Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-17-2013, 12:13 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 698
Over ISO 12800 or thereabouts (possibly even earlier) any further increase in ISO can be achieved equally well by simply boosting the brightness in PP and is most probably what the camera is actually doing. In other words the output of the sensor is the same when iso is set to 12800 or 51200, but for the latter the processor just multiplies the digital light values of each pixel by 4.

Regardless, I still stand by what I said in terms of the K-50 being a better choice for various reasons.


@IchabodCrane, I don't quite agree though that IQ is useless above 25,600 - it depends on what you need and what choices you have. Sometimes a grainy image is preferable to a blurred one, or none at all. That the image quality will be poor I of course fully agree but on its necessarily being useless that's another matter.

The purpose of a photograph is not always to look pretty and even when it is there are cases where the grain is actually desirable, even if digital grain is not nearly as good looking as film grain.
Take for instance this picture of my great great grandfather's cat.



- well not quite, that cordless vacuum in the background sort of gives it away.

( K3 ISO 51,200 1/250s F11 indoor with dim fluorescent light )

12-17-2013, 08:52 PM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by lister6520 Quote
Over ISO 12800 or thereabouts (possibly even earlier) any further increase in ISO can be achieved equally well by simply boosting the brightness in PP and is most probably what the camera is actually doing. In other words the output of the sensor is the same when iso is set to 12800 or 51200, but for the latter the processor just multiplies the digital light values of each pixel by 4.

Regardless, I still stand by what I said in terms of the K-50 being a better choice for various reasons.


@IchabodCrane, I don't quite agree though that IQ is useless above 25,600 - it depends on what you need and what choices you have. Sometimes a grainy image is preferable to a blurred one, or none at all. That the image quality will be poor I of course fully agree but on its necessarily being useless that's another matter.

The purpose of a photograph is not always to look pretty and even when it is there are cases where the grain is actually desirable, even if digital grain is not nearly as good looking as film grain.
Take for instance this picture of my great great grandfather's cat.



- well not quite, that cordless vacuum in the background sort of gives it away.

( K3 ISO 51,200 1/250s F11 indoor with dim fluorescent light )
Entertaining shot of the cat! Maybe "useless" was the wrong word but I think of it in terms like you already explained. If you really need a shot at ISO 52,600, all you have to do is shoot at half the ISO and boost it one stop in PP. The results won't be any tangibly worse or even different than at 52,600 for the reason you outlined. Did I make more sense this time?
12-18-2013, 10:42 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 698
Yep, I think we're in sync.
12-20-2013, 02:38 PM   #19
Pentaxian
seventysixersfan's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 1,709
Original Poster
well, so much for patiently waiting to buy the new camera-- when Adam posted about the $479 deal on B&H for a black body K-50, I jumped and now am looking forward to receiving my new DSLR! Thanks everyone for your help with this decision. I think the K-30 is still an excellent deal but for very little more, I was able to snag the latest camera model! Woo-hoo!

12-20-2013, 06:25 PM   #20
Senior Member
grog85361's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Phoenix Arizona
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 216
You are going to love it!
12-22-2013, 07:03 AM   #21
Veteran Member
stormtech's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In the boonies (NW Penna)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,670
Late to the thread as I see you already pulled the trigger on the K-50 - congratulations!

While I shoot only with my K-5IIs, my wife has been using a K-x for a couple years. She just likes the smaller form factor. As far as external controls, she doesn't have any interest in the meat of learning exposure and controlling it etc., but she is the composition queen when it comes to shooting. So I will set the camera for her depending on what we are shooting.

The K-x has proven to be a great camera. We share my better glass - she is usually shooting with the DA* 60-250. I had it in my mind to upgrade her K-x which she was very reluctant to, but ended up buying a very nice used K-30 here on the marketplace from a great forum member.

I guess the main reason was the bump in resolution from 12mp to 16mp. Also the extra features like AF adjustment and interval shooting.

I don't see a huge difference in the image quality, but it will be nice to have a little more crop room with the larger sensor. All in all it was a small but worthwhile upgrade I think.

Last edited by BigMackCam; 04-17-2016 at 01:47 AM. Reason: Removed link to parked URL
12-22-2013, 08:30 PM   #22
Pentaxian
ScooterMaxi Jim's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,497
Let's be clear about what happens when the ISO of a particular sensor/processor is "expanded" one stop even though nothing in the basic design has been altered to improve sensor response. It is telling the user to underexpose at the "expanded" setting - which is exactly the opposite of what you would want to do to preserve image quality. This is what happens when the Marketing Department has too much say.

For all of those who remember the film Spinal Tap, think of it as amp Volume setting 11. Its just an extra number. (For those of you who haven't see the film, get off the forum and watch the film - very funny!)
12-23-2013, 10:14 AM   #23
Pentaxian
seventysixersfan's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 1,709
Original Poster
Thanks, Stan! I am looking forward to the new camera. My old K-x served me very well for several years but since I got the K-01, I found that the quality of the images I was capturing with the K-01's sensor seemed significantly better than my K-x. So much so that I often reached for my K-01 even though I like my K-x's viewfinder, faster frames per second shooting, etc. For me, it made sense to finally make the upgrade. Plus I wanted a WR body -- I'm tired of quickly tucking my K-x or K-01 under my coat or even shirt whenever there is a little drizzle...

12-23-2013, 01:52 PM   #24
Pentaxian
ScooterMaxi Jim's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,497
You'll probably find it surprising how you'll want to balance use of the K-50 with the K-01. Of course, no real difference in IQ, but you'll be surprised how often you are likely to want to be shooting with something just a touch smaller, or quieter, or for doing an occasional video. If you are shooting all day, the better K-01 battery is an advantage as well. Although the dSLR is handier for the majority of outings, sometimes the K-01 is much preferred (especially in quiet situations).
12-23-2013, 03:05 PM   #25
Pentaxian
seventysixersfan's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 1,709
Original Poster
Thanks! I don't think I'll treat my K-01 as a backup body; instead, as you said, I will plan to use both at different times for different reasons. I'm thinking of my small DA limited primes with the K-01, and my larger zoom lenses on the K-50. What's nice is that they're basically the same sensor and image quality.
12-23-2013, 03:41 PM   #26
Pentaxian
ScooterMaxi Jim's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,497
QuoteOriginally posted by seventysixersfan Quote
Thanks! I don't think I'll treat my K-01 as a backup body; instead, as you said, I will plan to use both at different times for different reasons. I'm thinking of my small DA limited primes with the K-01, and my larger zoom lenses on the K-50. What's nice is that they're basically the same sensor and image quality.
I see you have a great group of optics. You're absolutely right that the smaller lenses and primes are better balanced on the K-01.
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!
body, eye-fi, image, k-30, k-50, k-50 versus k-30, pentax, pentax k30, pentax k50, processor, quality, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Firmware for K-500, K-50, K-5 II, K-5 IIs, K-5, K-30, K-01, K-r, and 645D is out Adam Pentax News and Rumors 60 09-16-2013 05:46 AM
FREE Batteries (K-r, K-30, K-50) StevenMatchett Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 09-05-2013 05:13 AM
K-30 or wait for K-50 K-500 Colbyt Pentax K-30 & K-50 54 08-23-2013 06:17 AM
Another Newbie (K-30) Lens Question Thread bibi Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 04-19-2013 09:50 PM
K-30 vs K-x with DA55-300mm lens, and 18-55WR versus DA L version?? altopiet Pentax K-30 & K-50 6 10-31-2012 06:28 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:28 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