[opiedog]

roland,

do you know if the k5 can or will utilize the same Grip as the k7?

tnx
jordan

So should the K-7 be then actually "exposed to the left" instead of right?

[Boris]

Roland, I also think that the way the sensor is fine tuned w.r.t. DR affects the way the metering system works, as I often find my shots slightly underexposed, that then is pretty easy to render properly in post and obtain rather nice looking images.

[Ishpuini]

Fascinating. It is also not difficult to see that K-7 has less headway in bright areas and its DR is actually deeper (for lack of better term) in dark areas. This can account for perceived lack of DR by many users. It seems to me that these days it is quite popular to have very contrasty images. Then, whatever advantages K-7 has in shades is not used, but the fact that its DR is lower in bright areas can be disappointing. As usual, it seems that one has to learn one's tools so as to be able to extract maximum from them.

Which is why Pentax's tendency to "underexpose" isn't a bad thing, since it actually maps the scene's DR to the camera's DR. In postprocessing this is easily recuperated. Complaining about underexposure and overcompensating to "correct" the camera only leads to incorrect DR mapping and more blown highlights and less perceived DR.

For an entry level user who doesn't use PP the Pentax way may not be ideal, but for a camera of the level of the K-7 one should assume a user that can actually use the camera to get the best results, rather than let himself be used by the camera...

Wim

[Ishpuini]

So should the K-7 be then actually "exposed to the left" instead of right?

No, you still have to expose to the right of the K-7's histogram. Only the K-7's histogram of a scene may not be the same as in another camera with the same exposure.

Wim

[Boris]

Indeed, after having bought K-7 I have noticed that the "default" curve that I tend to apply to my shots is rather different than that for K10D.

While this DR discussion of older models may be out of place here, I couldn't resist coping the table from the linked test and adding the K10D and K20D to it:

Camera (base ISO)
Shadow range Highlight range Usable range
Canon EOS 7D -5.0 EV 3.3 EV 8.3 EV
Canon EOS 50D -4.8 EV 3.5 EV 8.3 EV
Nikon D300S -4.6 EV 3.8 EV 8.4 EV
Pentax K-7 -5.7 EV 2.9 EV 8.6 EV
Pentax K20D -5.8 EV 3.2 EV 9.0 EV
Pentax K10D -4.5 EV 2.8 EV 7.3 EV

So according to this, the K20D has even more DR than the K-7...

And the K-x:

Camera (base ISO)
Shadow range Highlight range Usable range
Pentax K-x -5.7 EV 3.2 EV 8.9 EV

[wll]

25,600 high ISO in JPG only and multi shot ?

I hope this is not the case for the K-5. The reason you use 25,600 is for a concert situation or other where you need fast ISO to stop movement.

I can tell you I'm not using ISO 25,600 for landscapes or architecture, I could use it for candle lit situations or folks out of the spotlight that are in the shadows.

I hope Pentax has ISO 25,600 that is usable and not just a gimmick.

wll

[ogl]

DPR data

Useable DR:

K-7 8.6
7D 8.3
300s 8.4
50D 8.3

Canon EOS 7D Review: 17. Photographic tests (DR): Digital Photography Review

My friend from Pentax forum - oleg_v says that DPREVIEW only thinks that this method measures DR This methodology is far from real measurement of Dynamic Range....

I'm not physicist, I can't explain why he makes such conclusion

maybe Falk Lumo can...

[9littlebees]

Edit - deleted!

Just read the official announcement on PF homepage confirming olg's initial post...

[slinco]

Well I don't really disagree with you at all, but the whole "growth" concept is relative to your personal needs and goals.

Perhaps you want to be a world class architectural, sports, or fashion photographer. You want to compete in the real world
and you want access to a wide variety of tools so you can have every competitive advantage. Then indeed your system
could be inhibiting your growth. I can understand that.

However, you could also argue that a photographer can continue to grow creatively with a cheap plastic Holga camera.
Being forced to get by with less has made many a weekend shutterbug into a real artist.

I am often shocked when people tell me, younger photographers especially, that "I can't move forward because I just
don't have the right equipment." This kind of gear-head mentality just holds people back. It's really an atificial ceiling.

Obviously you can't shoot a wedding with a pinhole camera, but you can still work wonders and continually grow as a
photographer with a lot less than a current Pentax system, if you have the will to work and the guts to persistently strive for it.

Very well said Jeff, I couldn't agree more.

As usual, it seems that one has to learn one's tools so as to be able to extract maximum from them.

Yes, the K-7 has to be learned, as all high end cameras do. It's easy to pick out the folks who aren't willing to put in the effort by the comments they make putting down the K-7. All one has to do is look at the results from those who DO take the time to learn it to see what a remarkably capable camera it really is.

I believe that what confuses persons is the following - taken from the link provided above "The Pentax K-7 measures the highest overall dynamic range but at 2.9 EV delivers almost half a stop less highlight range than the EOS 7D, with little rolloff and therefore harsh clipping."

This means that K-7 has the highest overall dynamic range, but this range gives more details in the shadows than in the higlights compared to the competition. This is simply how the K-7 is adjusted. Differently tweaked, the K-7 could move up the dynamic range to give more headroom in the highlight at the expense of the shadows.
It is simply a choice made by the designers to have more range in the shadows than in the highlights.

Yes, nice shadow detail indeed, and as you say, "a choice made by the designers". It's just a slightly different way of doing things, and some people seem to have a hard time wrapping their heads around it. I don't know why - it's really not that complicated.

So should the K-7 be then actually "exposed to the left" instead of right?

No, every digital camera needs to be exposed to the right if you want to utilize the full bit range (tonal range) of the camera. You just have to be careful you don't go to far. A camera that's sensitive in this area just needs extra care, but the results are worth it. And the excellent shadow detail of the K-7 (see above) is easy to pull out of the RAW in post.

For an entry level user who doesn't use PP the Pentax way may not be ideal, but for a camera of the level of the K-7 one should assume a user that can actually use the camera to get the best results, rather than let himself be used by the camera...

Wim

Yes Wim, well said!!


In closing I'll say this - the K-7 is a great camera, and if the K-5 is in the same body as the k-7 it'll be a great camera too. I probably won't buy one, because the things it upgrades don't interest me at all - I manual focus and the K-7's noise levels are just fine IMHO. If DR is improved SIGNIFICANTLY I might be tempted, but really the K-7 does just fine in that regard (once I learned how to get the best out of it), and it's such a pleasurable camera to use I'll probably keep it for many years. But it's nice to see Pentax pushing forward - we should all be applauding that...

[Agnostic]

Huh?? The K-7 has fantastic dynamic range (that is not to say that something even better do not exist!); in fact, that's the reason I'm using it instead of film. In landscapes I have a hard time finding any scene that have larger dynamic range than the sensor can capture; even when shooting straight into the sun.
The image below is impossible to shoot on any film due to the scenes high contrast. It is fully possible on the K-7. I haven't even tweaked it in Photoshop (yet)!

That's a nice shot but it's not a high contrast image and you could shoot a scene like that without any problems on any decent film stock.

Check out DXO mark numbers for the K-7's dynamic range:
(For those who think the K-7 improved on the K20D regarding dynamic range: wrong. In that respect the K-7 was actually a downgrade on the K20D.)
DxOMark - Compare sensors

In fact if you get the plot with all APS-C cameras dynamic range on DXO mark the K-7 is completely at the bottom.

There was a nice comparison of the Nikon D300S with the K-7 in Amateur Photographer magazine October 2009 showing how steeply the tonal range of the K-7 drops off in the shadow areas compared to the D300S, and there's a reason for that: noise in the shadow areas even at relatively low ISO.

I don't own a K-7 because I didn't see the point in an upgrade that downgrades performance in an area that is important to me. I kept my K20D which is mostly a nice camera except for the dynamic range and the damn noise in the blue channel. Even the K100D which I owned shot better raws for b&w conversions mostly because it had a much cleaner blue channel.

Yes, the K-7 and K20D have exposure bracketing and I have used it but exposure blending is only useful if there is hardly any movement in the subject matter. Landscapes often tend to have trees and wind I seem to recall.

So the fact is I can still make pictures with significantly better tonal and dynamic range with a 50 year old Rolleicord than any APS-C or FF camera, especially if you want to do b&w. With some MF digital gear it may be different. The sample shot I have seen from the 645D are awesome and have great shadow detail (well it ought to, for the price of a small car).

[macTak]

Just a note for those who are looking at the A55 ISO comparisons on DPR, keep in mind that with the pelicle mirror, there is a 1/3 stop loss in light to the sensor, which is (according to one of the DPR editors) compensated for by increasing the ISO gain. So if the new Pentax was to use the same sensor, expect 1/3 stop better preformance in noise. By the way, JPEG DR on that new Sony sensor was around 9 stops.

[Kunzite]

Only 1/3 stop? Not almost double?