Originally posted by reh321 NO, NO, NO. The KP is running the 'accelerator", which lowers noise and raises DR and color fidelity in 'raw' files.
The raw files are cooked raw files. They are indeed in a "raw" file format but the data has been massaged in a way that was previously avoided, for good reason, in raw files. You have to separate the concept of raw sensor data with the concept of raw the file format. This massaging of the raw data means that the are one step closer to non raw files. All classifications are based on drawing black and white separators in a greyscale mud. This doesn't make the classifications meaningless. The KP raws are moving across the raw line.
Originally posted by reh321 These graphs are based by measuring 'raw' files. Anything you can do to reduce noise in one is still available in processing the other. And one of the two charts is of DR - how do you use "PP" to raise DR? Finally, if you actually look at the graphs, you can see for yourself that the D750 shows well also.
Don't trust me just look it up. PP can raise DR. It's as I said previously not very complicated even if it's a bit unintuitive and not common sense to most.
Secondly you can't reduce noise as well in a previously manipulated file. The algorithms don't work on massaged data. It's math, you can figure it out (I don't find it easy though and trust authority on this point)
Just to repeat my standard disclaimer: None of the above makes the KP a 'bad' camera. I'm just doing the above as an educational quest "someone is wrong on the internet". There are some misunderstandings being peddled that will confuse things for people. Running those comparisons that clearly show what's happening and then suggesting they mean something else is misleading.