :ugh:

The K-7 has superior IQ in well lit, iso 100 situations. The k-X pulls ahead in the high-iso department, but loses in the colour richness/fidelity and shadow detail department in my opinion.

I think the K-X made it EASIER to get something which looks good, which should be of prime importance for an entry level camera. The K-7 uses a sensor that really requires you to know what you are doing (and shoot in RAW) to take advantage of.

paperbag846 · 10-13-2010, 01:39 PM

Originally posted by tuco

You said no need for a FF camera. But at 1600 we see noise. Some FF out there show no noise at 1600. But this is great and glad to see it.

My god...

Yes, a 3000-5000 dollar body will out preform an 800 dollar body.

At the rate that this technology is advancing, though, the NEED to full frame is disappearing quickly. Realistically, it is absurd to claim that you need a noise-free image at ISO 1600 to get something worth looking at. The k20d is not at all great at high ISO compared to this K-R, and you can pull things out of it like this:

Name: PBAG0462.jpg
Views: 3381
Size: 90.7 KB

Name: PBAG0462.jpg
Views: 3381
Size: 90.7 KB

So is there a need for full frame, or simply a desire for the most impressive specifications in the room? Sure, there is nothing wrong with that, but don't derail a conversation about a very capable entry-level DSLR by blathering about some full frame "noiseless" wonder camera. The fact is, every year these cameras will get better in low light, and full frame will remain a luxury that only the most demanding professionals would ever "need".

10-13-2010, 12:03 PM	#62
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,608	Five bucks says this will be the forum's "thread of the day" Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

10-13-2010, 01:39 PM	#75
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by tuco You said no need for a FF camera. But at 1600 we see noise. Some FF out there show no noise at 1600. But this is great and glad to see it. My god... Yes, a 3000-5000 dollar body will out preform an 800 dollar body. At the rate that this technology is advancing, though, the NEED to full frame is disappearing quickly. Realistically, it is absurd to claim that you need a noise-free image at ISO 1600 to get something worth looking at. The k20d is not at all great at high ISO compared to this K-R, and you can pull things out of it like this: So is there a need for full frame, or simply a desire for the most impressive specifications in the room? Sure, there is nothing wrong with that, but don't derail a conversation about a very capable entry-level DSLR by blathering about some full frame "noiseless" wonder camera. The fact is, every year these cameras will get better in low light, and full frame will remain a luxury that only the most demanding professionals would ever "need".

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Macro My Pentax 100mm 2.8 SMC Marco lens just arrived!	entropy.uk	Post Your Photos!	2	09-14-2010 10:25 AM
The Pentax K-7: The era of in-camera High Dynamic Range Imaging has arrived!	HermanLee	Pentax News and Rumors	2	05-20-2009 10:40 PM
My Pentax kit has arrived!	Henrik Kristensen	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	32	05-18-2008 11:32 PM
Pentax K10D arrived - First Pic	Timbuctoo	Post Your Photos!	7	11-09-2007 01:03 PM
My 77 Ltd. Has Arrived!	balofagus	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	02-09-2007 09:59 PM

10-13-2010, 11:54 AM	#61
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by creampuff Noise comparison at 100% crop. Default camera settings, no pp or noise reduction done. I assume you mean no additional noise reduction done, over and above the default NR setting? The K-x was factory set for Medium NR, starting at 800 ISO. If found that to be excessive. Any idea on the K-r's NR defaults? Last edited by audiobomber; 10-13-2010 at 12:12 PM.

10-13-2010, 12:10 PM	#63
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,030	Originally posted by creampuff Noise comparison at 100% crop. Default camera settings, no pp or noise reduction done. Click image for larger size. Please note the images were shot handheld, so the focus and alignment might be a little off but the difference in noise/grain is visible. You said no need for a FF camera. But at 1600 we see noise. Some FF out there show no noise at 1600. But this is great and glad to see it.

10-13-2010, 12:12 PM	#64
taiweitai Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: HI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 168	Originally posted by Adam Five bucks says this will be the forum's "thread of the day" I wish to put $10 ! The ISO performance is just solid ! I am surprised that it comes with the matching color kit lens, aren't it supposed to be black just like the K-x?

10-13-2010, 12:16 PM	#65
BethC Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Pennsylvannia Photos: Albums Posts: 377	Wow! Looks great at high ISO! Can't wait to see the K-5 shots!

10-13-2010, 12:24 PM	#66
Recercare Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Sweden Posts: 359	Judging from the pics in this thread it seems like the K-r is fantastic up to ISO 5000. At ISO 6400 - ISO 8000 the noise is visible but should be no problem with NR-software. Anything above ISO 8000 is really of no importance to me as I will never use it.....but it seems like even ISO 16000 is perfectly usable. I am very very impressed. Kind regards .lars

10-13-2010, 12:24 PM	#67
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	Creampuff ... Congrats on your presentation(s)! A job very well done ... This is a very surprising and pleasant aspect of what the "little" K-r does at high ISO, something I long for in replacement of my K7. Not saying that the K7 isn't an able machine, to the contrary. I noticed that you said ... "... wait for the K5 ..."; do you expect better ISO handling with the K5? I'd be very surprised if it can actually better the K-r in that department. We shall soon see when you've some pics taken with the K5. Will you be able to make comparisons, side by side pics? You also mentioned that the K-r AF was able to lock fast on a subject ... have you tried a couple of shots with moving subjects: people, cars ... ? All those questions for one big reason: will I "upgrade" from a K7 to a K5 or to a K-r?!! If the tests show that the K-r will perform as well as the K5 in "all departments", what's the use to get the K5 now? Wouldn't that be a Pentax suicide to have the "little brother" perform as well as "Big Brother" ? I realize that you cannot answer all of those questions with simple tests but at least I now have a darn good idea of what this camera (K-r) can do!! Cheers! JP Last edited by jpzk; 10-13-2010 at 12:25 PM. Reason: spelling

10-13-2010, 12:29 PM	#68
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Santa Fe, NM Posts: 7,451	Originally posted by tuco You said no need for a FF camera. But at 1600 we see noise. Some FF out there show no noise at 1600. But this is great and glad to see it. Care to point me to one? My D700 certainly does.

10-13-2010, 12:40 PM	#69
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	Originally posted by deadwolfbones Care to point me to one? My D700 certainly does. I don't own a FF camera but, is that a fact that the D700 does show noise at ISO 1600? I though for sure such a FF would not show much noise at all at that level ... just curious because I know nothing about full frame DSLR's. Cheers. JP

10-13-2010, 12:46 PM	#70
quarc Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 182	That pink colour is truly ugly; I really want one. God how many people would be provoced by that. I guess those extreme colours will not be available in Sweden, and I am waiting for my K-5, but if I run into something colourful like that at the right price I will be tempted :-)

10-13-2010, 12:53 PM	#71
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	Originally posted by frank Here are a few sample photos converted from RAW, no other post processing done: All taken by K-r and a DA35 macro. Frank that iso 3200 shot is unbelievable, wow!...thanks for sharing. Extremely looking forward to your report on the K-5. P.S: Sorry about your experience with Pentax service.

10-13-2010, 01:00 PM	#72
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Thanks for all this work creampuff. You've shown without doubt that this camera is a considerable advancement in high ISO results. ISO 3200 is acceptable at 100%! I couldn't get those results at ISO 1600 on my K20D. Your synopsis on the K-r performance is very helpful. Thanks again mate. Look forward to hearing about the K-5.

10-13-2010, 01:16 PM	#73
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Santa Fe, NM Posts: 7,451	Originally posted by jpzk I don't own a FF camera but, is that a fact that the D700 does show noise at ISO 1600? I though for sure such a FF would not show much noise at all at that level ... just curious because I know nothing about full frame DSLR's. Cheers. JP Sure it shows it. When I'm not slammed at work I'll find an example.

10-13-2010, 01:31 PM	#74
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by wlachan iso3200 looks too good to be true, my K-m is usable up to iso800 only. Now I hope K-5 won't be any inferior like the K-7 to the K-x (but somehow I think it will). :ugh: The K-7 has superior IQ in well lit, iso 100 situations. The k-X pulls ahead in the high-iso department, but loses in the colour richness/fidelity and shadow detail department in my opinion. I think the K-X made it EASIER to get something which looks good, which should be of prime importance for an entry level camera. The K-7 uses a sensor that really requires you to know what you are doing (and shoot in RAW) to take advantage of.