Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-23-2010, 03:57 AM   #316
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,599
QuoteOriginally posted by artificialillum Quote

*snip*


@ solar1 - care to share your knowledge of "more to it than meets the spec sheet?" So far, all I've heard in defense of the K-5 is, "just you wait, the 1) price will be lower than you think 2) the image quality will be better than you think 3) the buffer will be larger than you think 4) the AF will be faster than you think..." well, so far, the price is what I thought, the image quality, pending further review, is about on par with what I thought (based on the A55), the buffer is still unclear (at least to me, but it seems on par with the K20D/K7 which are similar), and the AF is the only thing remaining to be tested... but seriously... it does seem like a "only a K7, updated." Unless you care to share your info that isn't listed on a spec sheet...
In regards to image quality, I have NO idea how you can make any judgements at all! All we have so far is ONE!!!!! image, shot at ISO 6400 from a camera with 0.30!!! firmware! Very little color gradient, no DOF transitions.
You can reasonably make some very preliminary judgements on high ISO noise but that's about it. It would be kinda like reveiwing a car knowing only the horsepower.
That you don't like a camera based on a spec sheet and ONE!!! published photo with pre release firmware is a bit ludicrous in my view. But you are entitled to your opinion.

NaCl(me, I prefer to wait until I can see what the camera can do)H2O

09-23-2010, 04:11 AM   #317
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,948
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
In regards to image quality, I have NO idea how you can make any judgements at all! All we have so far is ONE!!!!! image, shot at ISO 6400 from a camera with 0.30!!! firmware! Very little color gradient, no DOF transitions.
You can reasonably make some very preliminary judgements on high ISO noise but that's about it. It would be kinda like reveiwing a car knowing only the horsepower.
That you don't like a camera based on a spec sheet and ONE!!! published photo with pre release firmware is a bit ludicrous in my view. But you are entitled to your opinion.

NaCl(me, I prefer to wait until I can see what the camera can do)H2O
Absolutely. I appreciate Falk's taking the time to be our eyes and ears there, but this particular image is not the sort of thing that anyone will be shooting every day. How will the K5 deal with textures and colors in a darkened church or museum? How will the final firmware compare to the current one? No one really knows. Right now, all I can say is that iso 6400 looks a whole lot more useable than on any camera that I have owned till now, but I am sure it isn't perfect.
09-23-2010, 04:12 AM   #318
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Are anybody interested in photos at ISO100-200? Or everybody use cameras only with ISO1600-6400?

To compare crops from high ISO became the obsessional idea among a lot of users...
The reviews of cameras help marketers to sell MP and noise-reduction technologies.
And a lot users are involved in mass madness...

I've made more than 40 000 pictures from my DSLR and have only ~ 100 pictures at ISO800.
95% of my photos are made at ISO100-200.
Having seen what it can do at ISO6400(looking very good so far). I'd love to see the following RAW NR 0,0,0 samples... with all in camera settings(expanded DR etc): off and optimum lens/shutter settings.

ISO80/100
ISO200
ISO1600
ISO3200
ISO6400
ISO12800
ISO25600
ISO51200 <( why the heck not? )

Lest see what this baby can do!

-

Early ISO6400 sample testing: ACR6 and Denoise 5: K-5, ISO6400, ACR6, TDN5, 1280x848 sample, JPG IQ: 80%


2MB full size image: Download

... the end
09-23-2010, 04:41 AM   #319
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by brecklundin Quote
Like Scully "...I want to believe..." but sans tangible proof...
No, that was Mulder. Scully was the sceptic.



09-23-2010, 04:57 AM - 1 Like   #320
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Innsbruck
Posts: 283
The Pentax "Fall Collection 2010" states that the K-5 will be able to shot 15Pictures before the buffer is full
09-23-2010, 04:59 AM   #321
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by Mehlsack Quote
The Pentax "Fall Collection 2010" states that the K-5 will be able to shot 15Pictures before the buffer is full
Your link comes right back to pentaxforums
09-23-2010, 05:01 AM   #322
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,753
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
Your link comes right back to pentaxforums
That's by design. This forum allows us to write messages in other languages; apparently Mehlsack (meaning bag of flour, BTW) wrote his post originally in German. So it's not like he's providing a link to the German Pentax website
09-23-2010, 05:10 AM   #323
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 896
QuoteOriginally posted by artificialillum Quote
Okay, so I read Adam's post about how the K-5 at 6400 is as good as the K-7 at 800. Then I actually take a look at Falk's posted picture (thanks Falk, I appreciate it!) and I think to myself - hmm... that doesn't look right.

When I first saw the dpreview samples from the A55, I thought the noise was blotchy and pretty bad, especially in some of the color channels (which made me wonder why people were saying it was good). Now that I see the Pentax K-5 image at 6400, and while it's definitely better than the K10D or K20D (at 6400), I don't know if it's as good as ISO800. Now granted, I don't have a K-7 anymore, I returned it after testing it for about 2 weeks - I didn't like the fact that it had greater amounts of shadow noise at lower ISO compared to the K20D. I didn't play around too much with the high ISO, but I continually hear people go on and on, defending the high ISO performance of the K-7 as a major improvement over the K20D.

So for those who are interested, I did a comparison of the K20D and Falk's K-5 image. I tried to follow Falk's processing settings (opened in CS3 with default color noise reduction (25%) and sharpening (25%, radius 1, detail 25 sharpening), saved as quality 10 jpgs, and then took samples from the JPGs at a light, medium, and dark area of the frame.

I think ISO1600 looks better on the K20D than the K-5. I think ISO3200 are similar, except there's more color noise in the K20D (which probably can be easily removed by an expert in noise reduction, which I am not). I think ISO6400, an extended setting on the K20D, is pretty ugly. I included ISO800, but I apologize in advance, I didn't think to use a clean sheet of paper instead of my wall - any texture you see in the light or medium blocks are from the texture on my wall. Clearly, much lower noise than the K-5 (at least in my opinion). So if high ISO performance is so much better on the K-7, then how is ISO6400 on the K-5 as good as ISO800 on the K-7?

Two options:
1) It isn't, and Adam should update the post on the front page of this website...
2) High ISO on the K-7 is worse than the K20D

Thanks again to Falk for his posting of images and answering of questions (even if we disagree, which I'm not sure we do, I appreciate him taking the time to post images).

(p.s. In the interests of disclosure, this is my first post here, and I have a thread on dpreview expressing my disappointed opinion on the K-5, which some people took offense to. So yes, I'm not too impressed with the K-5 so far, mostly due to the marginal improvements and the substantial price hike)

(p.p.s full sized JPGs here: Dropbox - Photos - Online backup, file sync and sharing made easy.)
thanks for your work on this. by your own results, i think you'd agree that the K-5's 6400 is equal or even slightly better than the K20's 3200. isn't a stop better sensitivity with higher resolution than your baseline "good"?

to everyone developing Falk's RAW, do try using LR3, its noise engine is a truly a real upgrade from LR2, leaving more detail and luminance noise but effectively killing blotchy color noise.

couldn't agree more with you on the price though, and the fact that it's an upgrade to a camera (K-7) that IQ wise was a downgrade to the camera before it (K20). I'm pretty insulted with Pentax's attempt at "righting things" from the K-7 only at the privilege of spending $1599.

09-23-2010, 05:36 AM - 1 Like   #324
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by blende8 Quote
I did 100% screen dumps because I couldn't safe from DCU.
What's the left/right difference?

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
this particular image is not the sort of thing that anyone will be shooting every day.
Do you think this is what caught the attention of the Pentax reps in the show room?
09-23-2010, 05:40 AM   #325
Veteran Member
blende8's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bremen, Germany
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,484
What do you mean?
The first image is DCU, the second ACR.
09-23-2010, 05:51 AM   #326
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
couldn't agree more with you on the price though, and the fact that it's an upgrade to a camera (K-7) that IQ wise was a downgrade to the camera before it (K20). I'm pretty insulted with Pentax's attempt at "righting things" from the K-7 only at the privilege of spending $1599.
I'd agree with you there. I'm just glad I didn't get on the K-7 bandwagon when it struck.

TBH, the entire system came across like a first of a new breed of Pentax camera's(video etc) and that alone made me weary. But what Pentax did that that sensor was a real shame considering they would soon deliver an entry level camera that would run circles around it no less than a few months later.

But hey... Pentax isn't the only manufacturer to make such mistakes either. I've seen and heard of such attrocities taking place with Canon, Nikon and Fujifilm camera's and lets not forgot this years most talked about wtf from Olympus...

To tell you the truth, I'm just glad Pentax had the means to recover and deliver a competent product this time around.
09-23-2010, 05:58 AM   #327
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,934
QuoteOriginally posted by blende8 Quote
But it looks good in DCU4.
In contrast it looks noisy in ACR6.
I prefer the ACR6 version which has more local contrast. AFAIC, it looks noisier because it retains more detail than the comparatively smeared DCU4 version.

Of course it is a matter of NR and sharpening settings. The ACR6 version could be made to look as "smooth" as the DCU4 version without losing a lot of detail.

Last edited by Class A; 09-23-2010 at 06:10 AM.
09-23-2010, 06:01 AM   #328
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by blende8 Quote
What do you mean?
The first image is DCU, the second ACR.
Thanks. I guessed so but you didn't mention that you included the ACR version too.
09-23-2010, 06:02 AM   #329
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Nass's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: The British Isles
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,211
QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
I'm pretty insulted with Pentax's attempt at "righting things" from the K-7 only at the privilege of spending $1599.
Thanks, that's what I'm feeling too
09-23-2010, 06:18 AM   #330
Veteran Member
blende8's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Bremen, Germany
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,484
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
I prefer the ACR6 version which has more local contrast. AFAIC, it looks noisier because it retains more detail than the comparatively smeared DCU4 version.

Of course it is a matter of NR and sharpening settings. The ACR6 version could be made to look as "smooth" as the DCU4 version without losing a lot of detail.
I didn't apply anything to the DCU Version.
This is just a screenshot of the opened image.
But well, we should really be waiting for the final software.
Closed Thread

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!
falk, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photokina
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax stand at Photokina andi Pentax News and Rumors 1 09-21-2010 02:21 AM
Likelihood of EVIL Pentax @ Photokina? lurchlarson Pentax DSLR Discussion 30 07-24-2010 12:09 AM
Pentax at Photokina jct us101 Pentax News and Rumors 67 04-24-2010 08:44 AM
Pentax getting good coverage in magazines CaymanImaging Pentax News and Rumors 6 06-15-2009 02:48 AM
Photokina 2008, what can we expect from Pentax?? phatjoe Pentax DSLR Discussion 14 09-05-2008 05:54 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:01 PM. | 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