[er1kksen]

Melander and Janneman, a lot of how good a camera like the K20D looks at high ISO depends on the lighting and exposure of the image. If the image is shot in strong lighting where even the shadows are lit enough to generate sufficient signal to overcome noise, the image will look relatively great. If the lighting is poor, it's going to look awful.

We don't know anything about the lighting for any of these sample images.

[Ray Pulley]

We are not. This is not about K-7; the same can be applied to any camera from any manufacturers. We will not compare IQ from ANY beta firmware camera period.

We? Speaking for others again?

Whenever ANY camera manufacturers give out pre-production cameras to ANY reviewers / beta testers after the embargo date, ALL of them would do this under two conditions - no images from the beta camera, and no conclusive judgment of IQ based on beta camera.

Like the K20D beta images from the Pentax sponsored Dubai press release for the camera?

And no, there is NO such restrictions on any other pre-release features, which can be freely reviewed and discussed.

Can you see the difference? If you cannot, then I can't help you either.

See the comment about the K20D images above.

I was not aware that Pentax is in control of what can be freely discussed here.

Beta firmware can give out images which have little resemblance to the final output. The K10D leaked beta firmware images came to mind; those were so noisy that got most people worried. It was much more noisy when compared with A100 at that time. In the end, it turns out that the final firmware has less noise than A100. If users had concluded from the K10D beta firmware images that they would go with A100 to have less noise, I would consider it to be a wrong conclusion.

So? The opposite is true of the K20D initial images.

Can you explain why you believe yourself to be responsible for making sure that such (perhaps) erroneous conclusions are not drawn?

It is not just me, or anyone you accuse of being "fanboy"; no camera manufacturer or any reputable camera review sites would agree with you either.

Fanboy? Where did I say that?

"Children"? Can you keep this type of personal characterization out of discussions?
There are many users reading this forum who are looking to buy their first DSLR. And many do not know the pitfall in making buying decision based on beta firmware pictures.

Not when self-appointed people like you feel the need to "warn" everyone and somehow feel that they must take responsibility for making sure that everyone comes to the correct conclusion, whatever that might be.

I repeat: this is the Pentax News and Rumors forums, not the Facts about Released Cameras forum.

Such discussions are the very nature of this forum and what newbies might think about a lot of these discussions doesn't seem to concern you unless it might look bad.

This is not called forum police. This is all part of the forum discussion - and the whole point of having forum in the first place. You make a comment, and I make mine. I may or may not agree with you. I am not policing anyone. And that's why we have thread ratings as well. So are you saying that you only allow those who agree with you to post? Aren't you the forum police in this case? Or your thread guardian - trying to attack all the negative comments on your thread?

My OP was simply a link and comments about the images being beta. You and others felt the need to "warn" folks, and to tell everyone that the thread is pointless. If you feel it is pointless, why not just read it and move on? No, you and others decided that it was somehow your responsibility to warn everyone as if they cannot read the statements about the images being from Beta firmware.

One such poster felt that at least one reason the linked images were nonsense was because they were not in English. Now there's a cogent argument for you.

Why do you feel that it is any of your business what conclusion someone else might draw from any post? This is EXACTLY the definition of forum policing and you are not being intellectually honest by not admitting that.

Your purpose in posting was only to make sure that someone else did not make a conclusion you think might be wrong. What else would you call this?

Again, you are putting in personal characterization in your discussions.
In this case, twisting my original intention to "assume everyone else" as "so stupid".

You stated yourself that you wanted to warn people and keep them from drawing the wrong conclusions. This implies:

1. They cannot read and comprehend the OP.

2. They are incapable of making a judgement for themselves.

3. They need someone else to warn them about making such judgements.

4. You are a better judge of what conclusion they should or should not draw than they are.

5. All of the above.

Pretty arrogant of you it seems to me.

There are different stages of beta firmware development. And we have no idea when the noise optimization or image optimization comes in at which stage. The firmware version gives little indication either.

True, and also true for for every other feature in the camera at this point.

[shrug] Even if you don't care what the camera manufacturers want, at least all the reputable review sites agree with me.

Of course I do not care what the manufacturers want. Why should I? I am the customer, they are supposed to care what I want.

Lastly, I repeat: this is the Pentax News and Rumors forum where all sorts of things, real, not real, released and un-released are discussed every day. Your comment about reputable testing sites is a not relevant here.

Thaaaaaat's all folks.

Ray

[nosnoop]

I was not aware that Pentax is in control of what can be freely discussed here.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Can you explain why you believe yourself to be responsible for making sure that such (perhaps) erroneous conclusions are not drawn?

Nobody is responsible for anything. The whole point of this type of public forum is that we can freely express our opinion. When I feel that something is not right, I would say so. When I feel that something is pointless, I would say so.

And yes, whenever I feel like to write something, I would do so.

Fanboy? Where did I say that?

OK, you use the word "cheerleader"; and it was Stephen who used the word "fanboy".
They mean the same thing to me.

Not when self-appointed people like you feel the need to "warn" everyone and somehow feel that they must take responsibility for making sure that everyone comes to the correct conclusion, whatever that might be.

"self appointed"? Again, I have no idea what you are talking about.
I am just writing my opinion, just like any of your posts. My opinion just so happened to disagree with yours on this particular thread. Not sure where that "self appointed" is coming from.

I repeat: this is the Pentax News and Rumors forums, not the Facts about Released Cameras forum.

I repeat: this is a public forum, not only-write-if-you-agree-with-the-OP forum.

You and others felt the need to "warn" folks, and to tell everyone that the thread is pointless.

And why not? That's what I think, and that's what I would write.

If you feel it is pointless, why not just read it and move on?

Because I feel that some new comers who are not aware of the pitfall of using beta firmware for comparison may make the wrong conclusion. That's what I believe, and that's what I would write. So again, you only want positive comments about your thread and not negative ones?

Why do you feel that it is any of your business what conclusion someone else might draw from any post? This is EXACTLY the definition of forum policing and you are not being intellectually honest by not admitting that.

No, this is not. This is the whole purpose of a public forum where we can freely write what we want.

I have not used personal attacks, no insults, and keep it to the point so far in this thread.

Your purpose in posting was only to make sure that someone else did not make a conclusion you think might be wrong. What else would you call this?

This is a called a free exchange of opinions and ideas - or a public forum.
You may agree or you may not.

You stated yourself that you wanted to warn people and keep them from drawing the wrong conclusions. This implies:

Again you are using personal characterizations.
Those are your words, not mine. And not my original intention AT ALL.

Pretty arrogant of you

See? You resort to personal attacks again. [sigh]

Lastly, I repeat: this is the Pentax News and Rumors forum where all sorts of things, real, not real, released and un-released are discussed every day. Your comment about reputable testing sites is a not relevant here.

It is relevant. Dpreview, for example, would not review the camera based on beta firmware for a reason. They would not judge the camera IQ based on beta firmware for a reason. And it is for the SAME reason that I made my comments here.

[ILoveVerdi]

Good catch: according to the EXIF data, the K20D file was shot in RAW and made a trip through Photoshop CS3 before being presented, while the K-7 jpg was direct from camera. Other than that, the two photos were taken with different lenses, of different subjects, on different days.

Rather than being a controlled test, the photographer probably had limited time with the K-7 and snuck his SD card in the slot, then quickly shot the images we see here (and probably without the Pentax rep's knowledge or permission). Then a day later, he tried to take similar shots at home using his K20D (though, he shot in RAW and used ACR which automatically applies chroma noise reduction).

So I think it's pretty obvious that this is anything but a fair test. Let's wait a bit before jumping to conclusions, eh? [edit: Not directed at lol101; I get that you were joking in your last sentence]

Bears repeating, you get a gold star =)

[mike.hiran]

Why are you all so defensive about the K-7?




I would say the same about you. Have you made similar posts about the other pre-release features being discussed? If you are unwilling to answer this question, you have missed my point. Of course, you have not made similar posts in other threads about he preliminary K-7 performance (those that are of a positive nature), so I am quite sure that you know exactly what my point is.

The preliminary IQ of the camera is just as legitimate to discuss as any other preliminary feature or preliminary performance data we have seen. If you think that this is not true, please elaborate, which would be far more useful than playing forum nanny.



Thanks



No one said you didn't. I fail to see how posting statements about the thread being pointless furthers the discussion of the prelimibary K-7 IQ in any way.



You will have a bit of credibility on this point when you are making the same pointless comments on all of the other threads about the pre-release K-7 functionality and performance.



How do you know?

I would say that you are assuming too much and treating others like they are children who need to be "warned".



It would be hard for me to write a better definition of self-appointed forum police than what you have written above. Just where is it written that you, or anyone else for that matter, need to warn others or be in any way responsible for any conclusion they draw from anything they read here?

Are you paid by Pentax to make sure that you point out such things to others?

Perhaps you just assume that everyone else is just so stupid that only you can guide them to the real truth and keep them from drawing the wrong conclusion?

BTW, just how do you know that the images posted are not indicative of what the K-7 is capable of? As shown above, the K-20 Beta sample images were significantly better than what we have seen of the K-7 so far, and they were very much indicative of what the K-20 was capable of.

Does that mean the K-7 will be worse than the K-20? Well, if nothing else, based upon what I have seen, Pentax has some work to do just to match the K-20 IQ, and even with all of the gimmicks and new AF and so on, I have no interest in a the K-7 if IQ is not at least equal to the K-20, which is by no means class-leading in the IQ department (due to the inherently high readout noise in the sensor/ADC).



See the part about credibility above....

Geez indeed.

Ray

I don't often participate in threads like this, but honestly Ray, I do think you are taking all this too personally. I wouldn't judge a product based on preproduction form because changes will be made that could impact the image quality. I think you're going too far for calling people fanboys or cheerleaders and questioning people's integrity for pointing out that making judgements this early is premature.

Ray, you just dont get it, dont you?

You cant insinuate that the k-7 is not the best camera in the whole round world until the same people who are raving now realize that the k-7 is just another nice camera with some improvements and maybe some step-backs. The times for critical thinking and/or inteligent discussion in this forum are long-time gone. At least in the news and rumor.

I might even own more Pentax gear than you do:

2 x *istds
1 x K100D
1 x K10D (sold the second copy)
1 x K20D
2 x 645
1 x MZ-S (sold the second one not long ago)
1 x ZX-L

1x DA14mm
1 x FA 31 LTD
1 x DA 40mm pancake
1 x FA 43 LTD
2 x F 50mm f1.7
1 x FA 50mm f1.4
1 x FA 77 LTD
1 x DA 16-45
1 x FA 24-90
1 x DA 50-200
1 x FA 80-200
1 x DA* 16-50
1 x DA* 50-135

1 x 645 A 45mm
1 x 645 A 75mm
1 x 645 A 75mm lens shutter
1 x 645 A 150mm

Non-Pentax lenses:

Tamron 90mm macro
Tamron 28-70 f2.8
Sigma 70-210 f2.8
Sigma 135-400

I probably forgot some stuff, but who's counting?


Ray

You forgot at least a PZ-1 that I bought from you

[KungPOW]

I might even own more Pentax gear than you do:

2 x *istds
1 x K100D
1 x K10D (sold the second copy)
1 x K20D
2 x 645
1 x MZ-S (sold the second one not long ago)
1 x ZX-L

1x DA14mm
1 x FA 31 LTD
1 x DA 40mm pancake
1 x FA 43 LTD
2 x F 50mm f1.7
1 x FA 50mm f1.4
1 x FA 77 LTD
1 x DA 16-45
1 x FA 24-90
1 x DA 50-200
1 x FA 80-200
1 x DA* 16-50
1 x DA* 50-135

1 x 645 A 45mm
1 x 645 A 75mm
1 x 645 A 75mm lens shutter
1 x 645 A 150mm

Non-Pentax lenses:

Tamron 90mm macro
Tamron 28-70 f2.8
Sigma 70-210 f2.8
Sigma 135-400

I probably forgot some stuff, but who's counting?


Ray

My hero...

[obheng]

I am actually quite impressed with Ray's collection of lenses. It certainly says alot about his enthusiasm in Pentax, so we shouldn't be too harsh on him for sounding a little 'cautious' regarding the final IQ of the K-7. Personally, I am just hoping that it will be as good as the lucky few who have tried it reported to be. All that I had hoped for in my next Pentax DSLR body have been addressed, except for the high ISO noise performance which is very important to me, comiing from a K100D user who has resisted the past few bodies. I am really hoping that the K-7 will be able to at least to kick the D300's butt.

[MMVIII]

Has anybody noticed that it is the same image for the K7 pushed from (at least!) 1200 up to 6400? So what's the judging all about: Someone probably took an image with a preproduction K-7 at unknown iso and other settings and pushed the image to simulate comparison shots with a K20D. Not to much to discuss about, if you ask me

[regken]

little 'cautious' regarding the final IQ of the K-7. Personally, I am just hoping that it will be as good as the lucky few who have tried it reported to be. All that I had hoped for in my next Pentax DSLR body have been addressed, except for the high ISO noise performance which is very important to me, comiing from a K100D user who has resisted the past few bodies. I am really hoping that the K-7 will be able to at least to kick the D300's butt.

If high ISO is your concern and you push process heavily you might find it interesting to read GordenBGood latest well written analysis. he has been on the money for a long time.
Analysis: K-7 DNG raw Beta 0.2... [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

[Jonson PL]

Because it is not the same sensor.

It is a 4 channel readout, which is needed to get the frame rate up to the 5fps. This has noise implications that a 2 channel readout does not have (the K20D is 2 channel).

We also have all new circuits and a new Prime processor, new electronics insise (different noise and inerference charachteristics), different wiring, a new SR mechanism, new algorithms, etc..

This K-7 also does not have the final firmware and processing algorithms, and also may not even have final production circuit boards in it.

There is no surprise about it being a bit noisier than the K20D.

The initial K20D images were noisier than the final production release as well. In fact, IIRC, quite similar to what you see here on the K-7.

Ray

Thanks Ray. As always you’re really good at providing the technical explanation, in a manner that can be understood. Great having you on the forum.

I do not read any judgment on your part regarding the photos, so don’t see any reason for objections in you posting them.

Personally, I’m not the most technical type. I didn’t have the K20, and I’m sure I’m gonna be happy with the K7.

Have a great week everybody

[amilcaralzaga]

Well, I've seen other noise shots (with unespecified pre-release firmware) aviable in the internet and I think that it is quite good even comparing it with professional cameras.
I have never cared too much about the agressivenes or not of the camera procesing mostly because I always shoot in raw and postproduce in the computer (I know there are many good reasons why other people wouldn't do this anyway), in fact, I would love to see a full RAW optimized camera, where all the procesing and eerything would be just made to capture the widest synamic range with the higest quality straight from the sensor to the card as fast as possible with no mid-processing... just a thought. Then they could make some software add-on for the main raw editors (Lightrom, DXO and Capture One) which could be a lot more powerful than what you can put in a chip in the camera...

I don't know, but this days it seems to me that most people who buy a DSLR at this level almost always shoots RAW and postproduces, even for those who shoot JPEG they almost always postproduce, so, why not?

I'm sorry, Im divagating too much fom the subject, but then back to the noise issue in hand, I would like to see RAW shots with no treatment, so we would see "native" noise, and then from there we can talk...