K-1 Full res JPGs versus D810 ISO 12800, ISO 51200

**ffking** · 03-19-2016, 05:14 AM

Originally posted by melander

Comparing a7rmk2 vs pentax k-1 shows a pretty ugly side of the sony

I don't see that on my screen - but why can't they just get the basics right of having the same setup and focal length and focal plane?

Simen1 · 03-19-2016, 05:28 AM

Originally posted by beholder3

Whatever sick pixelpeepers might say, this should be good enough for anyone who can't afford a larger sensor pro camera like the Pentax 645z. Whiners fell free.

It you use a f/1,4 lens on a K-1 you get lower noise then with a 645Z and a f/2,8 lens. If you use the pixel shift function you will get comparable detail level. 645Z needs an upgrade in sensor size and megapixels to have a notable advantage over K-1.

melander · 03-19-2016, 05:42 AM

Originally posted by ffking

I don't see that on my screen - but why can't they just get the basics right of having the same setup and focal length and focal plane?

Look how blotchy the blacks in the camerabody looks compared to the pentax.

gorme · 03-19-2016, 05:49 AM

Originally posted by ffking

I don't see that on my screen - but why can't they just get the basics right of having the same setup and focal length and focal plane?

And the same settings... Switching to Manual mode and putting the same settings on both is not that hard..

D1N0 · 03-19-2016, 06:39 AM

This is the reason why Ricoh won't allow big preproduction files. The banding seems to be global, not just shadows. Firmware version is 0.38 so even earlier than the 0.48 we've been seeing. No telling whether it was caused by the sensor or the lighting. It looks like Ricoh does chromatic noise reduction in it's raws (as usual) I have no problems with that. it is mainly a time saver and it also can be reverted in post.

Also the auto-correction for movement is not working (because they didn't turn it on?) in the pixel shift comparison shot.

**ffking** · 03-19-2016, 06:45 AM

Originally posted by melander

Look how blotchy the blacks in the camera body looks compared to the pentax.

really not on my screen - if anything the Sony looks smoother- but I've never calibrated my laptop screen, and it does tend towards the cool,so that might explain why we're seeing it differently?

i83N · 03-19-2016, 06:48 AM

my eyes can deceive me, but it looks like K-1 ISO 51200 noise is equal(or even less noisier) to D810 ISO 12800

D1N0 · 03-19-2016, 06:51 AM

Originally posted by ffking

really not on my screen - if anything the Sony looks smoother- but I've never calibrated my laptop screen, and it does tend towards the cool,so that might explain why we're seeing it differently?

Sony?

banep · 03-19-2016, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by ogl

K-1 is much better, but blurred. Nikon is sharp.

K1 has better noise control, but D810 had better lens.
Center sharpness is almost equal on both cameras but Nikon lens is much sharper in corners.

beholder3 · 03-19-2016, 07:19 AM

Originally posted by banep

K1 has better noise control, but D810 had better lens.
Center sharpness is almost equal on both cameras but Nikon lens is much sharper in corners.

Yes, the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art on the Pentax seems weak. That lens was used for all images.

micromacro · 03-19-2016, 07:41 AM

I don't see ugly side of Sony as for noise. Looks pretty "clean".

Giklab · 03-19-2016, 07:54 AM

The K-1 samples are obviously OOC JPEGs at default settings.
What's also painfully obvious is that the NR algorithm hasn't changed much from the K-5...

melander · 03-19-2016, 08:01 AM

Originally posted by D1N0

This is the reason why Ricoh won't allow big preproduction files. The banding seems to be global, not just shadows. Firmware version is 0.38 so even earlier than the 0.48 we've been seeing. No telling whether it was caused by the sensor or the lighting. It looks like Ricoh does chromatic noise reduction in it's raws (as usual) I have no problems with that. it is mainly a time saver and it also can be reverted in post.

Also the auto-correction for movement is not working (because they didn't turn it on?) in the pixel shift comparison shot.

Raw? (and some more character to reach minimum posting lenght)

micromacro · 03-19-2016, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by Giklab

What's also painfully obvious is that the NR algorithm hasn't changed much from the K-5...

Forgive my ignorance, but what exactly wrong with NR algorithm? Nikon algorithm is better?
I love my K5iis, ISO is acceptable up to 10000, imo. Seriously, how often people use extremely high ISO.

Gimbal · 03-19-2016, 08:14 AM

Originally posted by beholder3

A little scary ISO 51200 (watch for Details in the open Prismdome):
K-1 http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/k1/IMGP1019.JPG
D810 http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/d810/DSC_0147.JPG

To be fair, the K-1 used an exposure of f8 1/4000 sec, while the Nikon used f8 and 1/8000sec. Nikon being one stop faster.

Also at iso 100, the K-1 used 1/6 of second, while the Nikon used a shorter time 1/13, at iso 64 !!

There is something fishy going on here.
The Nikon pictures where shot over two years ago, maybe the light used for the scene has faded forcing the Pentax to use longer exposures?

Or the ISO settings hasn't been calibrated yet, and might change.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax K-30. ISO 400...12800.	Mr. A.S.	Pentax K-30 & K-50	9	08-11-2012 06:01 AM
Misc The fun of shooting at ISO 51200 (K-5)...	igor	Post Your Photos!	10	07-14-2011 01:43 PM
K-5, DNG/RAW ISO Case Study (6400-51200)...	JohnBee	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	47	10-29-2010 09:14 PM
K-5 Vs K-7 ISO 6400 & 12800	eigelb	Pentax News and Rumors	7	09-28-2010 03:19 AM
Another ISO 12800 sample from D7000, good news for K-5?	leeak	Pentax News and Rumors	26	09-18-2010 03:57 PM

03-19-2016, 05:14 AM	#16
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	Originally posted by melander Comparing a7rmk2 vs pentax k-1 shows a pretty ugly side of the sony I don't see that on my screen - but why can't they just get the basics right of having the same setup and focal length and focal plane?

03-19-2016, 05:28 AM	#17
Simen1 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Tromsø, Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 1,031	Originally posted by beholder3 Whatever sick pixelpeepers might say, this should be good enough for anyone who can't afford a larger sensor pro camera like the Pentax 645z. Whiners fell free. It you use a f/1,4 lens on a K-1 you get lower noise then with a 645Z and a f/2,8 lens. If you use the pixel shift function you will get comparable detail level. 645Z needs an upgrade in sensor size and megapixels to have a notable advantage over K-1.

03-19-2016, 05:42 AM	#18
melander Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Sweden, Umea Posts: 876	Originally posted by ffking I don't see that on my screen - but why can't they just get the basics right of having the same setup and focal length and focal plane? Look how blotchy the blacks in the camerabody looks compared to the pentax.

03-19-2016, 05:49 AM	#19
gorme Senior Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Galway - Ireland Posts: 213	Originally posted by ffking I don't see that on my screen - but why can't they just get the basics right of having the same setup and focal length and focal plane? And the same settings... Switching to Manual mode and putting the same settings on both is not that hard..

03-19-2016, 06:39 AM	#20
D1N0 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Location: --- Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,802	This is the reason why Ricoh won't allow big preproduction files. The banding seems to be global, not just shadows. Firmware version is 0.38 so even earlier than the 0.48 we've been seeing. No telling whether it was caused by the sensor or the lighting. It looks like Ricoh does chromatic noise reduction in it's raws (as usual) I have no problems with that. it is mainly a time saver and it also can be reverted in post. Also the auto-correction for movement is not working (because they didn't turn it on?) in the pixel shift comparison shot.

03-19-2016, 06:45 AM	#21
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	Originally posted by melander Look how blotchy the blacks in the camera body looks compared to the pentax. really not on my screen - if anything the Sony looks smoother- but I've never calibrated my laptop screen, and it does tend towards the cool,so that might explain why we're seeing it differently?

03-19-2016, 06:48 AM	#22
i83N Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,203	my eyes can deceive me, but it looks like K-1 ISO 51200 noise is equal(or even less noisier) to D810 ISO 12800

03-19-2016, 06:51 AM	#23
D1N0 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2012 Location: --- Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,802	Originally posted by ffking really not on my screen - if anything the Sony looks smoother- but I've never calibrated my laptop screen, and it does tend towards the cool,so that might explain why we're seeing it differently? Sony?

03-19-2016, 07:03 AM	#24
banep Banned Join Date: Mar 2013 Posts: 360	Originally posted by ogl K-1 is much better, but blurred. Nikon is sharp. K1 has better noise control, but D810 had better lens. Center sharpness is almost equal on both cameras but Nikon lens is much sharper in corners.

03-19-2016, 07:19 AM	#25
beholder3 Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 3,112 Original Poster	Originally posted by banep K1 has better noise control, but D810 had better lens. Center sharpness is almost equal on both cameras but Nikon lens is much sharper in corners. Yes, the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art on the Pentax seems weak. That lens was used for all images.

03-19-2016, 07:41 AM	#26
micromacro Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,722	I don't see ugly side of Sony as for noise. Looks pretty "clean".

03-19-2016, 07:54 AM	#27
Giklab Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Slovenia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,182	The K-1 samples are obviously OOC JPEGs at default settings. What's also painfully obvious is that the NR algorithm hasn't changed much from the K-5...

03-19-2016, 08:01 AM	#28
melander Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Sweden, Umea Posts: 876	Originally posted by D1N0 This is the reason why Ricoh won't allow big preproduction files. The banding seems to be global, not just shadows. Firmware version is 0.38 so even earlier than the 0.48 we've been seeing. No telling whether it was caused by the sensor or the lighting. It looks like Ricoh does chromatic noise reduction in it's raws (as usual) I have no problems with that. it is mainly a time saver and it also can be reverted in post. Also the auto-correction for movement is not working (because they didn't turn it on?) in the pixel shift comparison shot. Raw? (and some more character to reach minimum posting lenght)

03-19-2016, 08:06 AM	#29
micromacro Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,722	Originally posted by Giklab What's also painfully obvious is that the NR algorithm hasn't changed much from the K-5... Forgive my ignorance, but what exactly wrong with NR algorithm? Nikon algorithm is better? I love my K5iis, ISO is acceptable up to 10000, imo. Seriously, how often people use extremely high ISO.

03-19-2016, 08:14 AM	#30
Gimbal Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,106	Originally posted by beholder3 A little scary ISO 51200 (watch for Details in the open Prismdome): K-1 http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/k1/IMGP1019.JPG D810 http://www.cyberphoto.se/bildexempel/d810/DSC_0147.JPG To be fair, the K-1 used an exposure of f8 1/4000 sec, while the Nikon used f8 and 1/8000sec. Nikon being one stop faster. Also at iso 100, the K-1 used 1/6 of second, while the Nikon used a shorter time 1/13, at iso 64 !! There is something fishy going on here. The Nikon pictures where shot over two years ago, maybe the light used for the scene has faded forcing the Pentax to use longer exposures? Or the ISO settings hasn't been calibrated yet, and might change.