Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-06-2017, 08:45 AM   #196
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,909
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
Two non-fair comparisons. The FF image is enlarged more then the APS-C image. Show them side by side at the same magnification, then we may compare.
Welcome - you can take the photos at dpreview and compare.

02-06-2017, 08:50 AM   #197
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,814
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
The KP has the Prime IV processor which is about 50% faster than prime III according to Ricoh.
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Do you really think that K-1's AF is 50% faster than K-3?
That's not what he said.
02-06-2017, 09:00 AM - 4 Likes   #198
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 29,931
Nothing is less fulfilling on this site, than the criticizing that happens when folks can't accept your test results and just sit and make up reasons to ignore the obvious.

The ability to look at a test, understand it's limitations, but also understand what you can learn from it, then say "thank you very much" is the sign of an intelligent person. "I can't accept your results because I don't like this and this and this about your test." is usually the sign of someone who doesn't have the ability to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Last edited by normhead; 02-06-2017 at 09:06 AM.
02-06-2017, 09:07 AM - 2 Likes   #199
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Athens
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 965
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Do you really think that K-1's AF is 50% faster than K-3?
Have you tried the K-3 and the K-1 autofocus performance? And with which lenses if I may ask. My question comes from your statements that seem to be opposite from Kenspos and others members. Moreover you speak like you know first hand, so please tell us your experiences on Pentax new models AF performance...

02-06-2017, 09:38 AM - 2 Likes   #200
Pentaxian
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,362
QuoteOriginally posted by kenspo Quote
And what do you think I'm doing? At least i have both cameras side by side to test...Do you since you seem to know the answer?

Its a better and newer sensor..of course it should be a bit better..and it is..But APS-C has its limitations no matter what...
Some things never change, the reason Ogl is on my ignore list is this has been his standard ever since he has been on here. there are a couple of people in the category who can't accept opinions based on actual experience from a user who has some talent and experience with a particular item
02-06-2017, 09:44 AM   #201
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 9,800
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Do you really think that K-1's AF is 50% faster than K-3?
I think you're getting confused...SAFOX is the AF engine, not PRIME
02-06-2017, 09:46 AM - 2 Likes   #202
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 29,931
I can't think of a test that would even determine how fast your AF is. There are times when I have trouble with the auto-focus on both cameras (K-3 and K-1) , moving targets and low light. It's quite possible that all we're going to get is the impressions of folks who regularly use both cameras. From time to time I use both in my blind, and I would say with my Tamron SP AF 2.8 and F 1.7 converter (screw drive) they are pretty close. But that doesn't address how they would behave with an SDM lens, where the speed of the lens motor is a limiting factor, or a DFA 28-105 or 18-135 with a faster more modern motor.

SO first off, there is unlikely to ever be a definitive answer that covers all circumstances. All you can do is look at what a person does and listen to his impressions. I'd say for birding, which is usually in good light ( I don't even go out on cloudy days) the K-3 and K-1 are pretty similar. For the situations Kenspo shoots, I wouldn't even venture an opinion. I don't shoot in those conditions.

Knowing what you don't know is key in these kinds of discussions.

Last edited by normhead; 02-06-2017 at 02:34 PM.
02-06-2017, 10:03 AM - 1 Like   #203
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Athens
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 965
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I can't think of a test that would even determine how fast your AF is. There are times when I have trouble with the auto-focus on both cameras, moving targets and low light. It's quite possible that all we're going to get is the impressions of folks who regularly use both cameras. From time to time I use both in my blind, and I would say with my Tamron SP AF 2.8 and F 1.7 converter (screw drive) they are pretty close. But that doesn't address how they would behave with an SDM lens, where the speed of the lens motor is a limiting factor, or a DFA 28-105 or 18-135 with a faster more modern motor.

SO first off, there is unlikely to ever be a definitive answer that covers all circumstances. All you can do is look at what a person does and listen to his impressions. I'd say for birding, which is usually in good light ( I don't even go out on cloudy days) the K-3 and K-1 are pretty similar. For the situations Kenspo shoots, I wouldn't even venture an opinion. I don't shoot in those conditions.

Knowing what you don't know is key in these kinds of discussions.
Normhead I listen to your and others opinions and remarks because I know you own and use the equipment you are commenting on. That's not the story for anyone in here and that is not a problem as long as they "know what they don't know" as you and Socrates have correctly remarked. But here we have comments on the performance and characteristics of equipment they don't use...

Anyway I just solve my problem... He got the silver medal...


Last edited by redpit; 02-06-2017 at 10:55 AM.
02-06-2017, 10:35 AM   #204
Pentaxian
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,362
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
For the situations Kenspo shoots, I wouldn't even venture an opinion. I don't shoot in those conditions.

Knowing what you don't know is key in these kinds of discussions.
Well having shot a lot of concerts over the years Kenspo is luckty he is shooting at the end of the business where there is plenty of light 95% of the time. it get's trickier in clubs and you learn to work around all sorts of stuff including slower af than you may like
but i wouldn't venture to say how well the K1 and KP or K3ii work in a concert venue. i can speak to older models and to how well three fuji models work (no idea how any of them are for Birding it's your domain i barely see any birds aside from pigeons and the spring murmations of starlings or the odd Bird of prey (usually when i'm driving)
02-06-2017, 10:40 AM   #205
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2013
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posts: 290
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
Two non-fair comparisons. The FF image is enlarged more then the APS-C image. Show them side by side at the same magnification, then we may compare.
As shown, they should be fair comparisons. Noise is produced at pixel level, and both the FF and the APS-C images from DPR show 100% views - one image pixel = one screen pixel. The image from the FF looks bigger because its sensor has more pixels recording the same image. However, when comparing the complete images from both formats, i.e. the same whole picture printed at the same size (or viewed on the same size screen), the crop factor means that the image from the APS-C sensor together with its image noise, will be magnified 1.5 times compared with the image from the FF sensor.

Philip
02-06-2017, 11:18 AM   #206
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
IgorZ's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,414
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
There is already less than a stop difference between the D500 and the K-70 When Pentax has improved further, they may well catch up:
Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review
That's a very interesting link. It's really amazing how greatly pixel shift improves the quality of the photo... I compared Pentax 645z to K-70 at 51200 with and without pixel shift. A picture is worth a thousand words, as they say...
02-06-2017, 11:35 AM   #207
bxf
Pentaxian
bxf's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lisbon area
Posts: 1,239
QuoteOriginally posted by IgorZ Quote
A picture is worth a thousand words
Sadly, probably none of mine are
02-06-2017, 11:39 AM   #208
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
IgorZ's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 1,414
QuoteOriginally posted by bxf Quote
Sadly, probably none of mine are
I bet your photos are worth two thousand words
02-06-2017, 01:10 PM - 1 Like   #209
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Welcome - you can take the photos at dpreview and compare.
Fine, I'll do it myself.

Name:  k-70 vs ff.png
Views: 1018
Size:  639.5 KB

There is a visible difference at ISO 3200 too, but I did increase the ISO to make it more visible. The rules of physics haven't imploded yet.. FF are better then APS-C.
02-06-2017, 01:25 PM   #210
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,028
QuoteOriginally posted by MrB1 Quote
As shown, they should be fair comparisons. Noise is produced at pixel level, and both the FF and the APS-C images from DPR show 100% views - one image pixel = one screen pixel. The image from the FF looks bigger because its sensor has more pixels recording the same image. However, when comparing the complete images from both formats, i.e. the same whole picture printed at the same size (or viewed on the same size screen), the crop factor means that the image from the APS-C sensor together with its image noise, will be magnified 1.5 times compared with the image from the FF sensor.
Noise are not produced at pixel level. Noise are a property of light. Photons only count in whole numbers and this counting process will have some randomness to it, depending on the total number of photons. That means that a theoretically perfect sensor that could count every photon without adding any noise at all, would still make noisy images when there is little light per exposure.

No, none of those images are 100% views. Those are heavily cropped, to 1:1 pixel match, and the actual crop varies from camera to camera. The K-70 crop shows the kings face and chest. The 5DS image don't.

Tell me how you view (not pixel peep) images, in a real world gallery or on screen. Do you check what number of megapixels the images are and pick up a magnifying glass according to that? Or do you stand closer to a 50 Mp image then you do to a 5 Mp image in a gallery? Or do you usually not know how many megapixels they where made from and just pick the same distance from all equal sized images? I do the latter, and I think its silly to compare different sized crops. Just the K and the spade, with the K, spade, kings face and chest.

Yes, pixel matching makes some complications when viewed on screen, but that is still the way it should be done on screen. You could downsize both heavily to minimize moire complications, or even better - print both in the same size.
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!
a7, addition, body, camera, ev0, exposure, f1.0, figures, hdmi, high iso, iso, k1, kp, kp high iso, kp iso, noise, olympus, pentax, pentax kp, pentax news, pentax rumors, pm, post, ricoh, samples, sensor, tech, video
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Q7 High-ISO Samples from RAW Adam Pentax Q 2 06-23-2013 12:11 PM
Pentax Q7 High-ISO Samples Adam Pentax Q 31 06-21-2013 06:53 PM
Nikon D7000 High ISO Samples vancmann Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 48 11-05-2010 06:38 PM
Dedicated Pentax K5 High ISO samples Thread vancmann Pentax K-5 2 11-03-2010 09:25 AM
Some K-r high ISO JPEG samples Asahiflex Pentax News and Rumors 34 10-11-2010 04:29 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:27 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