Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-11-2015, 05:09 AM   #136
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
And that also the Pentax engineers that cheated and smoothed high iso RAWs to get more pleasing high iso pictures in reviews and tests while once you put the raw into a proper denoising tool, what you gain from this is mostly less sharpness compared to an un-modified raw.
There is no RAW data, period. It is always processed, but not turned into jpeg. For all companies.

11-11-2015, 06:43 AM   #137
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by pacu Quote
There is no RAW data, period. It is always processed, but not turned into jpeg. For all companies.
Sure, but is it what is advertized?
11-11-2015, 07:46 PM   #138
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Sure, but is it what is advertized?
I am sure that they are covered with fine print.

But I find it ridiculus to blame Pentax for being a bit more agressive at ISOs that are the last resort if you care a bit about quality.

I certainly did not choose Pentax for this , but for the IBIS.

If by any chance Canon surpasses Sony in sensor's DR , I expect Nikon fanboys to commit seppuku if they have any kind of decency. At least for those in Greece.

Last edited by pacu; 11-11-2015 at 07:51 PM. Reason: Spelling
11-12-2015, 12:38 AM   #139
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by pacu Quote
But I find it ridiculus to blame Pentax for being a bit more agressive at ISOs that are the last resort if you care a bit about quality.
This depend a lot of what your activity is... If you are into weddings/action/sports/events/wildlife you are often stretching the limits and will have quite many shoots in the 1600-3200 range and the occasionnal 6400+ iso shoot.

For me sure, most of my pictures are at iso 800 or less and most of time iso 100, but this is also dependant of the practice.

11-12-2015, 01:26 AM   #140
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 71
Canon copied Pentax raw cooking

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
And that also the Pentax engineers that cheated and smoothed high iso RAWs to get more pleasing high iso pictures in reviews and tests
Ah, you must be referring to Pentax approach in the old K-5s. Something they do not do in their current flagship models K-3 or K-3 II.

This Raw-Denoising approach was so worthwhile that Canon decided to copy Pentax here (again) for their very current $5000 flagship pro model:
See "Canon EOS 1DX smoothed" - Canon EOS 1Dx : Measurements - DxOMark

And please don't even try to split hairs here by discussing at which ISO level you do this. It's either acceptable or not in a $400 (Pentax) and a $5000 (Canon) camera.
11-12-2015, 01:00 PM - 1 Like   #141
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by HavelockV Quote
Ah, you must be referring to Pentax approach in the old K-5s. Something they do not do in their current flagship models K-3 or K-3 II.

This Raw-Denoising approach was so worthwhile that Canon decided to copy Pentax here (again) for their very current $5000 flagship pro model:
See "Canon EOS 1DX smoothed" - Canon EOS 1Dx : Measurements - DxOMark

And please don't even try to split hairs here by discussing at which ISO level you do this. It's either acceptable or not in a $400 (Pentax) and a $5000 (Canon) camera.
Sure the discussion was about K5... And for me yes it was an improvement to remove it. I have DxO and other have lightroom and can do it themselves better. At worst make it an option in camera, even enabled by default. But let me a possibility to remove it.

Not that it is bad by itself to do things on the camera... This is just that you are not going to implement the best ever algorithm in your camera with your limited engineer dev team and limited processing power... You'll not doing it the wait I want it neither.

With DxO when I have a difficult shoot, I can enable DxO prime and it will give me additionnal quality. It may need 1 minute to process the picture, but it will look better. That's fine with me. I'am would not be fine with my camera doing this between shoots or to drain all the power doing it when I do not use it.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 11-12-2015 at 01:08 PM.
11-12-2015, 06:31 PM   #142
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
This depend a lot of what your activity is... If you are into weddings/action/sports/events/wildlife you are often stretching the limits and will have quite many shoots in the 1600-3200 range and the occasionnal 6400+ iso shoot.

For me sure, most of my pictures are at iso 800 or less and most of time iso 100, but this is also dependant of the practice.
Yes it is true. But also there is the issue of light quality, without it there is no photo quality.

It is the nature of the beast.
11-13-2015, 12:04 AM   #143
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by pacu Quote
Yes it is true. But also there is the issue of light quality, without it there is no photo quality.

It is the nature of the beast.
Sure, but light quality is not necessary related to light quantity and lowering the isos doesn't improve the quality of the incoming light, just the sensor sensitivity to it.

11-13-2015, 07:54 AM   #144
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Sure, but light quality is not necessary related to light quantity and lowering the isos doesn't improve the quality of the incoming light, just the sensor sensitivity to it.
All true.

But my point is that people take pictures in adverse conditions, just because the equipment can pull it, not because there is something to be said by taking a picture.
11-13-2015, 09:47 AM   #145
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by pacu Quote
....

But my point is that people take pictures in adverse conditions, just because the equipment can pull it, not because there is something to be said by taking a picture.
You don't sound like you have much experience. There are many beautiful scenes in twilight conditions. If there weren't , there wouldn't be any reason for mfr to continue the push for ever lower light capable cameras.
11-13-2015, 03:41 PM   #146
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 955
Maybe there is an IR twist on the color filter array? RGGB might include IR in some of the pixels or maybe one of the greens are replaced by a full spectrum pixel (including IR). With some advantages and some disadvantages.
11-14-2015, 11:09 AM   #147
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
You don't sound like you have much experience. There are many beautiful scenes in twilight conditions. If there weren't , there wouldn't be any reason for mfr to continue the push for ever lower light capable cameras.
At least I know what a tripod is for...
11-15-2015, 02:22 AM   #148
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 362
Ofc because exposure time has no impact on the picture ...
11-15-2015, 02:40 PM   #149
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 83
Well there is a pressing need for ISO 1.8446744073709551616 × 10^19 so I can finally take photographs of owls flying in moonless nights.
11-15-2015, 06:39 PM   #150
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by pacu Quote
Well there is a pressing need for ISO 1.8446744073709551616 × 10^19 so I can finally take photographs of owls flying in moonless nights.
That's never a matter of iso but lens diameter. Are you ready for that 3m lens Ų?

In other words ... there is a reason why bats use ultrasonic radar rather than their eyes ...
Same for owls, on a moonless night, an owl relies on its sharp hearing to track its prey.

Last edited by falconeye; 11-15-2015 at 06:45 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!
aps-c, body, cameras, canon, crop, dxo, dxomark, ff, ii, k-3, k-3ii, lr, marks, mask, motion, nikon, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pixel, results, score, sensor, sensors, shift, tests, thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How do you see the K-3ii vs K-5iis? Conqueror Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 01-27-2016 07:12 AM
K-3II First Impressions cali92rs Pentax K-3 9 07-17-2015 05:05 AM
Firmware the same for K-3 & K-3II? glee46 Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 07-05-2015 06:02 PM
K-3 (not K-3II) future availability & price guesses Lititz Pentax K-3 11 07-05-2015 10:36 AM
New K-3ii vict Pentax K-3 8 05-22-2015 01:05 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:16 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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