Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-29-2017, 12:08 AM   #976
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 21,813
I suppose I question what I take to be a 'universal' dSLR, highly capable in all aspects of modern photography.

Who really needs nearly the best (FF) wedding/studio camera, (FF) sports camera and (FF) landscape camera in one package? As biz-engineer implied, no one could afford all the lenses necessary to use all three capabilities to their potential.

10-29-2017, 12:13 AM   #977
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 21,813
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
You can pray and spray 7 frames per second with a D850, you can't do it at 7FPS with a K1 but you can do it with two K1 bodies at a time one in each hand. Does this answer your question?
I can do 70 Medium jpeg @ 7fps with a KP with decent x/y axis tracking AF and higher ISO.

Is buffer depth worth $1,400?
10-29-2017, 12:21 AM   #978
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Athens
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 830
The AF module makes the difference on 850. If you want to shoot BIF for example the Nikon camera offers many advantages especially in continuous AF-C tracking mode.
10-29-2017, 12:37 AM   #979
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Who really needs nearly the best wedding/studio camera
That one is very easy, flash lighting is relatively cheap for the result it is capable of and any camera can do it. The results belong to the know-how of the photographer with regards to lighting. For people who ask for best AF for weddings, that's because they shoot on the fly which is what beginners do (not caring about composition). Guess why Fuji have chosen portrait photography to promote their x series: 1) it is easy to do anywhere 2) no constrain on sensor SNR the flash light keeps camera at base ISO and 3) it is easy to spot portrait photographers (pro and semi pro) to make they evangelists of Fuji camera by giving them free gear and paying for promotional services on youtube & co. The only thing camera play a role is on rendering of skin tones, which basically is about changing color parameters in a software tweak.

QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Who really needs nearly the best sports camera
Sport photographers. The camera fast burst rate and AF are not enough , fast f2.8 lens required as well to keep high shutter speed to freeze motion and keep ISO relatively "low". Pro use typically 300 f2.8 or 400 f2.8 primes, which most amateurs don't have. But amateur who never shot any sport even in a professional way will read DPR and whine endlessly and envy a D500 with a Tamron 150-600 f6.3 on it... while that combo actually sucks for indoor sports because it required to bump ISO to >12800 which give crappy images. Here , there is a lot to be understood by the amateur from how Canon pro camera are specified...

QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Who really needs nearly the best landscape camera
Nobody. Camera is the least important for landscape. Tripod, travel and time are must. Landscape can be done with a manual focus camera, small sensor, as long as it output raw files, anyone can stitch for resolution and bracket for exposures and use filters for very long exposures.

---------- Post added 29-10-17 at 08:40 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I can do 70 Medium jpeg @ 7fps with a KP with decent x/y axis tracking AF and higher ISO.
I don't need a KP for that, I switch the K1 to crop mode and I get I don't remember how many jpegs but burst shooting in JPEG with K1 buffer feels endless.

---------- Post added 29-10-17 at 09:12 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
I know $ony is a 4 letter word around here but bit by bit every body they put out progresses.
Not sure if Sony is the best all around supplier. Tamron and Sigma are releasing their new lenses for Canon and Nikon and not for Sony. IMO, the Sony concept is nice but their bodies sucks with regard to using them with long lenses in the wild and there is still a lot more versatility with Canon and Nikon systems. Mirrorless is the thing nice to have for street photography and travel, but for the rest it's not proven yet.

=============

The only thing that my Pentax system would lack would be a D500 and a Sigma 500 f4 on it, once done, I wouldn't see anything lacking for any kind of photography (although that would cost a ton of money to get some extra shooting capability with long lens vs K1 crop mode with DFA150450 @ 450 f5.6).


Last edited by biz-engineer; 10-29-2017 at 01:19 AM.
10-29-2017, 01:37 AM   #980
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,802
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Not sure if Sony is the best all around supplier. Tamron and Sigma are releasing their new lenses for Canon and Nikon and not for Sony. IMO, the Sony concept is nice but their bodies sucks with regard to using them with long lenses in the wild and there is still a lot more versatility with Canon and Nikon systems. Mirrorless is the thing nice to have for street photography and travel, but for the rest it's not proven yet.
Its early days for the A7r iii,$ony have made significant improvements in useability....most lense mounts will be compatible,there have been instances that people have remarked that their Canon lenses work better on their $ony with an adapter,than on their Canon bodies!
10-29-2017, 01:48 AM - 1 Like   #981
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2017
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 66
The Nikon 850 does on paper seem very well specified, and for what its worth had good reviews. Trouble is in the UK its advertised for around £3500 and not in stock. Even if it were in stock, who apart from a professional or a wealthy person, could justify the price for what seems to be tiny improvements in image quality at normal ISO levels - say 100 to 1600? Sure the buffer, frame rate, AF etc is all very impressive , but unless your taking high speed sports, which most of us don't, the cost difference between a second hand 810 or new K1 is just too high. I have considered getting a K1 on and off since its release, but have not done so partly due its cost but mostly due to its size. For me its just too big. If I want to carry around something that size and a tripod I might as well go the whole hog and use my Bronica ETRSi. Loaded with Velvia or any decent B&W film its going to out resolve any FF digital at the moment. Any S/H medium format film camera and a coupe of lenses is the most cost effective way to get very high quality image currently. For every thing else APSC is more then adequate. I am talking about use for pastimes not professional, our needs are different.
10-29-2017, 02:12 AM   #982
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,236
QuoteOriginally posted by richard0170 Quote
The Nikon 850 does on paper seem very well specified, and for what its worth had good reviews. Trouble is in the UK its advertised for around £3500 and not in stock. Even if it were in stock, who apart from a professional or a wealthy person, could justify the price for what seems to be tiny improvements in image quality at normal ISO levels - say 100 to 1600? Sure the buffer, frame rate, AF etc is all very impressive , but unless your taking high speed sports, which most of us don't, the cost difference between a second hand 810 or new K1 is just too high. I have considered getting a K1 on and off since its release, but have not done so partly due its cost but mostly due to its size. For me its just too big. If I want to carry around something that size and a tripod I might as well go the whole hog and use my Bronica ETRSi. Loaded with Velvia or any decent B&W film its going to out resolve any FF digital at the moment. Any S/H medium format film camera and a coupe of lenses is the most cost effective way to get very high quality image currently. For every thing else APSC is more then adequate. I am talking about use for pastimes not professional, our needs are different.
I rather agree with you about all that. Itís easy to forget that FF is only a small and generally costly segment of the market anyway. By far the most folks will be using an APS-C camera or smaller. Value-wise this must be easily the current sweet spot. Even that is far more than enough for a big image in a printed publication, e.g. Iíve been looking at things like 5x4 plate cameras from Intrepid which are a fraction of the cost of a typical FF kit. And oh my, the rendering and resolution at least from what Iíve seen from online examples. Once one remembers that digital is only one option out there, and that even small digital sensors can make quite big prints, a lot of options start to open up with regard to different kinds of kit. The KI or D850 are great cameras but if the cost is too much there are other choices, good ones too. Even better, some are actually affordable!
10-29-2017, 02:16 AM   #983
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,135
Pentax offers a certain set of cameras and lenses with certain specs. There is no reason to assume that Pentax offers the best lens line up, best AF, ... Check out what is available and figure out for yourself what the roadmap has to offer. In the year of no primes, it is hard to convince people to switch, but I still see many reasons to stay. K1 is great comsidering specs and price. Pentax just has to make sure that the other manufacturers are not making Pentax obsolete. Weather sealing and shake reduction with 36MP sensor are available from all brands very soon at decent price. Lenses are missing. 2-3 primes in 2018 and a K1 clone in APS-C should keep the business running.

10-29-2017, 02:58 AM   #984
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 17,331
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Yes you are right. Sorry for my mistake.

Anyway , with regards to increasing DR, there is no secret, it's only about trade-offs.
I thought that DXO Mark had the impression that there was some massaging of the RAW files in order to maximize dynamic range. I don't know if that is true, but if there is noise reduction being done to RAW files or some such thing then I suppose it could make the shadows look a lot cleaner and allow for more bumping of the shadow areas before noise appears.

As to monochrome's question, the D850's big improvement over past cameras -- D810 and K-1 is frame rate and buffer size. You don't need those all of the time, but there certainly are times when you shoot a burst with the K-1 and then have to wait thirty seconds for the buffer to clear. This is worse if you are writing to both memory cards, as you would in a wedding photography situation. Otherwise there are small tweaks here or there, but the D850 doesn't seem to have dramatically different performance from past cameras.
10-29-2017, 03:32 AM   #985
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ffking's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Poole
Posts: 2,439
QuoteOriginally posted by richard0170 Quote
I have considered getting a K1 on and off since its release, but have not done so partly due its cost but mostly due to its size. For me its just too big. If I want to carry around something that size and a tripod I might as well go the whole hog and use my Bronica ETRSi. Loaded with Velvia or any decent B&W film its going to out resolve any FF digital at the moment. Any S/H medium format film camera and a coupe of lenses is the most cost effective way to get very high quality image currently. For every thing else APSC is more then adequate. I am talking about use for pastimes not professional, our needs are different.
That really does depend on what you use it for, doesn't it - no MF film camera has weather sealing, most have manual film advance, few have macro without bellows or telephoto - they are basically for studio, portrait (including social event), and landscape - but they are noisy for weddings and don't do video. They don't do sports or action, and where you can get longish telephotos (like the Pentax 67) they are massive. When I used a Pentax 67, shooting Velvia, each shot cost about £1 - I while no spray and pray merchant,I think I'd have difficulty returning to the sort of frugality where that is cost effective. And then the resolution is only as good as your scanner or the lens on your enlarger.

Actually the K-1 is not that heavy in practice.

All of which is not to say that I don't like film, just that I can't afford to run two systems and that there's too much that I can't do with MF film
10-29-2017, 03:41 AM   #986
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,967
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Dynamic range is the difference between the lowest level recorded and the most intense level recorded. Theoretically, I don't see how reducing the size of the image affects those metrics.

So, I'm not buying it, until I see a theoretical explanation and images to show the difference is observable.

Exactly how does reducing the size of the image either lower the lowest value recorded, or extend the highest value recorded. That is a function of the sensor not image size.

I'm sure someone will correct me if i'm wrong.

Saying if I reduce my image size from 7200 pixels to 1080 pixels increases my dynamic range to 17 EV of more, sounds like science fiction.
If the downsampling just pulls out selected pixels (often used for fast rescaling of a displayed image), then the DR is unchanged. But if the downsampling averages pixels together, then the noise level will drop and the DR may increase as long as the data format of the image can support the increased precision (e.g., you can't get 17 EV in a 16 bit TIFF).

In theory, downsampling by 2X (which averages together 4 pixels) can add 1 EV but only if the number space in the output is managed carefully. Done in the simplest way, averaging four pixels from a 14-bit ADC image from 14 EV DR sensor will result in the added DR from averaging being lost in the round-off of the 14 bit numbers. But if the output is rescaled to 15 or 16 bits, then the noise reduction will be in the output and the DR will be higher.
10-29-2017, 05:02 AM   #987
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
but if there is noise reduction being done to RAW files or some such thing then I suppose it could make the shadows look a lot cleaner and allow for more bumping of the shadow areas before noise appears.
Dynamic range is not the same as noise, for DXO it is the difference between the minimum detectable signal (on top of noise) and the clipping level. Basically, all sensors using 14bits A/D conversion cannot exceed 14ev, it is theoretically not possible, the rest is pure poetry.

Random noise is something else, it is random signal added to the wanted signal and there are multiple contributions:
- thermal noise (Johnson noise), proportional to temperature and inversely proportional to capacitance
- shot noise, increasing with light intensity
- A/D quantification noise (a component of read noise)

Due to the random nature of noise, it is averaged out when combining more than one pixel (example of downsizing an image). When pixels are larger (i.e from 50Mp to 24Mp), the quantization noise remains the same but the shot noise and thermal noise are being reduced, in theory.

Dynamic range does not improve or diminished when combining pixels. The max dynamic range of a 14 bits A/D is = 0 to 2^14-1 , regardless of the sensor size. DXO extrapolation of SNR based on image normalization to 8Mpixel is valid theory; however extrapolation of DR based on normalization to 8Mpixels is plain wrong, the same goes for what they call color accuracy vs ISO, accuracy is not affected by ISO, what they measure is all about noise and nothing related to color reproduction.

---------- Post added 29-10-17 at 13:10 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
But if the downsampling averages pixels together, then the noise level will drop and the DR may increase as long as the data format of the image can support the increased precision (e.g., you can't get 17 EV in a 16 bit TIFF).
You would need to re-sample the data with more than 14bits depth an reevaluate the actual value to be coded over the extra bits.

Taking a double exposure on the fly is more straightforward.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 10-29-2017 at 05:12 AM.
10-29-2017, 06:10 AM   #988
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I suppose I question what I take to be a 'universal' dSLR, highly capable in all aspects of modern photography.

Who really needs nearly the best (FF) wedding/studio camera, (FF) sports camera and (FF) landscape camera in one package? As biz-engineer implied, no one could afford all the lenses necessary to use all three capabilities to their potential.
It depends of your practice. As somebody making a decent living out of photography or as an agency it is I think particulary interresting to standardize the gear you use. Idealy a single photographer would have at least 2 bodies for the peace of mind and conveniance in some circonstances (each body ready to shoot with different lenses for example).

The more you standardize, the more you master your photographic tools, the more it become a second part of yourself. Even if you actually specialize in one practice or another having an all rounder is quite usefull and feature typically associated with a practice are also usefull in other areas.

Better/Faster AF allow to shot wider apperture with confidence and get the subject more reliably in focus, increasing the keeper ratio.
Faster burst, while primarily useful for sports is also valuable for wildlife, portraiture to keep the one with the best overall facial expression or to photograph things like a geyser or ensure you get more shots for critical scenes like the bride going out of the church...
The high resolution gives and FF format associated with pro lenses give more latitude to crop/reframe/recompose and deal with the fact that the AF points are only in the center area of the frame... For sports and wildlife in good light this mean more reach.

All the investment required is after all much lower than the one typical of a taxi driver, a plumber or a dentist... All the photographic gear one pro may needs doesn't seems to be that much compared to the cost of transportation to get the shooting location or the renting of a place either as shop or place to work.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 10-29-2017 at 07:18 AM.
10-29-2017, 06:36 AM   #989
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
If the downsampling just pulls out selected pixels (often used for fast rescaling of a displayed image), then the DR is unchanged. But if the downsampling averages pixels together, then the noise level will drop and the DR may increase as long as the data format of the image can support the increased precision (e.g., you can't get 17 EV in a 16 bit TIFF).

In theory, downsampling by 2X (which averages together 4 pixels) can add 1 EV but only if the number space in the output is managed carefully. Done in the simplest way, averaging four pixels from a 14-bit ADC image from 14 EV DR sensor will result in the added DR from averaging being lost in the round-off of the 14 bit numbers. But if the output is rescaled to 15 or 16 bits, then the noise reduction will be in the output and the DR will be higher.
Just to clarify the dynamic range has nothing to do with the number of bits of the encoding. It may be the A/D encode has N bits and N EV of dynamic range with current technology but after that step the actual encoding/format can be anything.

Many formats actually do not comes with the gamma or transfert function used encoded in the file. So basically the dynamic range of your typical jpeg with 8 bit per channel (before compression) is fully dependant of you jpeg engine and the settings used. If you actually did some manipulation to push shadow or recover highlight in your favorite raw editor or if your jpeg engine does it automatically, the final jpeg may have actually more like 10-12 EV of dynamic range than 8.

The typical screen current LCD screen has 9-11 EV of dynamic range and an oled screens something like 20EV. How these screens actually map the content they are provided with may be clearly defined at least for TVs standards, but can be greatly altered by each manufacturer and the user customs settings.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 10-29-2017 at 07:07 AM.
10-29-2017, 07:05 AM   #990
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 17,331
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Dynamic range is not the same as noise, for DXO it is the difference between the minimum detectable signal (on top of noise) and the clipping level. Basically, all sensors using 14bits A/D conversion cannot exceed 14ev, it is theoretically not possible, the rest is pure poetry.

Random noise is something else, it is random signal added to the wanted signal and there are multiple contributions:
- thermal noise (Johnson noise), proportional to temperature and inversely proportional to capacitance
- shot noise, increasing with light intensity
- A/D quantification noise (a component of read noise)

Due to the random nature of noise, it is averaged out when combining more than one pixel (example of downsizing an image). When pixels are larger (i.e from 50Mp to 24Mp), the quantization noise remains the same but the shot noise and thermal noise are being reduced, in theory.

Dynamic range does not improve or diminished when combining pixels. The max dynamic range of a 14 bits A/D is = 0 to 2^14-1 , regardless of the sensor size. DXO extrapolation of SNR based on image normalization to 8Mpixel is valid theory; however extrapolation of DR based on normalization to 8Mpixels is plain wrong, the same goes for what they call color accuracy vs ISO, accuracy is not affected by ISO, what they measure is all about noise and nothing related to color reproduction.

---------- Post added 29-10-17 at 13:10 ----------



You would need to re-sample the data with more than 14bits depth an reevaluate the actual value to be coded over the extra bits.

Taking a double exposure on the fly is more straightforward.
I guess I don't totally understand what DXO Mark is measuring. For me, dynamic range is the maximum usable amount that I can get from the darkest spot on the image to the lightest spot without clipping. This is actually a lot less than what DXO Mark says. I start to see unwanted noise in images long before I hit 14 EVs.
Closed Thread

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!
camera, company, customers, data, guys, hd, k-1, k-1 another nikon/canon, level, lot, medium, movies, nikon/canon shooter, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pentaxian buying k-1, pm, post, ricoh, sample, screen, shooter jumped ship, size, statement, thread, video, view
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Greetings - First Time Pentax User - Jumped Shipped from Canon bsjsfo Welcomes and Introductions 5 07-07-2014 12:40 PM
Jumped Ship - K5 urundai Pentax K-5 39 04-22-2013 04:09 PM
Finally jumped ship Hey Elwood Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 21 06-11-2012 09:31 PM
As Pentaxian, if you were to jump ship, Nikon, Canon, Sony, or? LFLee Pentax DSLR Discussion 215 06-11-2012 08:11 AM
K-r jumped ship to Sony A55 due to FF issues SteveUK Pentax K-r 15 06-25-2011 10:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:36 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