[deejjjaaaa]

we shall see what happens with NX camera which will have the same sensor, but EVF... so that there should be more heat from the sensor in a regular shooting situation.

[bravobrown]

The problem with most noisepeeper analysis threads is not the analysis itself, but the invariable wild conclusions drawn (not necessarily by the OP). From what I've seen, that's one of the main differences between Gordon and Oleg. These threads invariably bring out the "anti-fanboy" anthem of declaring that those who THEY call "fanboys" have been disproven, which is in fact not necessarily the case at all. BTW, what is with all the name calling over there? Are we all in kindergarten again?

A major part of science is being able to draw reasonable conclusions from statistical data. For digital photography, what REAL WORLD impact does it have? What does the data actually mean, and is it relevant? Has the data been gathered reasonably? Also, is the test itself valid? If an inexperienced doctor reads your MRI, he might miss-diagnose something that could kill you (either from mistreatment or not being treated at all). Science is all about having an open mind and proving theories about the physical universe (which bad scientists and pseudo scientists NEVER do). Photography is basically a marriage between art and science, and as we all know, marriages tend to foster highly emotional responses. Instead of whining about how green the grass is on the other side, learn to live with what you have like a REAL photographer/husband/wife etc do. *little personal rant* As someone raised in a scientific household and trained to follow in those footsteps (even though my profession has taken me far away from that), it's a giant pet peeve of mine when pseudo science and plain false quotes are attributed as "absolute irrefutable scientific proof" just to further someone's agenda.

For the two links given by the OP here, Gordon has much more credibility because he's explained his test methods before, and has generally sound conclusions (whether or not they affect your usage in the least is for you to decide). Oleg (IMHO) seems to be another story. Sometimes has interesting data, but none shown here (it's not valid scientifically unless the test can be replicated, which constitutes hearsay) and an extreme conclusion which is flawed based on his inaccurate theory (that Pentax does on chip NR but Nikon doesn’t, which everyone knows is not the case... Nikon is just better at it at this point). Just because someone can run a test doesn’t make his conclusions valid.

The other problem with these types of threads is the rotten egg syndrome (yes, I made that up). Once you get a certain off putting smell in your nose, it's very easy to fixate on it and smell it everywhere. Public forums tend to exaggerate minor details into insurmountable problems. Analysis is great if it turns up something that can be adjusted in firmware. Not so great when misread or misquoted. I think all reasonable thinkers realize that for the VAST majority of applications these findings really won’t affect our real world shots, just interesting data about the limits of the K7’s performance. ALL cameras have limits that must be learned so we can work within and around them. If a particular camera doesn’t provide the specific item for your own extreme needs, the obvious choice is to find one that does.

I’m really looking forward to getting a K7 at some point, as it is obviously a much more capable camera than its predecessors in multiple ways (even if this particular point is basically the same as the K20D).

[deejjjaaaa]

From what I've seen, that's one of the main differences between Gordon and Oleg.

I'd suggest you to read this

High ISO raw comparation k20/40d/d300/d3 [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

skip the usual bullshit from RMabo, read what GordonBGood writes about Oleg_V

[ManuH]

skip the usual bullshit from RMabo, read what GordonBGood writes about Oleg_V

Where is gone the civility on these forums? Anyway... I was somewhat disapointed to learn that Pentax was doing *software* NR on their high ISO raw files. But in real life it doesn't matter much IMHO, the NR done is very faint and nowhere near the kind of smearing that Sony was doing on the A700. But still I would prefer to see an option to turn it completely off as software NR in-camera can rarely be better than NR on the PC.

Now about Nikon... OK nobody detected any NR done on the D90/D5000 that are said to be the top high ISO noise performers for APS-C according to DXOmark... Now look at this page:
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH1 Review: 14. Photographic tests (Noise): Digital Photography Review

And see how soft the D5000 is at any ISO! The GH1 is noisier but shows much more details. So I'm questioning the wisdom that Nikon doesn't do any NR. Because yes on graphs the Nikon does very well, in real life though it doesn't look so right IMHO.

[vinzer]

Where is gone the civility on these forums? Anyway... I was somewhat disapointed to learn that Pentax was doing *software* NR on their high ISO raw files. But in real life it doesn't matter much IMHO, the NR done is very faint and nowhere near the kind of smearing that Sony was doing on the A700. But still I would prefer to see an option to turn it completely off as software NR in-camera can rarely be better than NR on the PC.

Now about Nikon... OK nobody detected any NR done on the D90/D5000 that are said to be the top high ISO noise performers for APS-C according to DXOmark... Now look at this page:
Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH1 Review: 14. Photographic tests (Noise): Digital Photography Review

And see how soft the D5000 is at any ISO! The GH1 is noisier but shows much more details. So I'm questioning the wisdom that Nikon doesn't do any NR. Because yes on graphs the Nikon does very well, in real life though it doesn't look so right IMHO.

I've always thought to myself that Nikon does NR, only not as obvious as the one Canon does. I'm not sure that Nikon cameras have been scrutinized by technical people the likes of Gordon et al, though. Or maybe people simply set Nikon to be the current gold standard in doing images right, so they're given a free pass. That's no diss to Nikon, of course, since they do churn out good cameras.

[rawr]

Just for clarification, the DXOMark tests measure the highest ISO level reached whilst also maintaining a particular level of image quality, viz:

Low-Light ISO is then the highest ISO setting for the camera such that the SNR reaches this 30dB value while keeping a good dynamic range of 9EVs and a color depth of 18bits

Photojournalism & action photography: Low-Light ISO
It isn't just a measure of visible noise, such as you might see in the simple 'noisy or not' images on dpreview. It's basically the highest number the sensor can go in ISO whilst also maintaining good IQ.

[stanleyk]

BRAVO Bravobrown!!

One question- Can you please come teach school in Texas!! The idea of science down here is that the devil put dinosaur fossils on the 6,000 year old earth to test people's faith. I'm not kidding.

As someone who works in Higher Ed (whatever that may be) you're explanation of science is pretty darn accruate.

For people who just take photos for fun I would suggest say this is very sage advice:

"ALL cameras have limits that must be learned so we can work within and around them. If a particular camera doesn’t provide the specific item for your own extreme needs, the obvious choice is to find one that does."

I've decided to purchase the K7 after watching what Pentax has done with lens pricing.

Have a great day. And everyone who just enjoys photography for photography's sake should read Bravobrown's post. If you enjoy statisical analysis of cameras go debate 100% crops on a forum. That's a perfectly valid way to spend your time. I seriously doubt it will help you take better photos though.

Now with that said me and Stanley the Wonder Dog are going hiking to take some "noisy" ISO 200 photos K20 at the lake.

[falconeye]

High ISO raw comparation k20/40d/d300/d3 [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Reviewskip the usual bullshit from RMabo, read what GordonBGood writes about Oleg_V

What do you mean?

I only see that Gordon confirms Oleg's math. You could have asked me and I would have been able to provide the same confirmation. And DxO did run the same math as well.


One problem is that NR on raw data isn't necessarily an evil thing.

(E.g., binning the green channel is a very good idea if you think about how demosaicing works. There is a threshold in noise where binning is better than not binning. You could leave this decision to the demosaicing algorithm but maybe, the camera-internal JPEG engine just needs it done before.)


Another problem is, and nobody at DPR or DxO actually touched at this, is that noise can be correlated for other reasons than NR. Banding is a typical case. On a smaller scale, a gain amplifier serving multiple photo sites may have slightly more noise than a neighboring gain amplifier. This results in finite fall-off of the auto-correlation function. Despite the fact that no NR was done. DxO would then (mistakingly) reduce the signal-to-noise ratio.


All in all, Oleg may master the math better than anybody else at DPR. But this is not enough.

[deejjjaaaa]

The GH1 is noisier but shows much more details.

Panasonic has very weak AA filters...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcgh1/page29.asp

When shooting in RAW the GH1's measured resolution improves quite significantly and some detail is visible up to very high frequencies. The Panasonic's extinction resolution lies even beyond the Canon EOS 500D, which comes with a three megapixel higher nominal resolution.

[deejjjaaaa]

What do you mean?

I mean that bravobrown's opinion about Oleg_V worth ZERO

[deejjjaaaa]

One problem is that NR on raw data isn't necessarily an evil thing.

of course, for as long as it is not done samsung way.

Mr Benjamin K has showned that the K20D has enough resolution for big poster printing. It is likely that the K-7 is as suitable as the K20D for those big prints.

It would be interresting to know if Mr Oleg and Mr Gordon makes prints as large as Benjamin does... If not, then why bother?

Mr Benjamin barely shoots at ISOs above 400 (his words not mine). Mr Benjamin makes a living of mastering and using lighting so he doesnt have to push the shadows too far. Mr Benjamin can print billboards with the right sharpening and upsizing technique and high-tech printing facilities. Mr Benjamin has been in the business for gods know how long so we can agree he is an expert photographer. Mr Oleg and Mr Gordon discussions only affect to the remaining 99.9% of humans.

Now the question is not whether Mr Oleg or Mr Gordon can print billboards. The question is whether Mr RMabo can.

So far you dont give any argument rebating what they found. Just some second handed "feel good" argument which has proven to be effective in Pentax forums. But whoever has had the opportunity to shoot an image with some dynamic range (say landscape) have found himself in the situation where trying to improve the dark shadows is a lost cause. I know I know, a tripod, some bracketed shoots and a hefty investment of time would make your image suitable for Mr Benjamin printing sizes

Now where is the guru of AF so we can decide if it's worth upgrading from the K10D?

That has to be Ricehigh

[Asahiflex]

I'd be damned, but when I get the K-7 somewhere this week I can guarantee you that I won't do any pixelpeeping. I'll just slap my 77 Ltd and Sigma 500/4.5 on the damn thing and it's going to work hard for my hard-earned money, yeah! I'll already have some pics accepted in the PPG and printed for my family album when the study room photographers are still debating about the noise issues

We witness the advent of a new breed of troll: the masochistic one. After the likes of the ubber troll RH and some outbursts of the usual "there is no FF, the sky is falling", "there is no 10fps, the sky is falling", "there is no instant AF in the middle of a moonless night, the sky is falling", "Pentax sucks, the sky is falling" we now see the troll who actually buys the gear he so vehemently, constantly and wholeheartedly bashes. Or at least this is what he wants us to believe between an attempt of pimping some credit cards: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/65512-chance-shave-off...off-k-7-a.html and the sell of his pristine (probably unused just because it's such a piece of crap) K20D.
Thanks God for that wonderful array of Sigma consumer zooms that this guy apparently cannot sell in 12 hours like his K20D allegedly was sold otherwise I would of said that he just makes anti Pentax campains here, on dpreview: All forum messages: exdeejjjaaaa: Digital Photography Review and according to some Russian fellows from here on severeal Russian fora as well, for a copeic or two. BTW, this guy did singlehandedly about 1/10th of all the thread about this matter on dpreview: K7 - preprocessed RAW files - noise is worse than seemed [Page 1]: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review and after that thread reached 150 posts and was closed he exported it here. Very professional if you ask me!

Anxiously awaiting for the usual anti-Romanian crap,
Radu