ISO3200 JPEG from 16MP Sony Sensor (from Nikon D7000)

Winder · 09-16-2010, 12:40 PM

Until I see RAW files processed by LR3 it does not matter.

Even if it is the same sensor there can be a lot of variation. The color filter and low pass filter will be different and both Nikon and Pentax will chose differently. The new E-5 does not even have a low-pass filter as the work is done with software. Pentax will decide how much amplification to apply at each ISO since there is no standard. Rumor was that Nikon applied their own micro-lenses to the Sony sensors, and that they lease space inside the Sony fabrication plant. Who knows.

Will Pentax choose a heavier color filter for better colors, or a lighter filter for better high-ISO?
Will Pentax select a heavy AA filter or have they developed the software to deal with the issues in processing?

Canon uses a light color filter to get better high ISO performance, but the Canon colors always seem to be a bit off to me, but better RAW processing and color profiles definitely help.

The Sony A900 has a heavier than normal color filter, but produces some of the best colors of any camera in its class.

Anyway. Even if Pentax/Nikon/Sony are all using the same sensor there can be a significant difference in the images given all the variables.

Of course this could be a pointless argument if the K-5 comes out with the 18MP Sony sensor that is rumored to be going into the A700 replacement. Sony uses sensors to differentiate its bodies more than most. Since they make their own it makes it easier for them to do this.

pingflood · 09-16-2010, 12:51 PM

Originally posted by asdf

Looks good. No "pattern" noise and chroma noise can be handled in gimp/photoshop/etc.

I agree, the noise is pretty pleasant. That said, it looks to be about average ISO 3200 performance for a recent crop sensor, nothing spectacular.

If we really were to believe the claims that keep cropping up about how every new sensor is something like "a stop" better than the previous, we'd all be shooting noise free 102400 by now...

dylansalt · 09-16-2010, 02:10 PM - **1 Like**

Imo aps-c CCD sensor at 100 iso 10/12mp still gives better per pixel sharpness than all these aps-c high iso cmos sensors

I constantly check out these pics and then refer to my K10D and feel I'm not missing anything.

But when looking at files from a FF - only then do I see a quantifiable improvement worth spending the extra moola.

benjikan · 09-16-2010, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by dylansalt

Imo aps-c CCD sensor at 100 iso 10/12mp still gives better per pixel sharpness than all these aps-c high iso cmos sensors

I constantly check out these pics and then refer to my K10D and feel I'm not missing anything.

But when looking at files from a FF - only then do I see a quantifiable improvement worth spending the extra moola.

I totally agree...Here is a JPEG compressed 9/12 in Photoshop to fit in the Gallery, therefore not the best quality.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/photo-highlighting-k10d-sensor-21566/

Attached Images

Last edited by benjikan; 09-16-2010 at 03:35 PM.

dylansalt · 09-17-2010, 07:37 AM

Lovely and thanks for backing up my statement:-)

FullertonImages · 09-17-2010, 08:54 AM

Originally posted by dylansalt

Imo aps-c CCD sensor at 100 iso 10/12mp still gives better per pixel sharpness than all these aps-c high iso cmos sensors

I constantly check out these pics and then refer to my K10D and feel I'm not missing anything.

But when looking at files from a FF - only then do I see a quantifiable improvement worth spending the extra moola.

Agreed. ISO 100 in daylight from K10d looks better than any other camera since. High ISO's have definitely been getting batter, but low ISOs have also been getting worse. K-7 was a decent compromise I think, but K-x was too soft in the low ISOs. I hope the K-5 still has a strong priority on the lower ISOs, where most of us do most of our shooting.

yeatzee · 09-17-2010, 12:28 PM

Ok, am I the only one seeing the blue everywhere? Apparently according to my friend and his calibrated monitor there is no blue in the shadows

TOUGEFC · 09-17-2010, 01:51 PM

Originally posted by FullertonImages

Agreed. ISO 100 in daylight from K10d looks better than any other camera since. High ISO's have definitely been getting batter, but low ISOs have also been getting worse. K-7 was a decent compromise I think, but K-x was too soft in the low ISOs. I hope the K-5 still has a strong priority on the lower ISOs, where most of us do most of our shooting.

Agreed, if the k7 does low iso better than the k5 i will be upgrading to k7. Low iso tests is what i care about.

FullertonImages · 09-17-2010, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

Agreed, if the k7 does low iso better than the k5 i will be upgrading to k7. Low iso tests is what i care about.

I shoot with two K-7's right now, and I will likely pick up a K-5 for the better AF and high ISO. But I get the feeling that I'll still be reaching for the K-7 a lot when it's low ISO conditions.

There's a very obvious trend away from Pentax's older priorities of sharpness and color rendition. I think that their priorities were great, and I think the color and sharpness of k10 through K-7 beats anything out there that I've seen. I constantly get remarks on my images about them. But Pentax made a clear deviation from standard practices with the K-x, and in my opinion, it does great in High ISO, but it just shoots like a canon. Soft details, washed out colors, no contrast. They made a good stand, but when no matter what they do, people just bitch about the high ISO and how is not as good as blah blah canikon, while ignoring the trade-offs, that in my opinion are well worth it, they had to cave in eventually.

Torphoto · 09-18-2010, 11:23 AM

Those D700 sample shows me very heavy handed noise reduction past 800 iso, no defined detail or texture. When we see raw results we'll know better. This is like the 7D vs 5D scenario, the 7D's sensor was out resolving what lenses could project on the sensor making it look soft and muddy, the 5D images just looked that much better. The 50D as well to a point had the same problem but that was due to crappy kit lenses giving people the impression that canon had soft details, washed out colours and no contrast ( well ok it probably is still true for all the xxD series canons still ).

So lets wait to see what the K-5 does in raw first then I'll see if it can join the K20D, theres and empty spot where a K7 used to be in the bag.

yeatzee · 09-18-2010, 11:51 AM

Originally posted by Torphoto

Those D700 sample shows me very heavy handed noise reduction past 800 iso, no defined detail or texture. When we see raw results we'll know better. This is like the 7D vs 5D scenario, the 7D's sensor was out resolving what lenses could project on the sensor making it look soft and muddy, the 5D images just looked that much better. The 50D as well to a point had the same problem but that was due to crappy kit lenses giving people the impression that canon had soft details, washed out colours and no contrast ( well ok it probably is still true for all the xxD series canons still ).

So lets wait to see what the K-5 does in raw first then I'll see if it can join the K20D, theres and empty spot where a K7 used to be in the bag.

Nikon's jpegs have always sucked.... RAW is where its at 100% in nikon land.

Kenn100D · 09-18-2010, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by RBellavance

For the record, the D200 did *not* have the same sensor as the K10D, but a faster version (4-channel readout instead of 2 or something of the sort). The D80, however, did have the same sensor as the K10D. And the Sony A100 as well.

One thing puzzles me a bit when I look at the specs of the D7000 and those of the A55 and the rumoured K-5: the former's ISO range is listed as 100-6400 with 12800 and 25600 "expanded", while the latter are both specified as 200-12800, with 100 and 25600 "expanded".

There's also the fact that the D7000's sensor is reported to do 14-bit output at full speed, something the "stock" Sony EXMOR sensor does not do.

So I think it's highly likely that Nikon is using a customized version of the Sony sensor for the D7000, but not the exact same one as the A55, and the K-5 will presumably use.

What that says about the ISO and DR performance of the K-5 remains to be seen. From what DPreview says about the A55, I think we have reasons to be optimistic.

Your might be correct. i beleive as a sensor manufacture you can ask them to make you one based on your specs. I believe pentax is capable to develop a sensor based on the basic sony snesor then modified to pentax specs.

dmgabe · 09-18-2010, 09:24 PM

Nikon has stated that the D7000 sensor is built by Sony to Nikon specifications. Also, it is easy to see how much more Nikon can get out of the same sensor than Sony can by looking at the a900 and D3X. I know the prices aren't even close, but they use the same sensor, and the D3X blows the Sony out of the water.

If only Pentax would have released, or at least mentioned an actual pro camera. I would have loved to stick with the brand, but in the end had to leave for greener pastures, and I am loving my D700. Just wish I didn't have to spend so much to make the transition.

rangerbob36 · 10-18-2010, 04:25 PM

When I read about the A55, I became giddy. I'll probably sell all of my Pentax K10D stuff. I'v ehad it for a three years, and it has been a joy. But, I want something exciting, and I think that's the A33 or the 55.

rangerbob

**Rondec** · 10-18-2010, 06:45 PM

Originally posted by rangerbob36

When I read about the A55, I became giddy. I'll probably sell all of my Pentax K10D stuff. I'v ehad it for a three years, and it has been a joy. But, I want something exciting, and I think that's the A33 or the 55.

rangerbob

Have you even looked at the K5? Looks pretty good to me...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nikon D7000 pictured	deadwolfbones	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	4	10-18-2010 04:19 AM
Nikon D7000 officially announced!	JohnBee	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	41	10-04-2010 02:30 PM
K-x Sony Sensor vs K-7 Samsung Sensor	karl79	Video Recording and Processing	9	09-23-2010 09:35 AM
Will the Pentax K5 have 16MP from sony?	Belnan	Pentax News and Rumors	19	09-10-2010 06:06 AM
Does the K10 have a sony sensor or not?	slip	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	11-23-2006 02:49 PM

09-16-2010, 12:40 PM	#31
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Until I see RAW files processed by LR3 it does not matter. Even if it is the same sensor there can be a lot of variation. The color filter and low pass filter will be different and both Nikon and Pentax will chose differently. The new E-5 does not even have a low-pass filter as the work is done with software. Pentax will decide how much amplification to apply at each ISO since there is no standard. Rumor was that Nikon applied their own micro-lenses to the Sony sensors, and that they lease space inside the Sony fabrication plant. Who knows. Will Pentax choose a heavier color filter for better colors, or a lighter filter for better high-ISO? Will Pentax select a heavy AA filter or have they developed the software to deal with the issues in processing? Canon uses a light color filter to get better high ISO performance, but the Canon colors always seem to be a bit off to me, but better RAW processing and color profiles definitely help. The Sony A900 has a heavier than normal color filter, but produces some of the best colors of any camera in its class. Anyway. Even if Pentax/Nikon/Sony are all using the same sensor there can be a significant difference in the images given all the variables. Of course this could be a pointless argument if the K-5 comes out with the 18MP Sony sensor that is rumored to be going into the A700 replacement. Sony uses sensors to differentiate its bodies more than most. Since they make their own it makes it easier for them to do this.

09-16-2010, 12:51 PM	#32
pingflood Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Borås, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,169	Originally posted by asdf Looks good. No "pattern" noise and chroma noise can be handled in gimp/photoshop/etc. I agree, the noise is pretty pleasant. That said, it looks to be about average ISO 3200 performance for a recent crop sensor, nothing spectacular. If we really were to believe the claims that keep cropping up about how every new sensor is something like "a stop" better than the previous, we'd all be shooting noise free 102400 by now...

09-16-2010, 02:10 PM - 1 Like	#33
dylansalt Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Durban, South Africa Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,052	Imo aps-c CCD sensor at 100 iso 10/12mp still gives better per pixel sharpness than all these aps-c high iso cmos sensors I constantly check out these pics and then refer to my K10D and feel I'm not missing anything. But when looking at files from a FF - only then do I see a quantifiable improvement worth spending the extra moola.

09-16-2010, 03:29 PM	#34
benjikan Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,308	Originally posted by dylansalt Imo aps-c CCD sensor at 100 iso 10/12mp still gives better per pixel sharpness than all these aps-c high iso cmos sensors I constantly check out these pics and then refer to my K10D and feel I'm not missing anything. But when looking at files from a FF - only then do I see a quantifiable improvement worth spending the extra moola. I totally agree...Here is a JPEG compressed 9/12 in Photoshop to fit in the Gallery, therefore not the best quality. https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/photo-highlighting-k10d-sensor-21566/ Attached Images Last edited by benjikan; 09-16-2010 at 03:35 PM.

09-17-2010, 07:37 AM	#35
dylansalt Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Durban, South Africa Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,052	Lovely and thanks for backing up my statement:-)

09-17-2010, 08:54 AM	#36
FullertonImages Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 883	Originally posted by dylansalt Imo aps-c CCD sensor at 100 iso 10/12mp still gives better per pixel sharpness than all these aps-c high iso cmos sensors I constantly check out these pics and then refer to my K10D and feel I'm not missing anything. But when looking at files from a FF - only then do I see a quantifiable improvement worth spending the extra moola. Agreed. ISO 100 in daylight from K10d looks better than any other camera since. High ISO's have definitely been getting batter, but low ISOs have also been getting worse. K-7 was a decent compromise I think, but K-x was too soft in the low ISOs. I hope the K-5 still has a strong priority on the lower ISOs, where most of us do most of our shooting.

09-17-2010, 12:28 PM	#37
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Ok, am I the only one seeing the blue everywhere? Apparently according to my friend and his calibrated monitor there is no blue in the shadows

09-17-2010, 01:51 PM	#38
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Originally posted by FullertonImages Agreed. ISO 100 in daylight from K10d looks better than any other camera since. High ISO's have definitely been getting batter, but low ISOs have also been getting worse. K-7 was a decent compromise I think, but K-x was too soft in the low ISOs. I hope the K-5 still has a strong priority on the lower ISOs, where most of us do most of our shooting. Agreed, if the k7 does low iso better than the k5 i will be upgrading to k7. Low iso tests is what i care about.

09-17-2010, 03:07 PM	#39
FullertonImages Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Boulder, CO Posts: 883	Originally posted by TOUGEFC Agreed, if the k7 does low iso better than the k5 i will be upgrading to k7. Low iso tests is what i care about. I shoot with two K-7's right now, and I will likely pick up a K-5 for the better AF and high ISO. But I get the feeling that I'll still be reaching for the K-7 a lot when it's low ISO conditions. There's a very obvious trend away from Pentax's older priorities of sharpness and color rendition. I think that their priorities were great, and I think the color and sharpness of k10 through K-7 beats anything out there that I've seen. I constantly get remarks on my images about them. But Pentax made a clear deviation from standard practices with the K-x, and in my opinion, it does great in High ISO, but it just shoots like a canon. Soft details, washed out colors, no contrast. They made a good stand, but when no matter what they do, people just bitch about the high ISO and how is not as good as blah blah canikon, while ignoring the trade-offs, that in my opinion are well worth it, they had to cave in eventually.

09-18-2010, 11:23 AM	#40
Torphoto Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Trinidad W.I. Photos: Gallery Posts: 612	Those D700 sample shows me very heavy handed noise reduction past 800 iso, no defined detail or texture. When we see raw results we'll know better. This is like the 7D vs 5D scenario, the 7D's sensor was out resolving what lenses could project on the sensor making it look soft and muddy, the 5D images just looked that much better. The 50D as well to a point had the same problem but that was due to crappy kit lenses giving people the impression that canon had soft details, washed out colours and no contrast ( well ok it probably is still true for all the xxD series canons still ). So lets wait to see what the K-5 does in raw first then I'll see if it can join the K20D, theres and empty spot where a K7 used to be in the bag.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-18-2010, 11:51 AM	#41
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by Torphoto Those D700 sample shows me very heavy handed noise reduction past 800 iso, no defined detail or texture. When we see raw results we'll know better. This is like the 7D vs 5D scenario, the 7D's sensor was out resolving what lenses could project on the sensor making it look soft and muddy, the 5D images just looked that much better. The 50D as well to a point had the same problem but that was due to crappy kit lenses giving people the impression that canon had soft details, washed out colours and no contrast ( well ok it probably is still true for all the xxD series canons still ). So lets wait to see what the K-5 does in raw first then I'll see if it can join the K20D, theres and empty spot where a K7 used to be in the bag. Nikon's jpegs have always sucked.... RAW is where its at 100% in nikon land.

09-18-2010, 08:25 PM	#42
Kenn100D Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Paranaque City, Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 697	Originally posted by RBellavance For the record, the D200 did not have the same sensor as the K10D, but a faster version (4-channel readout instead of 2 or something of the sort). The D80, however, did have the same sensor as the K10D. And the Sony A100 as well. One thing puzzles me a bit when I look at the specs of the D7000 and those of the A55 and the rumoured K-5: the former's ISO range is listed as 100-6400 with 12800 and 25600 "expanded", while the latter are both specified as 200-12800, with 100 and 25600 "expanded". There's also the fact that the D7000's sensor is reported to do 14-bit output at full speed, something the "stock" Sony EXMOR sensor does not do. So I think it's highly likely that Nikon is using a customized version of the Sony sensor for the D7000, but not the exact same one as the A55, and the K-5 will presumably use. What that says about the ISO and DR performance of the K-5 remains to be seen. From what DPreview says about the A55, I think we have reasons to be optimistic. Your might be correct. i beleive as a sensor manufacture you can ask them to make you one based on your specs. I believe pentax is capable to develop a sensor based on the basic sony snesor then modified to pentax specs.

09-18-2010, 09:24 PM	#43
dmgabe New Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Carbondale, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 19	Nikon has stated that the D7000 sensor is built by Sony to Nikon specifications. Also, it is easy to see how much more Nikon can get out of the same sensor than Sony can by looking at the a900 and D3X. I know the prices aren't even close, but they use the same sensor, and the D3X blows the Sony out of the water. If only Pentax would have released, or at least mentioned an actual pro camera. I would have loved to stick with the brand, but in the end had to leave for greener pastures, and I am loving my D700. Just wish I didn't have to spend so much to make the transition.

10-18-2010, 04:25 PM	#44
rangerbob36 Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Sanford, NC Posts: 27	When I read about the A55, I became giddy. I'll probably sell all of my Pentax K10D stuff. I'v ehad it for a three years, and it has been a joy. But, I want something exciting, and I think that's the A33 or the 55. rangerbob

10-18-2010, 06:45 PM	#45
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	Originally posted by rangerbob36 When I read about the A55, I became giddy. I'll probably sell all of my Pentax K10D stuff. I'v ehad it for a three years, and it has been a joy. But, I want something exciting, and I think that's the A33 or the 55. rangerbob Have you even looked at the K5? Looks pretty good to me...