[geauxpez]

Among others. Just posted -- interesting tool to play with. "Measurebators" may need new mouse batteries after this.

[FullertonImages]

The D7000 looks like a RAW file, the 60D, looks like an over-sharpened jpeg, the K-5 looks like a heinously over-sharpened jpeg, and the 50D just like like crap.

[FullertonImages]

Although, if you compare them as RAW, the D7000 actually looks like it is holding more detail, especially at higher ISOs, at the expense of more noise though. It looks like the K-5 is applying NR to the RAW files.

[Eagle_Friends]

wow, the K5 looks much better in RAW 6400 (the most i'll probably go if i ever get one =[) vs. the D7000 RAW at 6400.

Look at the feather and the clock to the bottom right. much better i'll say.

[geauxpez]

Don't forget -- if you're not interested in the 50D or one of the others you can change it to...say, the Nikon 300s or others.

[mikem]

To me, the K-5 images seem a little less sharp in the first place. Look at some of the small text at low ISO.

But as an untrained pixel peeper, all the images seem pretty close (minus the 50D). The D7000 and K-5 certainly have an edge at higher ISO over the 60D, but it seems small enough that'd I'd never care. I'll gladly buy an K-5 (some day).

[JohnBee]

The K-5 low level NR is definitely showing it's effect here.
Though in its defense, I'd say that there would most likely be no issues recovering detail(minor tweak) in final output.

However, I do think Pentax should have adjusted low level NR to come-on at/or around ISO5000 rather than ISO3200. Because I don't think it's doing any good at this level.
If anything, they most likely initiated a common NR system in the K-5. However based on my own testing, the K-5 could benefit from a tweak imo.

From what I can see, the ultimate would most likely look something like this:

Low Level NR: OFF
ISO80 - ISO4000

Low Level NR 1: ON
ISO5000 - 10000

Low Level NR 2: ON
ISO12800 - 25600

Low Level NR 3: ON
... ISO51200

My 10 cents anyways...

[Eagle_Friends]

To me, the K-5 images seem a little less sharp in the first place. Look at some of the small text at low ISO.

But as an untrained pixel peeper, all the images seem pretty close (minus the 50D). The D7000 and K-5 certainly have an edge at higher ISO over the 60D, but it seems small enough that'd I'd never care. I'll gladly buy an K-5 (some day).

Yea, the D7000 looks sharper in a lot of the settings.

wonder what kind of lens they're using...

[pcarfan]

The K-5 is not generally softer, it's just that at high iso JPEG samples the K-5 has less noise and less detail (softer) due to more aggressive NR...I think the D7000 and the K-5 are a wash here.

In RAW the K-5 is much better at and above iso 3200 (Even slightly at iso 1600). At iso 12800 the K-5 is significantly better than the D7000. The iso 6400 K-5 RAW image is not really in focus though (K-5 iso 12800 samples showq more detail than the iso 6400 sample and this can't be, if not for focus issues).

[jpzk]

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/121955-dpreview-ha...son-shots.html

Duplicate in another thread?
Why do we have two of the same info? ... getting annoying.

JP

[geauxpez]

@ jpzk: Looks like the other OP and I opened threads in different forums minutes apart, both after searching for a thread on the topic. Apologies for annoying you (or anyone else), but it's bound to happen at times.

Mods, feel free to close or delete this thread if it is an unnecessary or bothersome duplicate.

Cheers,

Adam

[JohnBee]

@ jpzk: Looks like the other OP and I opened threads in different forums minutes apart, both after searching for a thread on the topic. Apologies for annoying you (or anyone else), but it's bound to happen at times.

Mods, feel free to close or delete this thread if it is an unnecessary or bothersome duplicate.

Cheers,

Adam

A thread merge might work

[pinholecam]

Posted some of this in the other thread.

They do look quite similar in JPEG. Not sure if these represent default NR settings of are they set to OFF.
IMO, the results are very close between 3 of them. Not something worth jumping ship for any one of them.


wrt JPEG at ISO12800
Its a win here loose there situation.
D7K does better with yellow, but there is a yellow cast and lots of patchy yellow blotches everywhere like what was seen on Imaging Resource. Seemly better detail on flat surface detail (eg. card prints). Then again, the contrast is slightly more as well, so that may give that extra hint of detail.

For me K5 does better with most of the other colors. Colors look a bit more vibrant. Very slightly better in fine detail for dimensional objects (Eg. feather, hair), and less noise, but can look softer on flat surface ones (eg. Printed card).

Canon 60D is not too bad overall either.

I’d actually say that all of them good enough , no real difference, win here loose there, though I’m a bit worried on the patchy yellow for D7K

If K5 is on Auto NR, then its doing itself a disservice. NR is set on MID after ISO3200 and I've found that it adds artifacts w/o doing much. In fact my own preference would be to turn off NR above ISO3200 to get the low artifact fine grain jpeg o/p that can be better worked with later with a NR program.


I am a pessimist when it comes to DPR reviewing Pentax, they will probably 'slam' the K5 against the competition as 'soft' based on the JPEG

[Erik]

It's amazing how much better the Pentax is at suppressing chroma noise in JPEG output. The D7000 and 60D are both getting slaughtered in that field, and it seems the K-5 is better than, or equal to, the other cameras in every other way, too. How the tables have turned!

[ogl]

Why do they use FA50/1.4 at F9?