Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-15-2018, 01:38 AM - 1 Like   #391
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,169
It is fun to dig deep to any system and find new fails while actually using the device to make photographs. Win-Win. Most devices are badly tested out before RTM phase. This is true with any brand but particularly related to Sony devices.

02-15-2018, 04:23 AM   #392
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 17,880
QuoteOriginally posted by AyeYo Quote
The KP has lower noise at high ISO, likely due to baking of the RAW files and not any hardware advancement that actually results in less noise. That's not the same thing as better low-light performance through increased DR and increased tonality in low light, which is where a 24mp FF like the D750 is going to excel with lower pixel density (hence larger pixels). High ISO performance is nice, but if you're shooting landscapes (which is supposedly Pentax's target market), then it's not terribly relevant and dynamic range matters a lot more.
You repeat that a lot, but I just don't see it in images that are being shown. I really would like to see some examples you have found of this "baking." Even if the accelerator chip somehow smooths away noise that has no detail in it in the shadows (I don't think that is really what it does), as long as there is no penalty and you can use higher isos comfortably, what is the problem?
02-15-2018, 04:43 AM - 1 Like   #393
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,169
There is some filtering definitely. Just take 30 second exposure at any ISO with KP, even base ISO and, say, 2 second exposure. After 30 second exposure camera stalls a bit before next one can be taken. Not so with 2 second exposure. And if you use interval shooting with built-in timer and minimal delay (no delay) between frames 30 second exposures have 2-3 second gap while shorter ones fire continuously at steady pace. This is kinda showstopper issue if one does star trails by using exposure stacking - there will be noticeable microgaps in the trails when looking a bit closer.

If this is the accelerator module, not very funny. K-1 mk2 will be instant fail.
02-15-2018, 05:22 AM - 1 Like   #394
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Kevin B123's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Hampshire
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 518
The behavior you describe is NR doing it's thing surely?. Longer exposures will have more noise to subtract. Turn NR off and take a dark frame for subtraction later?

02-15-2018, 05:35 AM   #395
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MMVIII's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: EU
Posts: 316
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
K-1 mk2 will be instant fail.
Why so quick at judgement? I would put it in the freezer first before jumping to conclusions.
02-15-2018, 07:44 AM - 3 Likes   #396
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 78
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
Post of the year?

Astonishingly sad when the people who use a brand spend more time trashing it than supporting it. Why would anyone doing research ever buy something where the fans do nothing but trash it.
Who's trashing it? In my short time on this forum I've quickly identified two groups of people: 1. Pentax can do no wrong and everything they produce is the best thing ever, 2. The realists.

Being a realist isn't "trashing" the brand. Having an unrealistic view of the brand's capabilities is even less beneficial.
02-15-2018, 07:51 AM - 4 Likes   #397
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ffking's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Poole
Posts: 2,768
QuoteOriginally posted by AyeYo Quote
1. Pentax can do no wrong and everything they produce is the best thing ever, 2. The realists.
I think you could equally justifiably divide people on this forum into those who believe Pentax can do nothing right and realists - but, of course, both are silly - there is a whole spectrum of opinion here, it's just that people tend to defend what is attacked.
02-15-2018, 07:53 AM - 2 Likes   #398
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,809
QuoteOriginally posted by AyeYo Quote
Who's trashing it? In my short time on this forum I've quickly identified two groups of people: 1. Pentax can do no wrong and everything they produce is the best thing ever,
I'll call you on this assertion, AyeYo.

Name just one person like that.





02-15-2018, 08:02 AM - 1 Like   #399
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eureka, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,340
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Say it to Henri Cartier-Bresson or Ansel Adams
Adams and Cartier-Bresson are high-end art photographers. For high end art photography, Pentax is a great option (especially the MF and FF options). But most professional photographers are not high end art photographers. Moreover, Adams and Carier-Bresson did most of their life's work well before the advent of reliable auto-focus cameras. In the era of manual focus SLRs, Pentax was a major player. Pentax's inability to maintain a competitive AF system with Canon and Nikon is the primary reason for the downward turn in its fortunes.

I really don't see the point in coming out with a K-3ii successor that doesn't have at least (1) 50+ focusing points and (2) more processing power for the AF system. But that's an ambitious project involving a newly designed body and who knows what else. I wouldn't expect to see such a camera released this year, or possibly not even next year.
02-15-2018, 08:07 AM - 1 Like   #400
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 78
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
You repeat that a lot, but I just don't see it in images that are being shown. I really would like to see some examples you have found of this "baking." Even if the accelerator chip somehow smooths away noise that has no detail in it in the shadows (I don't think that is really what it does), as long as there is no penalty and you can use higher isos comfortably, what is the problem?
Because other manufacturers are doing the same thing these days (see the A7R "star eater" issue). Because the KP uses a known sensor that isn't exclusive to that camera model and there's no explanation for the "better" high ISO in that particular model aside from software baking (which is exactly what the accelerator chip is there to facilitate).

I agree that in actual use, if Ricoh managed to bake in noise reduction that has minimal-to-no impact on image detail... great. Enjoy it. But that isn't my point. My point is that it's disingenuous to compare baked RAW files from camera X to largely unmolested RAW files from camera Y - then go on and on about the amazing high ISO performance of camera X. That high ISO performance wasn't achieved by a superior sensor, shielding, cooling, etc. design. It was achieved with noise reduction algorithms. That's like comparing an untouched RAW to something you've run through Lightroom and reduced noise on. It makes no sense.

That's why I said it's absurd to try to say a KP might "match or best" FF in IQ. That's just absolutely not true. Suppressing high ISO noise to the level of an unmolested FF file doesn't mean it's matched it in image quality. If the sensor was truly better and truly matched FF image quality, we'd see increased DR across the range too. The D7200 was able to achieve an incredible 14.6 stops years ago, so it's definitely possible. At last check the KP and A6500 shared a sensor, and the A6500 is a full stop down from that. Otherwise, I can just take K3 files, run them through Lightroom, and two seconds later I've achieved the same "image quality" as the KP.
02-15-2018, 08:20 AM - 2 Likes   #401
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,738
QuoteOriginally posted by AyeYo Quote
In my short time on this forum I've quickly identified two groups of people:
Very helpful article:
Justin Kruger, David Dunning: Unskilled and unaware of it. How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. In: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
02-15-2018, 08:30 AM   #402
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,949
QuoteOriginally posted by AyeYo Quote
At what??

Even an M43 GH5 has a 1.5 stops lower DR at ISO100. An RX100iii with a 1" sensor has a over two full stops less DR at ISO100 and 2.5 stops lower high ISO performance.
Not every image requires a lot of dynamic range. A lot of images on really flat light days seem to use about half the DR available according to my histogram.

Going to larger sensor sizes gets you better performance in some circumstances, but if those aren't circumstances you encounter regularly, they aren't worth paying for. Checking the DR of my images in post processing, I find a very high percentage of my images, maybe in the range or 25% would have had the same dynamic range as using my point and shoot, because the scene didn't demand any ore than that for a faithful rendition.

Part of evaluating camera systems is knowing what the various specs might mean to you in your photography. Blanket statements don't really help. You need to know if the spec means anything to you personally.

Canons for many years had less DR than other cameras, yet they were favoured for their AF at sporting events. In my case and others I know, we shoot every sunset we can and the DR of Sony sensors makes more sense. But, just because they have less DR, has absolutely no bearing on how Canon's are favoured shooting sports and action. All of these type of specs are meaningless, if the camera is not used for what it's good at. Two stops of DR is meaningless to many photographers.

When you look at DR, AF whatever, it may be the most important thing on your list, but it may be irrelevant to others, Lot's of times people get hung up on a spec. and buy something they won't use, because they just don't take the type of image that makes good use of that performance feature, but they see the "2 stops less dynamic range" and freak out.

You have to analyze your shooting style etc. to see if any given spec will mean anything to you.

Last edited by normhead; 02-15-2018 at 08:41 AM.
02-15-2018, 08:32 AM - 2 Likes   #403
Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,224
QuoteOriginally posted by AyeYo Quote
Who's trashing it? In my short time on this forum I've quickly identified two groups of people: 1. Pentax can do no wrong and everything they produce is the best thing ever, 2. The realists.

Being a realist isn't "trashing" the brand. Having an unrealistic view of the brand's capabilities is even less beneficial.
When the K-3ii came out, I was roughly the same place as a member that you are now. I heard words like "fail" more often that week than I had in my previous months here ... but here we are.


Some of the harshest criticisms of the K-3ii came from users who think that "plastics" is a four letter word and that in-lens AF motors are a bad idea. If Pentax had followed their inclinations, we wouldn't have KP or the KAF4 lens


Added: there is no "value added" to criticism. I wandered in here when I was looking for a new camera. Evaluating what was said, I decided the criticisms I was hearing were unfounded, and I purchased my Q-7 anyway .... it has turned out even better than I had hoped, and it encouraged me to purchase a K-30 despite my shortage of funds. I am glad I did, but I hear comments elsewhere from people who are put off by them.

Last edited by reh321; 02-15-2018 at 08:43 AM. Reason: added comment
02-15-2018, 08:35 AM   #404
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 78
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Not every image requires a lot of dynamic range. A lot of images on really flat light days seem to use about half the DR available according to my histogram.

Going to larger sensor sizes gets you better performance in some circumstances, but if those aren't circumstances you encounter regularly, they aren't worth paying for. Checking the DR of my images in post processing, I find a very high percentage of my images, maybe in the range or 25% would have had the same dynamic range as using my point and shoot, because the scene didn't demand any ore than that for a faithful rendition.
That's somewhat true, but saying "I don't need it" is absolutely not the same thing as a huge advantage not being there. That's like saying a Ford Focus and a McLaren P1 are basically comparable vehicles because both of them get you to work just fine and driving to work is all you do.
02-15-2018, 08:48 AM - 1 Like   #405
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MMVIII's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: EU
Posts: 316
QuoteOriginally posted by AyeYo Quote
Because other manufacturers are doing the same thing these days (see the A7R "star eater" issue). Because the KP uses a known sensor that isn't exclusive to that camera model and there's no explanation for the "better" high ISO in that particular model aside from software baking (which is exactly what the accelerator chip is there to facilitate).

I agree that in actual use, if Ricoh managed to bake in noise reduction that has minimal-to-no impact on image detail... great. Enjoy it. But that isn't my point. My point is that it's disingenuous to compare baked RAW files from camera X to largely unmolested RAW files from camera Y - then go on and on about the amazing high ISO performance of camera X. That high ISO performance wasn't achieved by a superior sensor, shielding, cooling, etc. design. It was achieved with noise reduction algorithms. That's like comparing an untouched RAW to something you've run through Lightroom and reduced noise on. It makes no sense.

That's why I said it's absurd to try to say a KP might "match or best" FF in IQ. That's just absolutely not true. Suppressing high ISO noise to the level of an unmolested FF file doesn't mean it's matched it in image quality. If the sensor was truly better and truly matched FF image quality, we'd see increased DR across the range too. The D7200 was able to achieve an incredible 14.6 stops years ago, so it's definitely possible. At last check the KP and A6500 shared a sensor, and the A6500 is a full stop down from that. Otherwise, I can just take K3 files, run them through Lightroom, and two seconds later I've achieved the same "image quality" as the KP.
"bake", "molest", "untouched". I see your point. Still, there is nothing like "untouched" raw. And plain image observation as synthetic tests show that the pipeline for a KP-raw file seems to be very effective, numbers say it can retrieve higher DR at higher ISO than some FF cameras. If this would be achieved by significantly loosing resolution, it would be nothing to rave about. But also here empirical observation and test data shows that it is not.
But some other people before have claimed that they would be able to process the files from K-3 to match the KP. No one was able to proove that, are you? I would be rellay curious, seriously! Thanks!
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, camera, companies, design, dslr, filter, flagship, forum, frame, fuji, k-3, k3, mirrorless, pentax, pentax k3ii, pentax news, pentax rumors, person, post, replacement, samsung, sensor, sensors, site, sony, successor, web
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-70 Officially Announced PF Staff Pentax News and Rumors 5 06-09-2016 06:51 AM
When will the K3 be officially discontinued? r0ckstarr Pentax K-3 2 05-25-2015 04:02 AM
Pentax K-5 Officially Discontinued Adam Pentax News and Rumors 165 11-05-2012 01:47 PM
Has the K7 been officially discontinued? rena Pentax News and Rumors 21 01-26-2011 10:03 AM
K200D is officially discontinued Sitting Bull Pentax News and Rumors 35 03-07-2009 09:35 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:19 AM. | 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