Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-27-2013, 08:49 AM - 1 Like   #76
Pentaxian
awaldram's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hampshire
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 720
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
You are technically correct, the tech could be substantially different.

However, there more recently was little difference between Toshiba and Sony sensors wrt high iso performance (aka quantum efficiency QE). And QE already crossed 50% and can only progress in ever so small steps towards the 100% barrier.

So, just using common sense, I wouldn't expect a vsible high iso noise improvement wrt e.g., D7100. And more importantly, the ISO 6400 samples provided on the very same test site do indeed show a well visble advantage for the D600.
.
As I said you need to interpert what your looking at without preconceptions.
You've looked at the images and made you first error i.e at iso6400 the d600 whoops the k3's butt.

The d600 when set @6400 is actually shooting @4870 an old Nikon trick they've done on all their cameras to catch the unwary !
So though the D7100 Vs D600 is fair i.e iso4516 Vs 4870 any comparison to Pentax needs adjusting to be fair.

Given Pentax do not go in for such kidology you would need to shoot the k3 @5000 to get a true comparison at which point I would say it would be a wash given the K3's SNR @3200.

Any conclusion always has to be based on solid data, yours is not and as such is considerably more suspect than the 'Tests' you happily slam.!

Note Canon also play this game the 6d at 6400 is shooting @iso 4990 !


Last edited by awaldram; 10-27-2013 at 08:54 AM.
10-27-2013, 09:01 AM - 2 Likes   #77
Site Supporter
Rorschach's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kuusamo, Finland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 598
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Sorry, I wanted to say it with polite words. But you challenge me.

So, here it is for you again:

Guy says "K-3 swipes D600", "also on par at high iso". I open the 6400 sample and NO WAY they can be regarded as on par. So, I really think guy is a lier, just preferred to use words joke, unserious and foolish.

Now, is it un-academic enough for you?

Jeeeezh
I am sorry but I am not seeing what you are seeing. I also opened the 6400 samples. Yes, there is more noise in the K3 samples but there also seems to be more detail. Overall, if this is what it boils down to in terms of full frame vs. APS-C real world difference, I AM IN NO WAY IMPRESSED.

Oh and by the way, things like Dxomark are ridiculously overrated compared to actual images.

I do agree on the author failing with the title. I do not think the K3 swipes the D600. However, their differences seem minor and mixed and that is really the big news even though this test is clearly less rigorous than some others.

Last edited by Rorschach; 10-27-2013 at 09:29 AM. Reason: a typo
10-27-2013, 09:23 AM - 1 Like   #78
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Sorry, I wanted to say it with polite words. But you challenge me.

So, here it is for you again:

Guy says "K-3 swipes D600", "also on par at high iso". I open the 6400 sample and NO WAY they can be regarded as on par. So, I really think guy is a lier, just preferred to use words joke, unserious and foolish.

Now, is it un-academic enough for you?

Jeeeezh
I don't know what you're seeing but they look about the same to me, close enough to not make any difference on print.
And if that ISO 12,800 is for real, WOW!!!!

Last edited by mille19; 10-27-2013 at 09:32 AM.
10-27-2013, 09:34 AM   #79
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
The wrong conclusion

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
This is such a typical "academic" type response. pointing out everything that might be wrong..... think court of law here... this is evidence. You may
have issues with the evidence, but, it's still evidence.
The problem is, though, I could produce 'evidence' right now in this thread that my K20D is almost on-par with my D800, and I could convince folks who weren't familiar with either model that they were, roughly, equivalent in IQ.

The K-3 looks great as I knew it would, but as Adam and Falc and others have implied, a 'test' like this can show you anything you really want to see, especially if done halfhazardly or under conditions that even things out.

On a related note, here's what I've been thinking and saying for three years now - if Pentax can make aps-c DSLRs that lead that tier in IQ... what could they do if they moved into FF? A Pentax FF with a 36MP Exmor sensor with Pentax's treatment and a new, more powerful AF module? How can this not make people drool!?

.


Last edited by jsherman999; 10-27-2013 at 10:04 AM.
10-27-2013, 09:37 AM   #80
Site Supporter
Rorschach's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kuusamo, Finland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 598
QuoteOriginally posted by awaldram Quote
As I said you need to interpert what your looking at without preconceptions.
You've looked at the images and made you first error i.e at iso6400 the d600 whoops the k3's butt.

The d600 when set @6400 is actually shooting @4870 an old Nikon trick they've done on all their cameras to catch the unwary !
So though the D7100 Vs D600 is fair i.e iso4516 Vs 4870 any comparison to Pentax needs adjusting to be fair.

Given Pentax do not go in for such kidology you would need to shoot the k3 @5000 to get a true comparison at which point I would say it would be a wash given the K3's SNR @3200.

Any conclusion always has to be based on solid data, yours is not and as such is considerably more suspect than the 'Tests' you happily slam.!

Note Canon also play this game the 6d at 6400 is shooting @iso 4990 !
Interesting. Can you give a link to this?
10-27-2013, 09:39 AM   #81
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by mille19 Quote
I don't know what you're seeing but they look about the same to me, close enough to not make any difference on print.
And if that ISO 12,800 is for real, WOW!!!!
Except it's not for real - anything above (IIRC) ISO 1600 (maybe ISO 3200, I forget) is pushed in camera, so it's about as real as taking an ISO 1600 shot and applying NR and 'EV comp' in post. What Pentax is showing you there is that their raw processing which can't be turned off can do that step pretty well in camera (which isn't necessarily a bad thing... just keep in mind what it really is.)
10-27-2013, 09:47 AM   #82
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 83
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Except it's not for real - anything above (IIRC) ISO 1600 (maybe ISO 3200, I forget) is pushed in camera, so it's about as real as taking an ISO 1600 shot and applying NR and 'EV comp' in post. What Pentax is showing you there is that their raw processing which can't be turned off can do that step pretty well in camera (which isn't necessarily a bad thing... just keep in mind what it really is.)
I don't care, it's what I get out at the end that counts, I don't go for all the figures really it's what my eyes see, and to me it looks like I'll be buying a K3.

I was worried the 24mp would be a step backwards in high ISO IQ compared to my K5 which I am happy with, but looking at these comparisons I don't think I've got anything to worry about.
10-27-2013, 09:51 AM   #83
Site Supporter
Rorschach's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kuusamo, Finland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 598
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
The problem is, though, I could produce 'evidence' right now in this thread that my K20D is almost on-par with my D800, and I could convince folks who weren't familiar with either model that they were, roughly, equivalent in IQ.

The K-3 looks great as I knew it would, but as Adam and Falc and others have implied, a 'test' like this can show you anything you really want to see, especially if done halfhazardly.

On a related note, here's what I've been thinking and saying for three years now - if Pentax can make aps-c DSLRs that lead that tier in IQ... what could they do if they moved into FF? A Pentax FF with a 36MP Exmor sensor with Pentax's treatment and a new, more powerful AF module? How can this not make people drool!?

.
So you are suggesting that these testers are biased and trying to skew the results? If that is not the case, I do not think that any pixel peeping can convince me any more of the "godly superiority" of the full frame. Real world images are real world images.

I can understand that some people want full frame to have their old lenses perform as they should in terms of angle of view. Also, arguments about viewfinder quality I find solid. However, image quality seems to be too close now to have any practical role. Absolutely zero role when the price difference is also taken into account. The price chasm is even wider when stabilized lenses are taken into account too (this is where total system weight factor will also start to really show). Hopefully Pentax can prove me wrong in the future but that's where I stand now.

10-27-2013, 09:52 AM   #84
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by mille19 Quote
I don't care, it's what I get out at the end that counts, I don't go for all the figures really it's what my eyes see, and to me it looks like I'll be buying a K3.
That's perfectly fine and valid, just keep in mind this 'test' incorporates that raw cooking - cooking that can also be done to a D600/D610 shot in post.

QuoteQuote:
I was worried the 24mp would be a step backwards in high ISO IQ compared to my K5 which I am happy with, but looking at these comparisons I don't think I've got anything to worry about.
Don't see any reason to fear the megapixels. K-3 looks like a great camera and an actual upgrade from the K-5.
10-27-2013, 09:59 AM   #85
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Rorschach Quote
So you are suggesting that these testers are biased and trying to skew the results?
Either biased or just careless. 'Reviewers' can indeed be biased for/against a brand. Remember that video that was making the rounds a few months ago where the 'reviewer' was claiming that the K-5 AF was superior to other cameras because (among other things) the K-5 would focus in a split second where the Nikon for example would take up to three seconds in the same situation? I lost track of the inaccuracies about 1/3 of the way through, but a good number of folks took that as a legitimate video review.

As Falk said, if you hang your hat on stuff like this it can actually work against Pentax's legitimacy. Let's wait for the real reviewers, the real sensor tests, I have no doubt they'll be good - and will have the benefit of being rigorous.

.
10-27-2013, 10:05 AM   #86
Pentaxian
awaldram's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hampshire
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 720
QuoteOriginally posted by Rorschach Quote
Interesting. Can you give a link to this?
DxO do the work for you.
select camera you interested in got to measurements and select either iso sensitivity or SNR 18%

hover over the circles on the graph a pop will tell you camera setting and true ISO
10-27-2013, 10:10 AM   #87
Pentaxian
awaldram's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hampshire
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 720
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
That's perfectly fine and valid, just keep in mind this 'test' incorporates that raw cooking - cooking that can also be done to a D600/D610 shot in post. .
1 how do you apply pre RAW NR to the 600/610 in post?
2 given the number people who have tried to discredit it and their inability to show any detail loss I think maybe Pentax have it protected under patent.?

As the Pentax pre-NR is a function of the sensor there is no guarantee the K3 will support it.

The concept is simple you use a similar algorithm to MTI (Moving Target Indicator) but against noise to separate that which is pure noise Vs Signal you then reduce bit depth to remove the pure noise, It wont give you massive gains but will give you cost free NR .
10-27-2013, 10:11 AM - 2 Likes   #88
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,594
The original article, this thread...
Attached Images
 
10-27-2013, 10:21 AM   #89
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,211
What I find interesting about the higher iso shots is how the noise shows up. The two pentax shots, assuming the nikon ones were properly focused, look sharper. Noise as measured is what? Proportion of pixels that are not valid light measurements? Ultimately what we use is a processed shot, the end result is dependent on the noise reduction mechanism having data that allows it to optimize the shot.

When I look at the two high iso shots I think of what can be recovered. Am I wrong to think that the pentax shots have more sharpness and probably would look better post.
10-27-2013, 10:25 AM   #90
Site Supporter
Rorschach's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Kuusamo, Finland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 598
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Either biased or just careless. 'Reviewers' can indeed be biased for/against a brand. Remember that video that was making the rounds a few months ago where the 'reviewer' was claiming that the K-5 AF was superior to other cameras because (among other things) the K-5 would focus in a split second where the Nikon for example would take up to three seconds in the same situation? I lost track of the inaccuracies about 1/3 of the way through, but a good number of folks took that as a legitimate video review.

As Falk said, if you hang your hat on stuff like this it can actually work against Pentax's legitimacy. Let's wait for the real reviewers, the real sensor tests, I have no doubt they'll be good - and will have the benefit of being rigorous.

.
I see your point. But I fail to see what Falk saw in those iso6400 images. Plain and simple and not very convincing from him.
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!
comparison, d600, dslr, head, k-3, k3, nikon, pentax, pentax k-3, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-5 vs K-r vs K-7 - DSLR Comparison Adam Pentax K-5 40 09-30-2013 06:22 PM
Current K-5 vs. K-30 autofocus comparison? Newtophotos Pentax K-5 5 08-27-2013 10:31 AM
k-30 vs Nikon D600 zorza Pentax K-30 & K-50 31 01-02-2013 04:30 PM
Unscientific Comparison: K5 vs. 5DII vs. D600 sb in ak Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 36 12-27-2012 01:13 PM
Camera comparison: One X vs Galaxy S II vs Nexus vs N8 vs iPhone 4S jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 3 04-12-2012 07:41 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:38 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