Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-30-2018, 06:43 PM   #391
Moderator
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 10,510
Just curious since I haven't watched the video (and don't intend to). What was their pick for The Worst Camera for 2018?

12-30-2018, 07:51 PM - 2 Likes   #392
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 11,250
QuoteOriginally posted by Breakfastographer Quote
As dusk comes, so does the point when ISO 800 will seem like a distant luxury.
Note that you could just choose to shoot at ISO 400 and then push in post.
With a camera like the K-1 II that would avoid the mandatory denoising from kicking in and the results after pushing in post would be equivalent to "pushing in camera".

ISO settings on a modern sensor do not affect sensitivity, they simply control gain. Unless the camera uses a dual gain sensor or one of the (typically older) ones with analogue gain then there is no difference between pushing in-camera or in post in terms of IQ (this is often referred to as a sensor exposing "ISO invariance").

A downside of pushing in post is that previews on the back LCD of the camera will look too dark.

Fuji has a camera that forgoes any digital gain in the camera (IIRC after a certain ISO threshold) but compensates for that by boosting the image brightness both for previewing and with respect to RAW converters (which are instructed to pre-apply the boost). This is how all higher ISO settings should be handled. There is no advantage to digitally pushing the values in the camera already but actually a huge downside in that one may clip highlights that won't be recoverable.
12-30-2018, 07:59 PM   #393
Veteran Member
kooks's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San José, Costa Rica
Photos: Albums
Posts: 794
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
(*) Our older daughter will be married in about two weeks; I, of course, will have other responsibilities during the actual ceremony , but the bridal couple tells me that I will be totally 'free' during the reception - in fact, the groom's father is also interested in photography, and the expectation is that the two of us will spend most of the reception wandering around {perhaps together} with our respective cameras.
Congratulations for your daughters wedding, it is always a really special day for the couple.. // Just as a wedding photographer tip, if they hired a pro (if not you can ignore this post) for the job try to not be in his/hers way at the ceremony, speaches, toasts, and every important moment that will happen during the day, you can't imagine the amount of lovely shots that gets ruined by the "uncle bob" camera jumping in the frame at the worst time.. those are moments that will never happen again (well sometimes it happens more than 1 haha.. but you get the idea) so if they hired a person to do the job, just relax, take your shots from your sit or from a position where you will not be on the main photographer way, receptions at more relax, specially during the dance you can get crazy shooting pics, but everything else have some key moments that will never happen again and can be ruined very easy , i know that the best intentions are always there but just be careful and enjoy such a lovely day with the family. You can give the same advice to the grooms father if you see that he is getting too crazy during the key moments.
12-30-2018, 08:04 PM - 4 Likes   #394
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 11,250
QuoteOriginally posted by Rico Quote
What I found odd is how DPReview never explained how in their previous review of the KP they praised the high ISO handling of the Accelerator Unit as APS-C class leading which contradicts their conclusion the pre-processor in K-1MKII delivers inferior high ISO quality.
I believe it is clear that they would have panned the KP already but just did not notice that the clean images were the result of in-camera RAW processing.
I'm pretty sure that DPReview admitted to that in one comment as part of the extensive K-1 II discussion.

QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
With the K-1II, there was already a K-1 as a baseline and obvious comparison target. The KP, however, stood on its own.
Well, a good review site wouldn't need a baseline to figure out that RAW data is being manipulated.
  1. One can run analyses like those performed by Bill Claff. RAW smoothing is detectable and has been shown for a ton of camera models (the difference being that it usually kicks in at much higher ISO levels).
  2. One can compare the results to other cameras using the same sensor or at least similar sensors with the same resolution.
DPReview may have aimed for accuracy and repeatability when Phil Askey was at the helm but the current staff don't seem to be able to run and interpret a 2D Fourier analysis and choose to use different lenses for their camera testing (and don't get me started on "repeatability" when it comes to their AF testing).

Imaging Resource used to use the Sigma 70/2.8 EX lens as a reference lens for all systems. This allowed cross-brand camera comparisons (modulo lens copy variations which one can control by carefully selecting copies). DPReview has argued against this approach and hence their camera comparison tool is mainly a lens comparison tool and as we know from recent events, DPReview don't even pick up on lens copies being decentred, thus making the "camera" comparison tool even less useful than it already is.

12-30-2018, 08:13 PM   #395
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 11,250
QuoteOriginally posted by Rico Quote
I don't mind criticism but at least criticize something that actually exists.
The K-1 II processing does actually exist. Everyone is free to decide for their own whether the processing works to their advantage or their disadvantage.


QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
But there is a group of "RAW purists" who believe that anything done to the RAW image is terrible. This irrespective of what the results are.
I believe you are misrepresenting those who are against in-camera RAW processing by stating that even improvements to the RAW data would be unwelcome.

I don't believe that is what RAW purists are saying, at least it is not my position. Note that Sony sensors internally already "alter" the data in order to ensure that each sensel value is as free of noise as possible and has been obtained by using the same gain. I don't see why anyone would argue against improving RAW data in-camera with data that is (usually) only available in the camera during the point of capture and in a way that does not irreversibly remove information from the initial data.

The problem with the "accelerator" processing is not that RAW purists are denied the fun to do the denoising out of camera, the problem is that it irreversibly removes information.

Again, the boring conclusion is that Ricoh should have made the processing optional.
Everyone would have been a winner then.
12-30-2018, 08:29 PM - 1 Like   #396
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 11,250
QuoteOriginally posted by kooks Quote
Now.. this doesnt mean that A7III is better camera than K1.. it just means that for that kind of work ( weddings/events ) it is a tool that fits better.
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
There are times when I feel like a mutineer for saying that I prefer my A7 MkII rather than my Pentax gear for manual lens work.
I don't think anyone should feel bad about preferring a non-Pentax camera whether that's for particular applications or just in general. I agree that for instance some Sony models offer features/specs that surpass what is available from a K-1 (II) and I'd love to be able to use/enjoy some of them. It's just that, overall, the pendulum swings to Pentax, for me personally.

Furthermore, just to clarify some of my recent tirades against EVFs, I don't mind if someone prefers EVFs over OVF. The only reason why I'm trying to point out disadvantages of EVFs is because I don't want DPReview's narrative of EVFs being the future and DSLRs belonging on the graveyard of technology to take over. I'm just trying to establish a more balanced view, not argue that EVFs are intrinsically evil.

Chris Niccolls seriously called "every entry-level DSLR" the third-worst camera of 2018. I think that is outrageously wrong. One may feel that EVFs may be good for beginner photographers (which is debatable) but the first camera often implies a system choice for later as well and to implicitly recommend that everyone (without exception) choose a mirrorless system from now on is just ridiculous.
12-30-2018, 08:49 PM   #397
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by kooks Quote
Congratulations for your daughters wedding, it is always a really special day for the couple.. // Just as a wedding photographer tip, if they hired a pro (if not you can ignore this post) for the job try to not be in his/hers way at the ceremony, speaches, toasts, and every important moment that will happen during the day, you can't imagine the amount of lovely shots that gets ruined by the "uncle bob" camera jumping in the frame at the worst time.. those are moments that will never happen again (well sometimes it happens more than 1 haha.. but you get the idea) so if they hired a person to do the job, just relax, take your shots from your sit or from a position where you will not be on the main photographer way, receptions at more relax, specially during the dance you can get crazy shooting pics, but everything else have some key moments that will never happen again and can be ruined very easy , i know that the best intentions are always there but just be careful and enjoy such a lovely day with the family. You can give the same advice to the grooms father if you see that he is getting too crazy during the key moments.
I'll probably be too busy photographing the photographer to get in her/his way.


Last edited by reh321; 12-30-2018 at 09:05 PM.
12-30-2018, 09:15 PM   #398
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 475
Ok last day of the year
May time close this charter
Everybody Pentax forums probably agree over 100 y
Pentax still very good camera from enthusiastic to pro
So accept DPR has own opinion we have our much great practical experience and super achievement. Look picture by picture when forum member add here
Happy 2019
With wish good news from Pentax
12-30-2018, 09:41 PM   #399
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 673
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Since you cannot see that difference on the DPReview's "originals", that points toward a processing issue.
Not sure if you're referring to RAW or JPEG, but I think I can see a difference in both:

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

Yes, it is a processing issue. The pre-processed noise from the accelerator interferes with DxO PRIME because the PRIME algorithm is designed to be the first denoiser in the pipeline. For those who may not know this, PRIME only works on RAW files, and that's because it needs the non-demosaicked data. There was a specific reason I was interested in doing this test, namely that I suspected that any baked in NR would interfere with PRIME's operation. And that hunch turned out to be correct.

Now, for those that have been saying "well, other cameras also bake in NR" - the testing could be repeated for those cameras. I've no doubt that the outcome would be unfavourable to any of Sony's "star eater" cameras.

The luxury (or tragedy, depending on how morose we feel about this) with the K-1 II (I think I've said this before) is that we have a before-and-after comparison available in the shape of the K-1.

---------- Post added 12-30-18 at 09:47 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
The problem with the "accelerator" processing is not that RAW purists are denied the fun to do the denoising out of camera, the problem is that it irreversibly removes information.
Yes.

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Again, the boring conclusion is that Ricoh should have made the processing optional.
Everyone would have been a winner then.
I don't know why it's so hard for them to just give us that - could the accelerator be so deeply built into the hardware that software can't circumvent it?
12-30-2018, 10:00 PM   #400
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by Breakfastographer Quote
could the accelerator be so deeply built into the hardware that software can't circumvent it?
The 'accelerator' is a separate integrated circuit. Pentax says data goes through it while going from the sensor to the processor {I'm not sure they've said exactly where the A/D converter is}
12-30-2018, 10:26 PM - 1 Like   #401
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
I believe it is clear that they would have panned the KP already but just did not notice that the clean images were the result of in-camera RAW processing.
I'm pretty sure that DPReview admitted to that in one comment as part of the extensive K-1 II discussion.
If you evaluate the images coming from my KP solely on the basis of how the image compares to the actual scene - what should be there and what should not be there - the images come out quite well; as you say, that seems to be how DPR looked at the KP.
First photo with KP - PentaxForums.com
Iso 25600! - PentaxForums.com

The images should not be evaluated on how they were created - that is how 'religious' discussions get started and how DPR went astray when looking at the K-1ii.

Last edited by reh321; 12-30-2018 at 10:33 PM.
12-31-2018, 01:40 AM   #402
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 673
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
The 'accelerator' is a separate integrated circuit. Pentax says data goes through it while going from the sensor to the processor {I'm not sure they've said exactly where the A/D converter is}
Thanks for that - I wrote a little bit about the accelerator back in 2017 when the KP came out, e.g.

Pentax KP, affordable DSLR for low light – breakfastographer

So by what you're saying, and assuming that's all we know, it may be entirely possible that because of how everything is wired, they can't provide software to bypass the accelerator. Curious to find out how "evolved" the K-3 III will be in this regard.

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Note that you could just choose to shoot at ISO 400 and then push in post.
Coincidentally, that approach is described in the same article cited above.
12-31-2018, 01:54 AM   #403
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
QuoteOriginally posted by Breakfastographer Quote
So by what you're saying, and assuming that's all we know, it may be entirely possible that because of how everything is wired, they can't provide software to bypass the accelerator.
Apparently it's in the signal chain before PRIME, so it's awkward, but doable.

SENSOR > ACCELERATOR > IMAGING ENGINE > SD CARD
12-31-2018, 02:25 AM   #404
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
If you evaluate the images [...] on the basis of how the image compares to the actual scene - what should be there and what should not be there - the images come out quite well
[...]
The images should not be evaluated on how they were created - that is how 'religious' discussions get started and how DPR went astray when looking at the K-1ii.
+ over nine thousands.
When you're looking to prove something, you'll succeed.

I once again spent some time comparing the DPR's K-1 and K-1 II's ISO 12800 samples. Silkypix, all NR sliders to zero, starting with identical parameters so that the software would interfere as little as possible. No advanced techniques whatsoever.
At pixel peeping level, the K-1 II image does appear very slightly smoother, but:
- the extra noise on the K-1 image gives a false impression of detail
- the scenes are not absolutely identical (the tiny strand you're looking for might've been moved by air currents - or by the cleaning lady, since the studio scene doesn't get more and more dusty as the years passes)
- the lens is not identical (imagine if we were comparing with the initial K-1 II samples!)

IMHO the differences are within the test's error margin. I'm not saying they aren't real, just that... we're making a mountain out of a molehill. And it's a philosophical "don't touch my RAWs!" issue rather than a practical one.

Wait, it gets better: I nudged the sharpening up a notch in the K-1 II image; I can do that, and noise still remains less objectionable than on the K-1 image.
Or I could apply some (more) NR on the K-1 image to bring it to the K-1 II's level.
12-31-2018, 02:39 AM   #405
Ash
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,920
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote

IMHO the differences are within the test's error margin. I'm not saying they aren't real, just that... we're making a mountain out of a molehill. And it's a philosophical "don't touch my RAWs!" issue rather than a practical one.

Wait, it gets better: I nudged the sharpening up a notch in the K-1 II image; I can do that, and noise still remains less objectionable than on the K-1 image.
Or I could apply some (more) NR on the K-1 image to bring it to the K-1 II's level.
Wonderful! That's great and thanks for sharing your observations. That's intuitive and what I would have thought the Pentax engineers were dealing with when developing the accelerator. Much obliged, kind sir. And happy new year.
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!
2018, 4k, autofocus, camera, dp review, dpr, dpreview, feature, firmware, hand, ibis, k-1 ii, k-1 mark ii, mirror, noise, pentax news, pentax rumors, reduction, review, review puts k-1, reviewers, reviews, sound, subjects, switch, track, tv, youtube
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best and worst of 2018 surfar Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 5 12-11-2018 05:35 PM
Mark I vs Mark II ISO Comparison Plus Files SirTomster Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 64 07-31-2018 01:06 PM
K-3 upgrade to "Mark I" or Mark II neal_grillot Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 20 06-01-2018 02:25 AM
DP Review's review of the K-r is up.... ccd333 Pentax K-r 67 03-20-2011 09:41 AM
DP Review modifies K2000 Review jeffkrol Pentax News and Rumors 8 02-05-2009 07:44 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:32 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