Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-28-2012, 01:41 PM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
The comments on the page seem to affirm that thought.
Yes, they do. I think the K-30 is being assessed fairly accurately by DPR readers.

08-28-2012, 01:47 PM   #17
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,630
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
DPR has just posted their studio samples of the K-30. It looks even stronger than the K-5 to me, and on par with the Canon 5D Mk III (I focused on the RAW samples).

Just Posted: Pentax K-30 studio test shots as part of rolling review: Digital Photography Review

Not only is this a great showing for the K-30, it bodes well for what we may yet have in store before the year's out. Congratulations on a job well done, Pentax!
I get the feeling Pentax has optimized or tweaked the AA filter performance recently. Which will be very good for the K-5 replacement given that RAW files required a bit more coaxing to give-up full detail potential.
08-29-2012, 12:15 AM   #18
Junior Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 34
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
Yes, but JinDesu is correct in that you have to be really careful when looking at DPR's studio shots. On some cameras the focus is slightly more toward the back of the scene, and on others it's more front-focused. This problem is then exacerbated by the fact that cameras have differing effective DOF (e.g. FF vs. APS-C). I'm sure they work hard to keep this to a minimum, but some variance is unavoidable. You need to look hard at the various parts of the scene to determine where the focal point ended up for that particular camera. You'll notice some cameras "excel" at the front part of the scene while others excel toward the back.

This is further complicated by the fact that different lenses are used on each camera, although DPR tries to use quality lenses, such as 50mm primes.


So, practically speaking, JinDesu is nearly correct. Unless you take great pains to make sure you're observing and including all of these factors, your conclusions are likely to be askew.
When I read your post I went back to the sample and I did check the sharpness of the object that are in the back of the scene. You are right, the focus point of K-30 sample seems to be a little in back compared to focus points of the other cameras. it also seem that for the K-30 samples dpreview used lens that has a better corner performance than lenses used on other cameras. Unfortunately, feathers and fuzzy balls are in front part of the scene and I made kind of wrong ascertainment.

Nevertheless, samples at ISO1600 look better anywhere in the scene no matter the place of the focus point. From the commercial point of view Canon 650D was established as a new benchmark for this class of dslr-s and if K-30 performs better in some aspects I am sure that it will gain wider audience, which might lead to a lower price of the K-30 in the future.
08-29-2012, 11:05 AM   #19
CDW
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Big Island, Hawaii & Utah
Posts: 382
Pentax engineers clearly know how to coax the maximum performance out of SONY sensors, even more so than NIKON. The K-30 or K-5 comparisons against Canon, shows that Canon is starting to definitely lag behind in areas of noise and resolution in shadow areas.

08-29-2012, 11:09 AM   #20
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by CDW Quote
Pentax engineers clearly know how to coax the maximum performance out of SONY sensors, even more so than NIKON. The K-30 or K-5 comparisons against Canon, shows that Canon is starting to definitely lag behind in areas of noise and resolution in shadow areas.
That sensor has always lagged behind. They used that sensor in the T2i, T3i, and it's slightly modified for the T4i and the EOS-M.
08-29-2012, 11:20 AM   #21
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 44
But I'm wondering why Pentax have noise reduction on the RAW, thats why are cleaner, but download the RAW's from dpreview, don't go with the side to side charts. And you will see that the raws even with all the NR Off are still reduced and lost sharpness is happening..

Anyone know why Pentax do this ??
08-29-2012, 12:57 PM   #22
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by CyberManiaK Quote
And you will see that the raws even with all the NR Off are still reduced and lost sharpness is happening..
When you say sharpness is lost, compared to what? The JPGs? Other camera's RAW files? There must be something you're qualitatively measuring against.
08-29-2012, 02:24 PM   #23
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 44
QuoteOriginally posted by DSims Quote
When you say sharpness is lost, compared to what? The JPGs? Other camera's RAW files? There must be something you're qualitatively measuring against.
Compared to RAW to RAW ISO:3200 with what I think is the direct contender T4i to bad DPreview want to put it on a superior level because the price certainly is not, but also would be nice to see it on that level because with the dynamic range that it offers, and the price point must score A very great price-value rate..

Here are some crops i made this are default camera values with Luma noise at 0 and sharpen at 0 for color noise I left the default values of 25

I didn't resize the 18mp sensor because as you know there happen some scale and will lead to a sharper pic.

Look at this one, the dime for example and the letters. T4i on the left and K-30 on the right


On this one. check out the number of the day 15, and the day, also on the watch background you can see the artifacts that Noise reduction in camera are prone to produce.
T4i on the Left side, K30 on the right side.



Check out the texts on the batt's T4i on the left and K-30 on the right
[IMG]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8178/7889892774_106f15fb1d_o.jpg[/IMG]

K-30 on the left and T4i on the right check out all the edges on that stamp.


T4i on the left and K-30 on the right again the letters,and see the blurry on the Q , that kind blurry is like the one appears when we use to much NR


And the final part more controversial I may say..

T4i on the left and K-30 on the right check out the thread rolls, ofcourse there are cleaner but the edges are softer and also the thread itself. And look at the bottom text it's completly blurry



Sure, the lens and DoF play a huge part on this.. But the K-30 was tested with the smc PENTAX-D FA 50mm F2.8 MACRO @ F8 and the T4i with EF50mm f/1.4 USM @ F8 But a Macro Lens had always been sharper than a traditional prime lens, so I don't get it..

So.. what could be the reason for this kind of blurry/softness?

08-29-2012, 02:27 PM   #24
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
Macro lenses are good in the short range. Based on the size of the setup, I do not believe this was short range. Most macro lenses are weaker when shooting farther targets.
08-29-2012, 02:43 PM   #25
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 44
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
Macro lenses are good in the short range. Based on the size of the setup, I do not believe this was short range. Most macro lenses are weaker when shooting farther targets.
What ???? That's the reason Macro lenses are not much recommended for Portrait work because they are Sharper and will show every skin blemish and also the slow focus on them.
08-29-2012, 02:49 PM   #26
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
QuoteOriginally posted by CyberManiaK Quote
What ???? That's the reason Macro lenses are not much recommended for Portrait work because they are Sharper and will show every skin blemish and also the slow focus on them.
....so will your average good portrait lens, when stopped down.

Macro lenses are optimized for macro work, and perform less than perfect when shooting longer ranges. Less than perfect on a macro lens might still be fantastic, but it doesn't instantly make it better than your average 50 1.4/1.7 when stopped down on a farther subject.
08-29-2012, 03:05 PM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
....so will your average good portrait lens, when stopped down.

Macro lenses are optimized for macro work, and perform less than perfect when shooting longer ranges. Less than perfect on a macro lens might still be fantastic, but it doesn't instantly make it better than your average 50 1.4/1.7 when stopped down on a farther subject.
Some ~100mm macro lenses I've used are noticeably deficient at portrait ranges and longer - for example, the Vivitar Series 1 105/2.5 Macro I had was outstanding at macro distances but not much good for any other use. The DFA 100 WR macro is a notable exception. It's strong in all areas, including taking good shots at longer distances. So I agree with this principle.


But macros such as the F50/2.8 I have are known to be sharp at portrait distances - perhaps the DFA 50 is too (but I've not used one before).


In any case, DPR used to use a different 50 (FA50/1.4, I believe), but many Pentaxians complained that Pentax had sharper lenses, so they changed. It seems to me they should use the FA43 or DA*55, but I've obviously not had a chance to compare them directly. It may be that the DFA 50 is still the sharpest at around f/8, and it still has better color than the Canon does, IMO. But the FA43 would give the best color - just not sure about the sharpness in the most minute details as we're looking at here. In practice, I say that if my photos look sharp on my monitor at 50% size, they're sharp enough.

Last edited by DSims; 08-29-2012 at 03:10 PM.
08-29-2012, 03:23 PM   #28
Junior Member




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 44
Ok lets leave the sharpness of macro lenses for another thread, here we can talk of what was used.. well if the FA 50mm F2.8 MACRO is well known to be a very sharp lens SMC Pentax-D FA 50mm F2.8 Macro Reviews - D FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Why is there a noticeable blurry/softness ? This lead me to believe that Pentax is using NR even for the raw files .. What do you guys think ?
08-29-2012, 03:28 PM   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by CyberManiaK Quote
T4i on the left and K-30 on the right again the letters,and see the blurry on the Q , that kind blurry is like the one appears when we use to much NR
In a very rough evaluation, I'd say Canon wins the first two, the middle one is a draw (better sharpness on Canon, but not so sure about the colors), and the last two are a win for the Pentax. In particular, the Q and the whole playing card, as well as the more 3D-looking bottle, are just better on the K-30.


It's clear - both from your processed examples and the ones on the DPR site - that the K-30 is back-focusing on or around the playing card. Thus the Canon is clearly sharper on the foreground elements, and clearly less sharp than the K-30 on the few background objects. There may be a little loss due to some form of RAW NR, but focus is the primary problem here, I think. And the Pentax clearly wins on the noise issue.
08-29-2012, 03:59 PM   #30
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Jakarta
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 96
I always liked technical comparison, and whenever some new raw samples come up in DPR I downdloaded them and starts tinkering.

For the K-30 I wanted to know how good the sensor is at ISO 6400 (I own a K-x and many times found situations where I need 6400). So I downloaded some raws at that ISO run it through Darktable (one of the best Raw workflow programs available) on very basic AMAZE demosaicing algorithm. No PP whatsoever, not even base curve. So I think this is as pure as I can get.



As we can see the 650D's (Left side) has sharper globe while the K-30's is has sharper "KODAK G". So it seems the sharpness issue is due to different focusing plane between the two cameras. So overall, at high ISO the K-30 has truly less noise than the competition. RAW NR is evident, of course, but it only improves on the final picture. What I find a little strange is how much less saturated the colors are on the K-30 right out of demaosaicing.
Attached Images
 
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!
k-30, k-50, pentax, pentax k30, pentax k50, review, samples, studio
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
how an ad posted? loeil64 General Talk 3 04-02-2012 07:35 AM
Member for a while just never posted chepburn Welcomes and Introductions 2 11-14-2011 01:34 PM
Just posted at DPR lammie200 Pentax K-5 5 10-04-2011 02:50 PM
People Why I haven't posted much Andi Lo Post Your Photos! 13 06-06-2011 01:12 PM
Misc first shots posted here stlind Photo Critique 2 09-26-2010 05:57 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:02 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