Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-29-2012, 07:48 PM   #1
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,224
Q10 vs Q part 2 higher iso. Comparision images

Q 1st followed by Q10. Noise reduction set to lowest setting. Photoshop Elements 8 was used to convert DNGs. Only resized and converted to jpeg- no image manipulation. Handheld with SR on.
thanks
barondla

"Statue" f2 1/25 iso400
"Statue With Roses" f1.9 1/200 iso1600.

Expect to have more fun tomorrow.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q  Photo 
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX Q10  Photo 
10-29-2012, 08:57 PM   #2
Veteran Member
wanderography's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Hayward, California, USA
Posts: 567
once again they look the same to me, but I asked the speed question in the other post, for this post I'm going to ask which one do you prefer shooting? And do you feel it's worth the upgrade?
10-29-2012, 09:31 PM   #3
Pentaxian
Greyser's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Los Angeles, California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,072
I just posted some could be interesting Q info in Part 1. However, it might be irrelevant, if you shoot RAW.
10-29-2012, 11:02 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
Hi barondla,

Thanks for posting this.

The Q 10 appeared to meter slightly to the right in the second shot and has a noticeably redder cast in both. Noise seems about the same for both, even tho the Q10 exposed slightly more to the right (hard to tell with this much downsizing). The faster processing/write speed is nice. . . good to see that P/R is making gains in this regard.

Scott

10-29-2012, 11:39 PM   #5
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 41
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Expect to have more fun tomorrow.
If possible, could you find a way to make a quick movie and verify stereo v.s. mono recording?
10-30-2012, 12:44 AM   #6
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 41
Also interested in a comparison of sensor bloom, the purple flare which occurs when the sun is in the image.

Likewise, the purple fringes which show up around hard edges such as back-lit twigs or shining chrome.
10-30-2012, 01:04 AM   #7
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,325
Wait, do you guys really not see a difference? To me the Q10 images appear to have more detail? (or rather, less detail lost to noise)
Maybe I'm just seeing things
10-30-2012, 01:22 AM   #8
Veteran Member
wanderography's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Hayward, California, USA
Posts: 567
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Wait, do you guys really not see a difference? To me the Q10 images appear to have more detail? (or rather, less detail lost to noise.
Maybe I'm just seeing things
Actually now that I'm on my girls retina display iPad i see a bump in contrast on the q10 taking away from the detail a slight bit...

10-30-2012, 06:10 AM   #9
Veteran Member
NickLarsson's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,390
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Wait, do you guys really not see a difference? To me the Q10 images appear to have more detail? (or rather, less detail lost to noise)
Maybe I'm just seeing things
Yes I have the same impression for the first shot, but to me it's less noticeable on the second shot.
10-30-2012, 05:45 PM   #10
Pentaxian
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,439
I also think that the Q10 looks sharper, in both pics both tests. I looks like the edges and details have less bloom to them, almost like different levels of sharpening. My guess is that the Q10 got a faster processor so that they can use slightly more advanced algorithm. I'm still happy with choosing the old one.
10-30-2012, 06:40 PM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 186
Thanks for testing!

I think you said you shot these RAW and then processed in Lightroom, and not in camera? Does it have a profile for the Q10 yet? If not, you may not see the best from that sensor yet.

I'm using tapatalk and the files are hopelessly low res. next time I'm on a laptop I'll download and view from the forum website. Can't wait to check 'me out!

What were your impressions of the body? Better or worse than expected when holding it in person? After the little jewel that is the magnesium Q I worry I'd be disappointed with a plastic body. I don't own any plastic cameras :/
10-30-2012, 07:37 PM   #12
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,224
Original Poster
I converted them in Photoshop Elements 8. I prefer Silkypix for coversion. Will borrow the new one from the store and compare. Didn't think about converting in camera- though I have done it with other Pentax cams.

Body isn't bad as I feared. It is still a little brick though the surface has a little give vs the mag. The two doors are the least appealing part. They are fine as long as they are closed. Will try to write a mini post on the body soon.
thanks
barondla
10-31-2012, 03:50 AM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 186
Great, I'd love to hear your impressions. If you get over there again, try to grab a few converted in camera (shoot RAW+). It will be interesting to deconstruct all that has changed in the Q10 as time goes on; my suspicion is the sensor is slightly better but not a revelation, per se, and that most of the differences amount to noise processing and base color profile differences. I'd imagine that setup optimally, the Q and Q10 images will look nearly identical.

I'm hopeful that the relative lack of detail you noted is down to the new noise processing algorithm; as you recall I found similar results with the new Q firmware. Hopefully this isn't a AA filter change. As I recall, the Q has no AA filter, which is likely both responsible for the excellent pixel-level detail compared to other 1/2.3" sensors, as well as partially responsible for poor battery life, as lots of processing must be brought to bear to resolve moire and other issues with no AA filter.
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, mirrorless, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Q10 arrives. Q10 vs Q comparison images. barondla Pentax Q 6 10-29-2012 09:58 PM
k-5 and k-r ISO noise higher than 3200? metungnasi Pentax K-5 14 12-11-2010 11:57 AM
Vertical patterning in K-7 higher ISO bkpix Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 08-25-2010 04:16 PM
K20D at higher ISO robbiec Pentax DSLR Discussion 16 10-26-2009 09:07 PM
Pushing film vs higher ISO Wombat Pentax Film SLR Discussion 9 10-25-2008 05:27 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:02 AM. | 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