Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-04-2012, 02:04 PM   #121
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
I'm not 100% sure, but... it looks as though the NEX-7 RAW could yield more detail at ISO6400 than the K-5. Granted... the effects of noise would inevitably consume the noisier sensor as sensitivities continued to rise though for the most part, the 24MP sensor does have the potential to produce better output than its 16MP counterpart.

That being said, I'd also point-out that the K-5 has the advantage of low level NR over the NEX-7 as well. And so this may just be enough to offset the difference in the end. IOW. if Pentax were to couple the same low level NR with the 24MP sensor, it may be enough to place it in the same noise performance area as the K-5. Though I'm really not sure how far it could toward maximum ISO.
I can make perfect usable A3+ pictures in my printer coming from K-5 with iso6400. I don't have a larger printer, so don't need the extra pixels.

09-04-2012, 02:26 PM   #122
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 376
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Did you look at them downsampled?
I just downsampled them to 8MP and the NEX-7 didn't look too great.
But then, I never trust images I didn't take myself, so, who cares.
09-04-2012, 02:27 PM   #123
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
But the FA77 images are amongst the most pleasing I have shot - along with the other two FA Ltds.
Sure, they weren't 'designed' for digital, but they'll do just fine on it - as they have with all the APS-C cameras to date.
09-04-2012, 02:32 PM   #124
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,150
[deleted]


Last edited by beholder3; 08-11-2013 at 07:20 AM. Reason: [deleted]
09-04-2012, 02:38 PM   #125
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,496
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
I can make perfect usable A3+ pictures in my printer coming from K-5 with iso6400. I don't have a larger printer, so don't need the extra pixels.
What's interesting in all of this, is where it all comes down to ones personal needs. ie. I was able to get away with ISO6400 prints with the K20D until I tried the K-5. At which point I thought... well this is nice. And then moved on from there. And so I'd say the same applies in cases such as these as well. IOW. most of us likely could have continues to make due a few models ago. Though that doesn't seem to stop us from wanting more either

TBH. I could use more pixels, DR and high ISO performance myself. In fact... I'm not going to pretend I'm all on-board with the technological limitations surrounding the current sensor just because everyone else accepts it. Just as I wouldn't make excuses for the fact that I can't capture an indoor scene(as I see it) in a room with a window in daylight for example.

And so for me... better is definitely on the table. ie. I would love to have low light and dynamic range that would allow me to capture exactly what I see with my eyes when I'm shooting. Likewise... I'd like to have enough MP so as to produce prints that look just as real as the moment they were shot. - and in some cases, even better given that I often push process them afterward.

But that just me.
09-04-2012, 02:42 PM   #126
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
What's interesting in all of this, is where it all comes down to ones personal needs. ie. I was able to get away with ISO6400 prints with the K20D until I tried the K-5. At which point I thought... well this is nice. And then moved on from there. And so I'd say the same applies in cases such as these as well. IOW. most of us likely could have continues to make due a few models ago. Though that doesn't seem to stop us from wanting more either
True, but I'm not looking for it in an aps-c sensor camera. That I want coming from a FF 24mp camera.
09-04-2012, 02:45 PM   #127
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by LamyTax Quote
Even if that camera had tons of issues?
Why would a FF have tons of issues compared to an APS-C ?
09-04-2012, 02:49 PM   #128
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
Have you ever actually looked at those pictures? With your own eyes?
There is absolutely nothing about a misconception there. The 24MP sensor is inferior with regards to high ISO performance vs. the current 16MP.

For anyone who cares to use his own eyes, instead of multiplying unsubstantiated claims:
I would hardly call DXOMark tests unsubstantiated.

What you are seeing in the DPR files is shown in the DXO graphs. At ISO's up to 1600, the noise levels are the same for the 16 and 24mp cameras. Pentax applies non-defeatable NR at ISO's above 1600, which significantly improves SNR (and loses some detail). For proof, compare the DPR images for the NEX-5N to the Pentax K-5. They use the same sensor, but the noise levels are radically different. That's the only explanation for what you're seeing in your examples above.
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-came.../(brand3)/Sony


Last edited by audiobomber; 09-04-2012 at 04:48 PM.
09-04-2012, 03:01 PM   #129
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 376
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
Why would a FF have tons of issues compared to an APS-C ?
You don't get the argument. People want Pentax to rush out a FF-body. Just because.

They weren't allowed to develop FF under Hoya. Ricoh, however, changed things, but things take time to get right. And you don't just release a crappy FF body, just because.
You take your time and make it right. So it's worth >2000$ and actually sells.
09-04-2012, 03:19 PM   #130
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by LamyTax Quote
You don't get the argument. People want Pentax to rush out a FF-body. Just because.

They weren't allowed to develop FF under Hoya. Ricoh, however, changed things, but things take time to get right. And you don't just release a crappy FF body, just because.
You take your time and make it right. So it's worth >2000$ and actually sells.
Is 12 years rushing it ?
Pentax Digital SLR - 6 megapixel: Digital Photography Review
Pentax 6mp Digital SLR hands-on: Digital Photography Review


09-04-2012, 03:29 PM   #131
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 376
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
Is 12 years rushing it ?
Yeah, right, Pentax had their FF-program running, fully blown, for the last twelve years.

I think it doesn't make any sense to continue a conversation with someone who doesn't care for facts.
Would you care to read what I posted above.
09-04-2012, 03:35 PM   #132
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by LamyTax Quote
Yeah, right, Pentax had their FF-program running, fully blown, for the last twelve years.

I think it doesn't make any sense to continue a conversation with someone who doesn't care for facts.
Would you care to read what I post (or the links of what you just posted, for that matter).
So now Pentax doesn't have a clue about producing a 35mm sensor FF DSLR ? So I guess I will get the new FF Canon 6D then.
09-04-2012, 03:38 PM   #133
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
Did you read my post? If you open those things in a firefox tab, the browser by default scales the pictures to fit into the windows. So, yes, that makes viewing them there downscaled automatically.

Try for yourself, it is only a few seconds effort.
I don't trust the downsampling of teh interwebz. Sorry. If it hasn't been done for the express purpose of comparing noise output at the same resolution I'm not going to use it as such. Maybe your source/browser/whatever are AOK but I'm not going to trust it unless I have two RAW's going into lightroom (or someone like DxO does the same for me).
09-04-2012, 04:12 PM   #134
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Near Sydney, NSW
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 331
QuoteOriginally posted by LamyTax Quote
So, are you saying a Canon 7D makes no sense?

Pity for all those folks who bought one...
As in, over the 60D?

You can't really compare a 60D/7D competition to the K-30/K-3 competition because A) the Pentaxes are weather sealed, so I'm looking at that as a major feature of the K-30, and thus strange to have a K-3 that is basically the same - and B) well this actually a different point but here we go:

No I do not think the 7D makes a whole lot of sense. Honestly, do people on this thread really think the Canon body line up is not... well, a wank? 1100D, 600D, 60D, 7D, 5D-3, 1DX... and then to top it off, a lot of the preceding lines are not discontinued, so they overlap - the 1000D and 1100D overlapped for a bit, the 650D and the 600D are both being made (I think), not sure if the 5D-2 is out of production yet - oh and yes, before the 1DX there was the 1D and the 1Ds.
The 7D makes sense by itself, but I think it would make more sense to have: 600D, 7D, 5D3... Anything less than the 600D would be fine to be mirrorless - K01 style.

And, your "pity for those who bought one" - well, I pretty much think that about any Canon APS-C camera, yes it is a pity, because normally, for the same money, you could have got a lot more camera in a Pentax. The Nikon D5100 is currently not much less than the K-5... and it sucks in comparison. As does the 60D...
09-04-2012, 04:35 PM   #135
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
For comparing sensors, I have this (perhaps mistaken) view that DXO is the only trustworthy source. No one else seems to "get it" and their testing is flawed for one reason or another (not recognising claimed ISO100 on camera is not necessarily ISO100 actual, looking at smoothed jpegs, looking at pixel level noise rather than equalising resolution etc etc). If DXO graphs show the Sony 24MP sensor is as good as the 16MP sony sensor then I believe it.

I just checked the DXO graphs and it looks to me the sensors are very similair in performance with the edge going to the 24MP sensor (as overall score indicates). One interesting thing is to look at the claimed vs measured ISO for both, and the 5N stretches the truth more than the 7 for claimed vs actual ISO, I suspect that is tripping up the other sites and making the 16MP sensor look better than it actually is vs. the 24MP one.

Last edited by twitch; 09-04-2012 at 04:45 PM.
Reply

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!
k-3, parameters, pentax, pentax k-3, pentax news, pentax rumors, slr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ad are already appearing for the K-30 Docrwm Pentax K-30 & K-50 9 07-15-2012 11:35 PM
Corrosion appearing on battery grip dave2k Pentax K-5 12 04-04-2012 04:31 AM
Late-appearing sensor stain PALADIN85020 Pentax K-5 15 10-13-2011 02:20 PM
Error No thumbnail appearing in Critique forum jeztastic Site Suggestions and Help 2 06-14-2011 06:53 AM
Once more... Pentax EVIL upcoming next spring mtr_fingolfin Pentax News and Rumors 129 12-05-2010 05:42 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:10 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