K-5 vs K-7 First ISO performance testing (ISO-6400)

JohnBee · 09-24-2010, 07:22 PM

Originally posted by Slowpoke Rodriguez

My thoughts exactly. You don't shoot at high ISO just to shoot at high ISO. You do it when the light level requires it. Let's see some faces by candle light at 6400.

You mean something like this

Christopher M.W.T · 09-24-2010, 07:25 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

You mean something like this

Lovely what camera and lens?

happygui · 09-24-2010, 07:31 PM

Originally posted by Christopher M.W.T

Lovely what camera and lens?

k20. I believe they were post processed.

JohnBee · 09-24-2010, 07:32 PM

Originally posted by Christopher M.W.T

Lovely what camera and lens?

Both images were shot in RAW with a K20D.
They were processed using ACR6.2 and Topaz Denoise(for NR).

The first image was part of some low light ISO6400 trials I conducting a few months back. I used the SMC-A 50mm 1.4 @ f/2 with a shutter of 1/10s

The second image was taken at ISO 1250 with a PK/A Vivitar 28mm 2.8 CF @ f/4 1/100s(to help isolate the subject against the background).

happygui · 09-24-2010, 07:35 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

Both images were shot in RAW with a K20D.
They were processed using ACR6.2 and Topaz Denoise(for NR).

The first image was part of some low light ISO6400 trials I conducting a few months back. I used the SMC-A 50mm 1.4 @ f/2 with a shutter of 1/10s

The second image was taken at ISO 1250 with a PK/A Vivitar 28mm 2.8 CF @ f/4 1/100s(to help isolate the subject against the background).

nice done. they look amazing.

JohnBee · 09-24-2010, 07:38 PM

Originally posted by happygui

nice done. they look amazing.

Thank-you for that!

Slowpoke Rodriguez · 09-24-2010, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

You mean something like this

Yeah, I guess something like that.

Very nice pictures, by the way.

Now, if you can get a hold of a K-5 and a D7000 and compare the two in similar lighting, we would be on to something.

Whenever I see these test shots at 6400 or whatever, and the other settings lead me to believe the shot could have been taken at 400 or 800, I think "nice--entirely unrealistic, but nice."

audiobomber · 09-24-2010, 08:31 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

I beleive that is a consequence of the lighting.

To me this says poor AWB.

Raybo · 09-24-2010, 08:34 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

Both images were shot in RAW with a K20D.
They were processed using ACR6.2 and Topaz Denoise(for NR).

The first image was part of some low light ISO6400 trials I conducting a few months back. I used the SMC-A 50mm 1.4 @ f/2 with a shutter of 1/10s

The second image was taken at ISO 1250 with a PK/A Vivitar 28mm 2.8 CF @ f/4 1/100s(to help isolate the subject against the background).

Show off!

Just a joke JohnBee.

I have been in awe of your K20/iso6400 shots for quite some time......amazing!

Ray

ogl · 09-24-2010, 09:06 PM

Originally posted by janneman

Why this particuar crop???

Dark area of photo.

obheng · 09-24-2010, 10:15 PM

Great work, JohnBee! From my laptop screen, I'd say it can easily print up to 10R without much distractive noise. Very imporessed.

levelred · 09-24-2010, 10:45 PM

I'd love to see K-x vs. K-5

janneman · 09-25-2010, 12:31 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

To me this says poor AWB.

The two Nikon sampes here post1196215 and here post1196229 have a different cast and both look over exposed to me. Are they overexposed as they were shot or in PP? Latter would add noise... maybe D7000 isn't so bad.

photogerald · 09-25-2010, 03:22 AM

This is very impressive and the kind of high-ISO performance I've been waiting for! Looking at the 100% crops we can see that the noise is greatly improved. But taking a closer look at the resized images, it becomes apparent just how much improved the K-5 is. Kudos to Pentax AND Sony!

With the K-7 shot the contrast has been greatly increased (by the camera) to try and mask the poor DR - notice how there are absolutely no details in the shadows. Nasty.

gazonk · 09-25-2010, 03:25 AM

Originally posted by photogerald

With the K-7 shot the contrast has been greatly increased (by the camera) to try and mask the poor DR - notice how there are absolutely no details in the shadows. Nasty.

I think it says that it's shot in bright mode, though, that explains some of the high contrast.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 ISO 6400 developed	sirluke	Pentax DSLR Discussion	24	09-23-2010 10:57 AM
Pentax k-x picture taken at ISO 6400	guillermovilas	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	07-17-2010 09:28 AM
People Iso 6400	jct us101	Post Your Photos!	1	06-27-2010 06:03 PM
K7 + ISO 6400	cpk	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	02-26-2010 07:46 PM
Iso 6400 on the Kx is a Homerun	Igilligan	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	01-02-2010 03:52 PM

09-24-2010, 07:22 PM	#76
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by Slowpoke Rodriguez My thoughts exactly. You don't shoot at high ISO just to shoot at high ISO. You do it when the light level requires it. Let's see some faces by candle light at 6400. You mean something like this

09-24-2010, 07:25 PM	#77
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689	Originally posted by JohnBee You mean something like this Lovely what camera and lens?

09-24-2010, 07:31 PM	#78
happygui Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: OHIO Posts: 211	Originally posted by Christopher M.W.T Lovely what camera and lens? k20. I believe they were post processed.

09-24-2010, 07:32 PM	#79
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by Christopher M.W.T Lovely what camera and lens? Both images were shot in RAW with a K20D. They were processed using ACR6.2 and Topaz Denoise(for NR). The first image was part of some low light ISO6400 trials I conducting a few months back. I used the SMC-A 50mm 1.4 @ f/2 with a shutter of 1/10s The second image was taken at ISO 1250 with a PK/A Vivitar 28mm 2.8 CF @ f/4 1/100s(to help isolate the subject against the background).

09-24-2010, 07:35 PM	#80
happygui Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: OHIO Posts: 211	Originally posted by JohnBee Both images were shot in RAW with a K20D. They were processed using ACR6.2 and Topaz Denoise(for NR). The first image was part of some low light ISO6400 trials I conducting a few months back. I used the SMC-A 50mm 1.4 @ f/2 with a shutter of 1/10s The second image was taken at ISO 1250 with a PK/A Vivitar 28mm 2.8 CF @ f/4 1/100s(to help isolate the subject against the background). nice done. they look amazing.

09-24-2010, 07:38 PM	#81
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by happygui nice done. they look amazing. Thank-you for that!

09-24-2010, 07:42 PM	#82
Slowpoke Rodriguez Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Alexandria, VA Photos: Albums Posts: 100	Originally posted by JohnBee You mean something like this Yeah, I guess something like that. Very nice pictures, by the way. Now, if you can get a hold of a K-5 and a D7000 and compare the two in similar lighting, we would be on to something. Whenever I see these test shots at 6400 or whatever, and the other settings lead me to believe the shot could have been taken at 400 or 800, I think "nice--entirely unrealistic, but nice."

09-24-2010, 08:31 PM	#83
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by JohnBee I beleive that is a consequence of the lighting. To me this says poor AWB.

09-24-2010, 08:34 PM	#84
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Originally posted by JohnBee Both images were shot in RAW with a K20D. They were processed using ACR6.2 and Topaz Denoise(for NR). The first image was part of some low light ISO6400 trials I conducting a few months back. I used the SMC-A 50mm 1.4 @ f/2 with a shutter of 1/10s The second image was taken at ISO 1250 with a PK/A Vivitar 28mm 2.8 CF @ f/4 1/100s(to help isolate the subject against the background). Show off! Just a joke JohnBee. I have been in awe of your K20/iso6400 shots for quite some time......amazing! Ray

09-24-2010, 09:06 PM	#85
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by janneman Why this particuar crop??? Dark area of photo.

09-24-2010, 10:15 PM	#86
obheng Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Kuala Lumpur Posts: 30	Great work, JohnBee! From my laptop screen, I'd say it can easily print up to 10R without much distractive noise. Very imporessed.

09-24-2010, 10:45 PM	#87
levelred Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: DFW Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 65	I'd love to see K-x vs. K-5

09-25-2010, 12:31 AM	#88
janneman Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 908	Originally posted by audiobomber To me this says poor AWB. The two Nikon sampes here post1196215 and here post1196229 have a different cast and both look over exposed to me. Are they overexposed as they were shot or in PP? Latter would add noise... maybe D7000 isn't so bad.

09-25-2010, 03:22 AM	#89
photogerald Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 253	This is very impressive and the kind of high-ISO performance I've been waiting for! Looking at the 100% crops we can see that the noise is greatly improved. But taking a closer look at the resized images, it becomes apparent just how much improved the K-5 is. Kudos to Pentax AND Sony! With the K-7 shot the contrast has been greatly increased (by the camera) to try and mask the poor DR - notice how there are absolutely no details in the shadows. Nasty.

09-25-2010, 03:25 AM	#90
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by photogerald With the K-7 shot the contrast has been greatly increased (by the camera) to try and mask the poor DR - notice how there are absolutely no details in the shadows. Nasty. I think it says that it's shot in bright mode, though, that explains some of the high contrast.