[rawr]

K-30 gets measured, reviewed by DxO:

DxOMark - Measurement

Scores 79 DxOMark score - same as the K-01. No surprises.

[Docrwm]

K-30 gets measured, reviewed by DxO:

DxOMark - Measurement

Scores 79 DxOMark score - same as the K-01. No surprises.

Thanks for the link. Among their "Cons" (of which there are only 2) was this gem:

"A dynamic range slightly inferior to that of the Pentax K-5"

[GlennG]

Thanks for the link. I had been waiting for this test, but thinking that the result would be close to what it is. APS-C sensors are topping out at around 80 as DXOMark scores the sensors, currently. This is a composite score of several factors - how much each is weighted I do not know. Plus or minus a few on the total score is probably of no real consequence, IMHO. The approximately 80 score for APS-C has remained at the top end since K-5 and D-7000 showed up in late 2010. Prior to K-5, the Kx and Kr were at 72, and before that the K10 and K20 were in mid-60's, K-7 was somewhat diappointing at 61. My K100dS was not tested, but if I "borrow" the D40 score, it would be in the mid-50's. So one can see that sensor makers improved over time. I have wondered if APS-C sensors have plateau'd out near 80, or there will be improvements any time soon. I think the sensor advances have given cameras real advantages that did not exist just a few years ago. But I'm not sure that every advance is always an improvement. I still think some of the K10 ISO 100 photos are among the "cleanest" I've seen - at least on the web, for example. Thanks for posting.

[JinDesu]

I expect APS-C to improve in the next generation - but probably by not much more. Resolution is the last bit left: If we can get a 24MP APS-C sensor, remove the AA filter because of the smaller pixels, and somehow magically actually improve the low-light performance, and that would be the final form of APS-C.

Beyond that would probably just be minor improvements - and hopefully reduction in prices.

[rawr]

I have wondered if APS-C sensors have plateau'd out near 80, or there will be improvements any time soon.

Who knows when APS-C will plateau. Tech innovations - think for example Sony's backside-illuminated CMOS - have a habit of springing up and making past predictions about the future of sensor chip tech unreliable.

The APS-C DXO scores may go up above 80, for arguments sake, even if just one of the scoring variables sees a big increase as a result of some individual tech innovation.

So for example if someone figures out how to massively boost low-light sensitivity in APS-C, without doing anything much to improve colour-depth or DR above the K-5, the total DXO score could still shoot above 80.

[RonHendriks1966]

Good to read and probably the exackt same sensor and processing unit as in the K-01. I think that is a fine set.

[Docrwm]

Who knows when APS-C will plateau. Tech innovations - think for example Sony's backside-illuminated CMOS - have a habit of springing up and making past predictions about the future of sensor chip tech unreliable.

The APS-C DXO scores may go up above 80, for arguments sake, even if just one of the scoring variables sees a big increase as a result of some individual tech innovation.

So for example if someone figures out how to massively boost low-light sensitivity in APS-C, without doing anything much to improve colour-depth or DR above the K-5, the total DXO score could still shoot above 80.

I quite agree. Remember that decades ago Bill Gates said, adamantly, that no PC would EVER need more than 640kb.

[snake]

Thanks for the link. Among their "Cons" (of which there are only 2) was this gem:

"A dynamic range slightly inferior to that of the Pentax K-5"

So that means it's still got fantastic DR that's in or near FF territory?

[Docrwm]

So that means it's still got fantastic DR that's in or near FF territory?

Yes, that's what was so funny about that remark. They rated the K-5 as the best in that regard and then they do a "Con" for Pentax's lower level camera being almost as good?? Wow, that's what I call reaching for a negative

[cbaytan]

13 EV dynamic range with a 12 bit camera is a quiet success, kudos to Pentax, just wondering what K-5 II s will be,

[boriscleto]

I quite agree. Remember that decades ago Bill Gates said, adamantly, that no PC would EVER need more than 640kb.

Thy application program and data shall all fit in 640K of RAM. After all, it's ten times what you had on a CP/M machine. Keep holy this 640K of RAM, and clutter it not with device drivers, memory managers, or other things that might make thy computer useful.

When Gates said that in the early '80s he was right. But it showed an amazing lack of foresight.

[boriscleto]

13 EV dynamic range with a 12 bit camera is a quiet success, kudos to Pentax, just wondering what K-5 II s will be,

Why would the K-5 IIs be any different than the K-5 or the K-5 II? The AA filter affects sharpness, not DR.

[cbaytan]

Why would the K-5 IIs be any different than the K-5 or the K-5 II? The AA filter affects sharpness, not DR.

AFAIK it does a bit.


http://www.go-ci.com/images/Anti-Aliasing%20Filter%20and%20Phase%20Match.pdf

Re: Stronger AA filter = More Dynamic Range?: Olympus SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

[Rondec]

Yes, that's what was so funny about that remark. They rated the K-5 as the best in that regard and then they do a "Con" for Pentax's lower level camera being almost as good?? Wow, that's what I call reaching for a negative

I would imagine the difference is a combination of the K5 having iso 80 and 14 bit versus 12 bit processing. Still, not sure how usable the one stop difference in dynamic range really is on the K5.

[Clarkey]

I'm just laughing as there have been howls to test the Oly OM-D at DXO Mark, and the Pentax K-30 review comes out first...