K-3 Low Light

scotty707 · 09-08-2016, 10:05 PM

What's everyone's experience with low-light performance on the (original) K-3? I've gotten decent low-light pics before, but this past weekend I was just unable to make it work. The picture I've linked to was taken with the DA 18-135 lens, 18mm @ f/3.5, 30s, at ISO 3200. Now it was the day after the new moon, so there was very little ambient light since what sliver of a moon there was hadn't risen yet. Is the problem my settings or just the lack of light? I just feel like it could have turned out better.

DNG: 2016_09_03 22-06-23.DNG - Google Drive

Edited: 2016_09_03 22-06-23.jpg - Google Drive

Adam · 09-08-2016, 10:10 PM

I think it's a combination of soft sharpness wide open/DoF and possibly where you focused. Noise-wise the image isn't too bad.

**BigMackCam** · 09-09-2016, 12:15 AM

Hi Scotty...

For frame-wide sharpness on the 18-135 at 18mm, you really want to be stopped down to f/7.1 to f/8. That will also help by increasing the depth of field.

As for the image noise, it looks about right for ISO 3200 to me. Your edited shot shows that the colour noise has been removed successfully. What software are you using for post-processing?

panonski · 09-09-2016, 12:37 AM

What the hell did you photographed here

nOISE is the last thing I would check out in this scene

MikePerham · 09-09-2016, 11:48 AM

Originally posted by scotty707

What's everyone's experience with low-light performance on the (original) K-3? I've gotten decent low-light pics before, but this past weekend I was just unable to make it work. The picture I've linked to was taken with the DA 18-135 lens, 18mm @ f/3.5, 30s, at ISO 3200. Now it was the day after the new moon, so there was very little ambient light since what sliver of a moon there was hadn't risen yet. Is the problem my settings or just the lack of light? I just feel like it could have turned out better.

DNG: 2016_09_03 22-06-23.DNG - Google Drive

Edited: 2016_09_03 22-06-23.jpg - Google Drive

I have shot several theatre shows, which have terrible lighting for photography, with a K3 and the DA* 50-135 f2.8. I use this wide open on aperture priority at IsO 1600 and have been very happy with the results. My images were selected by the show's producer over those of others using FF Sony and Canon equipment.

john5100 · 09-09-2016, 03:23 PM

The K3 is great at low light. My KS2 is great too.

K3

Anthrax by John Rudolph, on Flickr

Alter Bridge by John Rudolph, on Flickr

KS2

Saint Asonia by John Rudolph, on Flickr

bxf · 09-09-2016, 08:47 PM

Originally posted by scotty707

DA 18-135 lens, 18mm @ f/3.5, 30s, at ISO 3200

Or was it 1/30s? I have no idea what would make sense under the conditions at the time.

Originally posted by john5100

The K3 is great at low light. My KS2 is great too.

If the answer to the above is 30s (as opposed to 1/30s), then I'd say the comparison is not fair.

scotty707 · 09-09-2016, 09:33 PM

Originally posted by bxf

Or was it 1/30s? I have no idea what would make sense under the conditions at the time.

If the answer to the above is 30s (as opposed to 1/30s), then I'd say the comparison is not fair.

30 seconds. Conditions were no moon, no ambient light other than a flashlight.

**Scorpio71GR** · 09-10-2016, 05:39 AM

When shooting higher ISO's on my K3 I have found it better to advoid shadow clipping. Recovering shadows on high ISO settings tends to really increase noise for me. I use Lightroom 5 right now and when I can not get enough noise out I finish in Denoise 6. I have also found DXO Optics Pro 10 to remove noise pretty well with their Prime Noise removal engine. I have the 18-135 like others said I would not shoot it wide open. For a shot like that it would probably be better to have a fast prime to shoot wide open.

This is a shot taken at sunset with the K3 and DA*16-50 at ISO 8000, 1/30 second.

This one was with the 50-135 at ISO 1000, 13 seconds.

**BigMackCam** · 09-10-2016, 06:24 AM

Originally posted by Scorpio71GR

When shooting higher ISO's on my K3 I have found it better to advoid shadow clipping. Recovering shadows on high ISO settings tends to really increase noise for me.

Agreed, and that's the case with every camera I've used.

For the OP's particular shot where there is no movement, bracketed exposures could also be taken and merged to create an HDR image. That would help keep noise at bay in the shadows, and the multiple exposures will go some way to smoothing out the random noise.

**csa** · 09-10-2016, 06:36 AM

Originally posted by scotty707

30 seconds. Conditions were no moon, no ambient light other than a flashlight.

Considering all that, I think it turned out pretty well. You can clearly see the Big Dipper, along with the foreground that is brighter with the flashlight. It does look like you might have focused on the weeds in the foreground rather than the center snag tree.

09-08-2016, 10:05 PM	#1
scotty707 Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Southern California/IE Posts: 306	K-3 Low Light What's everyone's experience with low-light performance on the (original) K-3? I've gotten decent low-light pics before, but this past weekend I was just unable to make it work. The picture I've linked to was taken with the DA 18-135 lens, 18mm @ f/3.5, 30s, at ISO 3200. Now it was the day after the new moon, so there was very little ambient light since what sliver of a moon there was hadn't risen yet. Is the problem my settings or just the lack of light? I just feel like it could have turned out better. DNG: 2016_09_03 22-06-23.DNG - Google Drive Edited: 2016_09_03 22-06-23.jpg - Google Drive

09-08-2016, 10:10 PM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594	I think it's a combination of soft sharpness wide open/DoF and possibly where you focused. Noise-wise the image isn't too bad. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

09-09-2016, 03:23 PM	#6
john5100 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,725	The K3 is great at low light. My KS2 is great too. K3 Anthrax by John Rudolph, on Flickr Alter Bridge by John Rudolph, on Flickr KS2 Saint Asonia by John Rudolph, on Flickr Saint Asonia by John Rudolph, on Flickr

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-50 low light will not fire a shot?	focusr3	Pentax K-30 & K-50	9	12-24-2014 01:48 AM
K-3 doesn't focus in low light conditions	zoolander	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	10-28-2014 01:38 PM
K-30 Low Light/Stadium Advice	timmijo	Pentax K-30 & K-50	18	09-30-2014 10:01 PM
K-3 autofocus excellent in low light	wizofoz	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	24	03-26-2014 08:46 AM
K-3 and low-light shooting	rawr	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	19	10-27-2013 05:55 AM

09-09-2016, 12:15 AM	#3
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,665	Hi Scotty... For frame-wide sharpness on the 18-135 at 18mm, you really want to be stopped down to f/7.1 to f/8. That will also help by increasing the depth of field. As for the image noise, it looks about right for ISO 3200 to me. Your edited shot shows that the colour noise has been removed successfully. What software are you using for post-processing?

09-09-2016, 12:37 AM	#4
panonski Pentaxian Join Date: May 2015 Location: Zagreb Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 624	What the hell did you photographed here nOISE is the last thing I would check out in this scene

09-09-2016, 11:48 AM	#5
MikePerham Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Prince George, BC Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 642	Originally posted by scotty707 What's everyone's experience with low-light performance on the (original) K-3? I've gotten decent low-light pics before, but this past weekend I was just unable to make it work. The picture I've linked to was taken with the DA 18-135 lens, 18mm @ f/3.5, 30s, at ISO 3200. Now it was the day after the new moon, so there was very little ambient light since what sliver of a moon there was hadn't risen yet. Is the problem my settings or just the lack of light? I just feel like it could have turned out better. DNG: 2016_09_03 22-06-23.DNG - Google Drive Edited: 2016_09_03 22-06-23.jpg - Google Drive I have shot several theatre shows, which have terrible lighting for photography, with a K3 and the DA* 50-135 f2.8. I use this wide open on aperture priority at IsO 1600 and have been very happy with the results. My images were selected by the show's producer over those of others using FF Sony and Canon equipment.

09-09-2016, 08:47 PM	#7
bxf Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Lisbon area Posts: 1,660	Originally posted by scotty707 DA 18-135 lens, 18mm @ f/3.5, 30s, at ISO 3200 Or was it 1/30s? I have no idea what would make sense under the conditions at the time. Originally posted by john5100 The K3 is great at low light. My KS2 is great too. If the answer to the above is 30s (as opposed to 1/30s), then I'd say the comparison is not fair.

09-09-2016, 09:33 PM	#8
scotty707 Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Southern California/IE Posts: 306 Original Poster	Originally posted by bxf Or was it 1/30s? I have no idea what would make sense under the conditions at the time. If the answer to the above is 30s (as opposed to 1/30s), then I'd say the comparison is not fair. 30 seconds. Conditions were no moon, no ambient light other than a flashlight.

09-10-2016, 05:39 AM	#9
Scorpio71GR Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,003	When shooting higher ISO's on my K3 I have found it better to advoid shadow clipping. Recovering shadows on high ISO settings tends to really increase noise for me. I use Lightroom 5 right now and when I can not get enough noise out I finish in Denoise 6. I have also found DXO Optics Pro 10 to remove noise pretty well with their Prime Noise removal engine. I have the 18-135 like others said I would not shoot it wide open. For a shot like that it would probably be better to have a fast prime to shoot wide open. This is a shot taken at sunset with the K3 and DA*16-50 at ISO 8000, 1/30 second. This one was with the 50-135 at ISO 1000, 13 seconds.

09-10-2016, 06:24 AM	#10
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,665	Originally posted by Scorpio71GR When shooting higher ISO's on my K3 I have found it better to advoid shadow clipping. Recovering shadows on high ISO settings tends to really increase noise for me. Agreed, and that's the case with every camera I've used. For the OP's particular shot where there is no movement, bracketed exposures could also be taken and merged to create an HDR image. That would help keep noise at bay in the shadows, and the multiple exposures will go some way to smoothing out the random noise.

09-10-2016, 06:36 AM	#11
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133	Originally posted by scotty707 30 seconds. Conditions were no moon, no ambient light other than a flashlight. Considering all that, I think it turned out pretty well. You can clearly see the Big Dipper, along with the foreground that is brighter with the flashlight. It does look like you might have focused on the weeds in the foreground rather than the center snag tree.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search