Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-08-2018, 05:44 AM   #31
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
An abnormally in the sensor of that particular camera?

05-08-2018, 05:51 AM   #32
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 60
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
An abnormally in the sensor of that particular camera?
Sadly not. I could find the patterns in the K-1 Mark II of a local store and on my own copy as well.
05-08-2018, 05:58 AM   #33
Pentaxian
Andrea K's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 822
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
I think DPR's findings validate our preliminary conclusions about the K-1 II. Overall there is noticeable noise reduction applied, but it does come at the expense of detail. No free lunch here, since the sensor is unchanged.

But since this level of pixel-peeping is required to spot differences between raw files, for all practical purposes, IMO, it's a question of personal preference. Both cameras are good.
Unfortunately for RICOH in the DPR RAWs the differences are visible without pixel-peeping....
05-08-2018, 06:09 AM   #34
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
So you're saying that without pixel peeping, a K-1 image would be inferior to say a D810 image because of obvious artifacting?

That the noise on the D810 would be more acceptable than the artifacting on the Pentax? My point being noise is also a sensor artifact, so If you are trading one artifact for another that's the kind of comparison one needs to make.

05-08-2018, 06:14 AM   #35
Pentaxian
Andrea K's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 822
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
So you're saying that without pixel peeping, a K-1 image would be inferior to say a D810 image because of obvious artifacting?
Me? No no.
05-08-2018, 06:31 AM - 1 Like   #36
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,802
The amount of loss of detail varies with contrast as you can see it is most prominent in de text with gray background and hardly there in the black text on white background. This may have more to do with the human eye tan with the aggressiveness of the algorithm. I also noticed dpreview reverts the standard chroma NR Pentax raw files have when imported into lightroom. I have made the example 2:1 because otherwise it is very hard to see a difference. Since fine detail is already largely destroyed by noise at these iso's I don't think it really matters.


iso 512000







second sample at 100% with standard chroma nr applied:
05-08-2018, 06:37 AM - 3 Likes   #37
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Working From Home
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,276
What matters or doesn’t matter doesn’t matter. DPR has done its damage and there’s no fighting back. Truly Alinsykite tactics.

05-08-2018, 06:39 AM   #38
Veteran Member
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Newrfoundland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,667
This looks reminiscent of a processing artifact. Either in the RAW deconvolution stages, or in the camera NR processing.

Whatever the case, I wouldn't call it until it's been confirmed across difference RAW processors. Otherwise this could likely be software based.

QuoteOriginally posted by Tau-Ceti Quote
Hi folks,
DPReview just published their review of the Pentax K-1 Mark II. (See here)
Based upon the previous sample shots (mostly concerning Details and High ISO behaviour) these are the most professional Images i came across so far.

Besides the loss in Detail i spottet something different in their images. A strange regular pattern which only the K-1 II has.
(I checked the K-70 for such patterns and couldnt find any.)

(This is a sample from ISO 104.200 at about 3:1 magnification.)

The same pattern is also visible in the sample shots, which i took earlier with the K-1 Mark II.
05-08-2018, 07:37 AM - 3 Likes   #39
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,811
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
PF had decentered lens too?

As for pixel-shift, DPR had tests about PF and I would say it's positive.
Pentax K-1 II's hand-held 'Dynamic' Pixel Shift mode is not quite what you think it is: Digital Photography Review
Regarding the lens, just put the studio comparison tool at ISO100 and look in the corners, especially top-right. There something wrong with the lens. It's certainly not on the level of the 77mm they used for the K-1.

PF has not published its review yet, but Adam's comments indicate that there is a loss of detail. I suppose you are referring to the PF about the ISO performance article, which doesn't show the same destructive effect. I actually agree that it should be selectable, but I also think that at 36mp, there is plenty of detail for most purposes anyway, so most people will welcome the lower noise level.

Your reading of DPR's Dynamic Pixel Shift articles is different from mine. I don't take their commentary as positive at all. I think they are saying the it is not worth waiting the extra processing time for. But then at the same time, they seem to be suggesting that it's worth spending time in post processing instead. I personally would like to have this feature in my camera, and I would probably use it for taking pictures of museum exhibits or architectural details.

To continue my mini-rant at DPR, what has led me against trusting their reviews are a few points.
1. The people they have brought on since moving to Seattle are not as articulate and more opinionated, with Sam Spencer being the exception. Maybe it's my bias as a Brit, but I preferred the less attention-seeking style they had before.
2. They have shortened their review format by removing a lot of the observational detail. Now it seems to be centered around a handful of tests, and a ton of opinions. Some subjectivity is fine, but without the detail, you can't judge whether you would share that opinion yourself. I bought into Pentax largely on the strength of Lars Rehm's review of the K20D. He didn't say it was the greatest camera ever, but I felt like I knew exactly what I was getting into. That's gone now.
3. They have so much sponsored content and get so much corporate hospitality from certain companies these days, I don't see how they can claim to be objective. The real eye-opener for me was when all the camera reviewers came back with camera reports from a Sony-sponsored trip to Iceland a while back. One of the rumor site was reporting that Sony is having another "Appreciation Trip" this month, so don't be surprised if you see a load of reports from Monterrey in a couple of weeks. They will claim to maintain their objectivity, but there's a reason why companies use this kind of corporate hospitality, and a reason why many companies (mine included) have strict rules to stop their staff accepting excessive gifts.

The conclusion to all this is that I'm looking forward to the PF review for a more balanced verdict. I won't be buying a K-1 Mark 2, but I've still got my eye on a KP, and the accelerator is one of the big draws for me.

---------- Post added 05-08-18 at 11:56 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
What matters or doesn’t matter doesn’t matter. DPR has done its damage and there’s no fighting back. Truly Alinsykite tactics.
I think most Pentax users are used to this by now. It's nothing new. They put more trust in other review sources or have gone already. Also, given that Pentax seems to do about half it's business in Japan, that part of their customers base is immune to it. Few customers in Japan have heard of DPR. They will already have read reviews in the Japanese camera press, which were pretty positive in the case of the K-1 Mark 2.
05-08-2018, 08:14 AM - 3 Likes   #40
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
I think most Pentax users are used to this by now. It's nothing new. They put more trust in other review sources or have gone already. Also, given that Pentax seems to do about half it's business in Japan, that part of their customers base is immune to it. Few customers in Japan have heard of DPR. They will already have read reviews in the Japanese camera press, which were pretty positive in the case of the K-1 Mark 2.
Honestly, time to start discouraging people from posting reports from DPR here. If we gave a rats derriere about what they think, we can go there and read it ourselves.
05-08-2018, 08:38 AM - 3 Likes   #41
CDW
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Big Island, Hawaii & Utah
Posts: 457
DPR caters to the gear head crowd, first and foremost. Like high end audiophiles who never attend live music concerts to develop a frame of reference, DPR readers tend to be pixel peepers who spend their time online and in front of their computers rather than out taking pictures.
05-08-2018, 08:49 AM   #42
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
The amount of loss of detail varies with contrast as you can see it is most prominent in de text with gray background and hardly there in the black text on white background. This may have more to do with the human eye tan with the aggressiveness of the algorithm. I also noticed dpreview reverts the standard chroma NR Pentax raw files have when imported into lightroom. I have made the example 2:1 because otherwise it is very hard to see a difference. Since fine detail is already largely destroyed by noise at these iso's I don't think it really matters.

iso 512000

second sample at 100% with standard chroma nr applied:
Interesting.
I'm not even going to try and analyze why, the K1 mkII images look better. The rest of you should spend more time doing real comparisons. Not picking one camera and posting with no comparison images sowing what's better. And honestly, your high noise high ISO images are really poor.

How does anyone expect one to make comparisons without comparison K-1 images. In the above post the K-1 mkII is clearly worth it.

How do people make th K-1 mkII look bad. Really sloppy work as far as I can tell.

What we need is the above. A K-1 image a K-1 mkII image so we can compare and decide. Focussing on imagined weaknesses of the K-1 mkII without images demonstrating how other cameras are better is simply rubbish.

The K-1 mkII isn't perfect. Neither is any other camera. Perceived flaws in the K1 mkII does not make other cameras better. You have to do an actual comparison. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

The simple fact is, focussing in on one small aspect of a camera system and limiting your commentary to that single thing not only is myopic it's misleading.

And it is becoming apparent that the goal of some is nothing more than to mislead. Fortunately attempting to mislead the forum is within the parameters of accepted forum behaviour. My advice, don't be misled. Make up your own mind.

Buying a K-1 mkII doesn't make anyone a a genius. I am reminded of all the time spent with the D800 crowd, and their wild claims. Almost everyone of which turned out to be fallacies. A guy you've never seen eye to eye with trashing the K-1 mkII should be proof to you, it might be something you're interested in.

After all, if you don't agree on anything else, why would you agree on how bad the K-1 mkII is.

ANd for those who continue to whine need I point out, that on sites like Photozone, Pentax has always produced less LW/PH than Nikon cameras using the same sensors. Show me where you have any right to expect this camera to be different. If you don't share Pentax's NR values change systems. It does mean anyone else should but you should.

Last edited by normhead; 05-08-2018 at 09:00 AM.
05-08-2018, 09:02 AM   #43
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
No any difference between PF and DPR
Interesting comment.

QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
I’ve always been hesitant to criticize DPR, because even if I disagreed with their conclusion, I thought I got enough objective information on the way. I’ve changed my mind.
The same here. Their lens reviews are much better than most and their site is for the most part helpful. I do stay away from the forums though. The technical expertise is a notch down from this site, the interface is marginal, and the acid flows freely in the comments (here it generally sort of oozes).


Steve
05-08-2018, 09:15 AM   #44
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by Tau-Ceti Quote
Sadly not. I could find the patterns in the K-1 Mark II of a local store and on my own copy as well.
Perhaps you could post an example from your camera and a link to the RAW where the strange artifact is found? With any luck, the artifact from your camera will turn out to traceable to ACR and we can put this issue to bed. FWIW, I did a bit of forensic work on the DPR ISO 102400 RAW file from the K-1II and discovered that it is not an in-camera DNG and that the EXIF had been edited (easily detected by inconsistencies).

BTW...this thread would have been better placed in the K-1 discussion area. It is neither news nor rumor.


Steve
05-08-2018, 09:33 AM   #45
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,007
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Honestly, time to start discouraging people from posting reports from DPR here.
At one time it was policy of sorts to delete or edit blatant cross-posts.


Steve
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, companies, detail, details, dpr, dpreview, ii, images, k-1, lens, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pf, review, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DPReview High ISO Noise D850 vs K-1 ShaunW Pentax DSLR Discussion 29 10-05-2017 01:58 PM
Zeiss Loxia officially announced! 50mm costs $949 and 35mm costs $1,299. jogiba Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 25 11-09-2014 07:37 PM
Dpreview and K-3s ISO noise rrstuff Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 27 04-02-2014 09:17 PM
K-5 noise even with ISO 200 (was: K-5 IIs noise) lunany Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 9 12-28-2013 06:54 PM
DPreview K-5II & IIs Deimos Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 29 06-05-2013 03:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:28 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