Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-10-2016, 06:59 PM   #31
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,187
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
I mean, who ever needs or uses 1/8000+ sec shutter speed or f32 aperture or above? ...
I don't use 1/8000s, but I do use f/32...just not on my dSLR...



Maximum aperture for the lens being used (not visible) is f/6.8. I believe I was shooting at f/32 for that waterfall photo.


Steve


Last edited by stevebrot; 04-11-2016 at 09:01 PM.
04-10-2016, 07:03 PM - 1 Like   #32
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
On LF cameras apertures as small as f/64 are common*, in fact Ansel Adams was part of an anti-pictorialist group known as f/64.

In many situations macrophotogaphers have to stop their lenses down as far as possible, especially at magnifications higher than 1:1


* And not unusual, as most 4X5 and 8X10 format lenses commonly perform at their best at f/16~f/22 aperture range.

Last edited by Digitalis; 04-10-2016 at 08:06 PM.
04-10-2016, 07:15 PM   #33
Veteran Member
neostyles's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 445
I completely agree. I used to think high iso is a must have, that's why I went full frame. But I find i lately go over 1600 especially when using flash. The only people who I think really benefit from it are people who mostly do video as the bulk of their work. Might be good for urban explorers as well I guess. As someone who has aspirations of getting into urban exploring, that flexibility seems like it would be nice. Coming off a 2008 era aps c (and lets remember aps c used to not be so great at high ISOs) all I could think about was better iso. And to some extent, it has helped. but there isn't much of a difference between the latest crop and full frame (excluding the soon to be released canonikon full frame cameras) at iso 3200 and below. I never really had a flash in college and i tried to just solve all my problems with increasing the iso. But with my metz 52, I can shoot on a dimly lit street at on iso 400, so you know it's not really that important to me. Now the hard part is I guess focusing and this is where I think cameras should be focusing on instead. EVFs are nice in this regard as you aren't limited by the human eye.


It seemed like just yesterday that we were all being wowed by iso 25,600 and now we're seeing 3 million. Honestly who needs that? If you have the slightest understand of light, you won't realistically need to go past 6400 at the most and I dont even remember the last time I went nearly that high.

More megapixels is nice to a point, though I suppose it really depends on your needs. The medium format digital backs we shot with at school did 80 megapixels and as long as you have the card space and processing power this isn't all that bad. The detail in those files was amazing!
04-10-2016, 08:16 PM   #34
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 73
QuoteOriginally posted by neostyles Quote
Might be good for urban explorers as well I guess.
That pretty much describes a lot of my photography these days.... I tend to shoot a lot of street around Manhattan after hours. I spend plenty of time at 1600 or 3200. And yes I get a lot of "noise" / grain, but I believe it's acceptable for the work (play really) that I am doing....

I also shoot work events, kids at play indoors, etc. and those often require high ISO so I can avoid using a flash. I probably could do a better job cleaning up the noise (which is why I bought DXO OpticsPro) but I am not doing that too much at the moment. I attached an example..... Definitely lots of grain that may not appeal to many, but I am happy with this shot.

NOTE: This shot is 1/30, 3.2, 6400 - so it's a bit extreme. This was with a 21mm 3.2 - so as wide open as it gets.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3 II  Photo 

Last edited by jcsnyc; 04-10-2016 at 08:32 PM. Reason: added attachment
04-11-2016, 02:34 AM   #35
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,940
This is iso 10,000 (shot with DA *55 at f1.4 and 1/30 second). Shot with available light at a campfire. It is OK as a snapshot, but not great otherwise. I can't imagine using this iso for anything other than documenting family activities.



I think some folks use higher iso in relatively decent light, just to keep shutter speed up and the results can look considerably better.
04-11-2016, 02:58 AM   #36
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
Spot the Bunny.


Pentax K5IIs- SMCP-FA77mm f/1.8 Limited @ f/2.8 1/30th ISO12,800 - Un-cropped, no NR applied.

My eyes could only just see the rabbit, this image was taken half a hour after sunset. Incidentally, the K5IIs AF was able to accurately focus on the subject.

04-11-2016, 03:12 AM   #37
Veteran Member
Tan68's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 396
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Spot the Bunny.


... </i>
Peter Gabriel would like this.
04-11-2016, 07:24 AM   #38
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 148
My need for low light is for indoor sports (specifically horse show jumping), where I need minimum 1/1600 shutter speed to crisply catch the horse "in flight". On my K3ii with Pentax 60-250 F4, I only dare go as high as 6400, and even then I find the noise pretty much unacceptable. I get way more noise than the Bunny picture above shows. Maybe it's difference between k3ii and k5ii, though this seems like more difference than I would expect. Maybe lens comes in to play and 60-250mm doesn't like low light. I'm really hoping that the K1 with 70-200 will allow me to get much more usable pics at 12,800.

Here's a pic taken at 6400 ISO @F4, 1/1250 shutter speed (which isn't quite enough to be as sharp as I'd like), no NR applied. It's still quite underexposed and I had to lift the shadows in Lightroom quite a bit. I'm not sure if there's technically any difference in noise between using exposure enhancement in LR or just shooting at higher ISO, but it's always been my perception that shooting at 3200 or 6400 and boosting in LR is less noisy than shooting at 12,800.

On a side note AF.S works fine in this light. Pentax AF.C really doesn't work for this situation at all - doesn't track fast enough and often refuses to even take the shot, even with shutter priority on(!). But that's not a big deal because I know which jump they are heading for and I can just prefocus on the jump.

Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3 II  Photo 
04-11-2016, 02:21 PM   #39
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by carolina_sky Quote
My need for low light is for indoor sports (specifically horse show jumping), where I need minimum 1/1600 shutter speed to crisply catch the horse "in flight". On my K3ii with Pentax 60-250 F4, I only dare go as high as 6400, and even then I find the noise pretty much unacceptable. I get way more noise than the Bunny picture above shows. Maybe it's difference between k3ii and k5ii, though this seems like more difference than I would expect. Maybe lens comes in to play and 60-250mm doesn't like low light. I'm really hoping that the K1 with 70-200 will allow me to get much more usable pics at 12,800.
based on my a7r results, i wouldn't be looking forward to shooting at iso12,800, but it'll certainly be better than crop at every iso setting, this is a textbook case where it's a good idea to go ff.

QuoteOriginally posted by carolina_sky Quote
I'm not sure if there's technically any difference in noise between using exposure enhancement in LR or just shooting at higher ISO, but it's always been my perception that shooting at 3200 or 6400 and boosting in LR is less noisy than shooting at 12,800.
it depends on how well the shot looks like it's exposed, although you certainly don't want to ettr it... increasing iso doesn't increase exposure, but it might help retain details in dark muddy areas better, you are going to have to experiment... software like dxo pro will totally clean the noise in your shot up, it's much better than lightroom, but of course there will still be a loss of resolution and dr, nothing can fix that.

i would never use af in that horse jumping shot, you should be able to magnify liveview on the middle of the top bar, focus, possibly take a step or two to the right, and have perfect focus every single time... chimp it to be exact.
04-11-2016, 03:36 PM   #40
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 147
Well I can't judge if there is a scam but I certainly look forward to better iso at 3200 or 6400 with a K-1. Especially for portraits in available light. My K-7 starts getting bad at iso 400-800. Thats why I got the e-pm2 to test those waters. I did not like the Hoya Pentax lenses.
I do however like Pentax
colours. Hope to see people samples soon.
David
04-11-2016, 07:37 PM   #41
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
i would never use af in that horse jumping shot, you should be able to magnify liveview on the middle of the top bar
Have you ever photographed indoor equestrian events before? you would know using Manual focus with LV handheld is completely impractical.

QuoteOriginally posted by carolina_sky Quote
I get way more noise than the Bunny picture above shows.
I wouldn't be so sure about that.



Here is a 1:1 crop from the above image, with a NR comparison as well.




D-Fine does a good job at taming the aggressive noise at 12,800. But that is as high an ISO as I would ever use, and thankfully with all the fast lenses I own I rarely need to use such High ISOs.
04-11-2016, 08:06 PM   #42
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,724
QuoteOriginally posted by carolina_sky Quote
On a side note AF.S works fine in this light. Pentax AF.C really doesn't work for this situation at all - doesn't track fast enough and often refuses to even take the shot, even with shutter priority on(!). But that's not a big deal because I know which jump they are heading for and I can just prefocus on the jump.
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
i would never use af in that horse jumping shot, you should be able to magnify liveview on the middle of the top bar, focus, possibly take a step or two to the right, and have perfect focus every single time... chimp it to be exact.
How would your approach be any better than what was done: pre-focus on the jump and then shoot when the horse arrives?? That is a slight modification of what we did in MF days - it worked then and this automated version should work even better.
04-11-2016, 10:56 PM   #43
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,693
QuoteOriginally posted by carolina_sky Quote
Maybe lens comes in to play and 60-250mm doesn't like low light. ... On a side note AF.S works fine in this light. Pentax AF.C really doesn't work for this situation at all - doesn't track fast enough and often refuses to even take the shot, even with shutter priority on(!).

The AF-C system kept up fine for me here, but it's a fast screwdrive Tamron 70-200, rather than your 60-250's SDM. Your lens (which is a nice sharp one) is unfortunately letting the system down in that situation.


This is f2.8, 1/1600s, ISO 160, @140mm, on a K-30 so your K-3 would do even better:


04-12-2016, 05:31 AM   #44
Forum Member
rbelyell's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 95
my observation is that the gist of this thread is generally, but not specifically, true. most cameras do well up to 1600, maybe 3200. marketing claims to the contrary are mostly pap.

specifically though, the sony FF line does well up to 6400, its a7s goes much higher with aplomb, as does the nikon df.
04-12-2016, 06:28 AM   #45
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Michigan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,072
The Pentax K-01 here is mostly unusable at iso 3200.
The dng raw is noisy with horizontal stripes, and the camera jpg with auto NR on reduces the noise but is blurred.

At iso 6400:
Here is the dng (can't be viewed in the browser)
https://app.box.com/s/emmgg8hla86xx58210hi0imgdh2lh9t8
here is the camera jpg
https://app.box.com/s/8am0737ko9awsikxtai5qcgx5ysr7if1

Using Ufraw I can adjust the de-noise of the dng but in doing so, the lettering on top right of this example get too blurred while the noise is still apparent.
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!
24x36mm, af, aperture, camera, cameras, d810, data, dxo, flickr, focus, full-frame, gain, images, iso, james, k-1, k5, pentax, rider, sensor, sensors, shots, specs, williams
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why was the High ISO NR a problem on the K3? Culture Pentax K-3 15 10-09-2015 08:46 PM
Nature High ISO and high shutter speeds charliezap Post Your Photos! 3 09-15-2015 02:10 PM
What's the deal with K-3 poor high ISO performance Stavri Pentax DSLR Discussion 49 08-21-2014 03:02 PM
People K-5 high ISO... how high can we really go... igor Post Your Photos! 2 03-24-2012 01:10 AM
K-7 high ISO vs K20D high ISO supa007 Pentax DSLR Discussion 72 05-10-2010 04:24 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:23 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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