Originally posted by john5100 RainMan and candgpics
Thank you, our trip to Maui was really great. I'm especially proud of the father and daughter photo. I was such a special moment for the 2 of them and I was able to capture it.
John
John5100:
I know I have questioned a couple of forum members on this issue and perhaps I did of you, but.....I have contemplated getting a K3 (again; see below). I have 2 K5ii bodies and a K5. The high iso images that I have seen from you, and a few other forum members, seem significantly better than much of the other high iso images I have seen from other members.
I often shoot indoor martial arts events, sometimes under very poor lighting conditions. What I have read is that the k3 is about the same at high iso as the k5ii when scaled down to a comparable image size--but that on close inspection (e.g., pixel peeping at 100%) the k3 is a bit inferior at high iso. Yet, I see some amazing examples of very high iso images--3200 to 6400 from you and a few others--where my k5ii would not do as well.
Is the k3 success at high iso that I see from you all due to low, but even and good quality lighting, the right shot at the right time? Or are you finding the low light iso of the k3 at real world and comparable image sizes to be superior to the k5/k5ii?
I briefly had a k3 and returned it because it arrived clearly having been used, missing the white cap which covers the sensor/lens hole, and with time/date settings already in place. The camera appeared to work fine with nothing obviously wrong with it and the high iso seemed in-line with what I had read--inferior to the k5ii above 1600. I compared the images to my k5ii and there was no contest that the k5ii was superior in various low light settings around my house.
As an fyi, I use CS6, Noiseware when needed (but with a light touch), and have DXO Optics 9.5. Under both ACR, CS6 with Noiseware, and DXO Optics the k5ii was superior.
Any comments are appreciated.