Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-28-2014, 10:50 AM   #91
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
Original Poster
Since starting this thread, I've become a lot more comfortable with the noise at higher ISOs. I also have an A-400, and the CA is much more noticeable with the K-3, but reduced to the same size, it looks the same only sharper.

01-28-2014, 04:34 PM   #92
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,378
Hi folks show your high ISO shots. I'm actually interested in your technique.

ISO 1600

Last edited by john5100; 01-28-2014 at 06:16 PM.
02-27-2014, 12:14 PM - 1 Like   #93
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,378
Not sure how the K5 would do, but here is the K3 at ISO 25,600


Last edited by john5100; 03-02-2014 at 03:14 PM.
03-01-2014, 12:49 PM   #94
Veteran Member
Parry's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 541
K-3 at ISO 3200 with Tair-11A near wide open. Very, very little NR in LR5.3. Tiny amount.





03-02-2014, 05:52 PM   #95
mee
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,918
You can definitely see the softness/detail-being-sucked-away from the images above ISO 1600 on all of these images. Might be able to get some of it back with some smart PP but I wouldn't fool with it; I wouldn't use either camera above 1600 unless I realllyyyy *had* to.
03-02-2014, 07:03 PM   #96
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,843
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
You can definitely see the softness/detail-being-sucked-away from the images above ISO 1600 on all of these images.
You can see that from 1024px JPEG's, shot with lenses often used wide open, and processed in a variety of unknown ways?
03-02-2014, 07:27 PM   #97
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,686
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
You can definitely see the softness/detail-being-sucked-away from the images above ISO 1600 on all of these images. Might be able to get some of it back with some smart PP but I wouldn't fool with it; I wouldn't use either camera above 1600 unless I realllyyyy *had* to.
As a K-3 owner, I think that's ridiculous. Of course you are entitled to your opinion.
03-02-2014, 07:53 PM   #98
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,267
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
As a K-3 owner, I think that's ridiculous. Of course you are entitled to your opinion.
I agree. I had a shot a few days ago at iso 5600, much higher than I usually go, and it cleaned up very nicely.

The only difference in noise from the K-5 is the white/grey noise you get in low light, low contrast shots outdoors at mid to high shutter speeds. In comparable circumstances the K-5 did either no better or worse.

03-02-2014, 08:38 PM   #99
mee
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,918
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
You can see that from 1024px JPEG's, shot with lenses often used wide open, and processed in a variety of unknown ways?
Yes, I can tell a sharp/clean image from one that is not. Neither of these cameras (or any APS-C for that matter) is outputting sharp images beyond 1600 ISO.

And I photograph with a K-5 II so I'm not the FF snob.. but you can easily see the high ISO smear in all of these shots above 1600 ISO.. detail is lost. How that is translated to print I have no idea but on my computer screen I'm seeing a difference. And not just in this thread.. but across the board.
03-02-2014, 08:52 PM   #100
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
I think it looks pretty good. Personally I'm always in favor of as little NR as possible, let the details stay and fight it out with the luminance noise, details usually win the aesthetic battle
03-02-2014, 10:49 PM   #101
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,378
It's a personal preference but I have no problem shooting above 1600. FF does a better job at high ISO but the K3 is excellent.
03-02-2014, 11:37 PM   #102
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,843
QuoteOriginally posted by john5100 Quote
FF does a better job at high ISO but the K3 is excellent.
FF should indeed do a better job, according to all the tech tests, but it doesn't always work that way, it seems:

Sony A7 with Pentax Full-frame Glass - Pentax K-3 and Sony Alpha 7 Image Comparison - PentaxForums.com
03-03-2014, 01:20 AM   #103
Jet
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: London, UK
Posts: 15
What do you guys do about PP / NR?

Hi all, I was following the thread right from the start, especially after I got my new k-3 two weeks ago, replacing my loved k10d that I had for six and half years. The k-3 is an unbelievable step up in the game, and I can confess honestly that when I took her (the k-3) for a three-day shooting trip, I was able to capture photos with light conditions and hight dynamic range scenes, that I'd never be able to capture with the k10d.

I was truly excited about the k-3's high ISO performance over the k10d, and I was shooting interiors at ISO1600, 3200 and even 6400. I never went higher than ISO400 on k10d, so you can imagine what a change this was for me.

However, when I opened my RAWs in my Lightroom 5 when I got home, I was slightly disappointed first. There actually was a noise on ISO3200! Well maybe the expectations were too high first. So I played bit with NR settings in Lightroom, and then exported some of the photos to low resolution, about 1600 pixels high / wide. Obviously, this improved the noise massively.

I was still surprised to see how clean and defined are some of the photographs in this thread. A good PP technique and NR software was mentioned a few times. Now I have to say that because I was really avoiding high ISO on k10d, I have zero experience with those. I googled a few tutorials, but I'm not sure if I'm doing any good really.

Could you please point out, how do you go about noise reduction in post-processing, please? Maybe you have a routine, maybe you use a plug-in, or a dedicated software with good algorithms? If you can share a bit of your expertise with that, I'd be massively grateful.
03-03-2014, 01:59 AM   #104
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by Jet Quote
Could you please point out, how do you go about noise reduction in post-processing, please? Maybe you have a routine, maybe you use a plug-in, or a dedicated software with good algorithms? If you can share a bit of your expertise with that, I'd be massively grateful.
I don't do anything special, and I put up with noise if doing ordinary things doesn't work. (I shot film from 1963, and didn't have a hang-up about film grain!)

I use Lightroom, and take care with the noise reduction parameters. I also take care throughout my post-processing not to sharpen the noise and make things worse. For example, when sharpening in Lightroom I use the sharpening mask carefully to exclude broad expanses with no detail. And in Photoshop I use Unsharp Mask with a threshold of perhaps 10 where relevant. (I often do different amounts of sharpening in different parts of the photo, using layer masks). And I've been known to use blur on large featureless areas that show noise.
03-03-2014, 03:36 AM - 1 Like   #105
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,843
QuoteOriginally posted by Jet Quote
There actually was a noise on ISO3200! Well maybe the expectations were too high first.
QuoteOriginally posted by Jet Quote
If you can share a bit of your expertise
My first tip would be to not make your noise assessments based on looking at your images (a) at 100% on the screen of your computer or (b) viewed on the rear LCD of the K-3. Both of those will produce an impression of high noise in K-3 images that will not match your experience in practical use of the camera - for web use, for print etc.

My general tips for low-light high-ISO in LR or other tools would be to:

- expose correctly for the type of shooting you need to do, using matrix/centre/spot as appropriate too. Often there is no need to meter the whole scene the same way;
- don't over-sharpen (related: use the sharpening mask),
- never go crazy with luminance smoothing,
- crush the blacks a bit in post-processing ,
- at very, very high ISO, where the IQ seriously starts to fall away, boost contrast, clarity and vibrance a tad, reduce saturation a notch, boost midtones;
- switch to monochrome.
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!
dslr, images, k-3, k3, k3 vs k5, k5, k5 high iso, pentax k-3
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New K3 vs K5ii high iso RAW tests ihasa Pentax K-3 8 11-04-2013 09:15 AM
DR/Noise performance: pushing exposure vs high ISO HSV Photographic Technique 8 03-12-2013 06:51 PM
K-R VS X100 High Iso Noise Comparison Ryan Cole Pentax DSLR Discussion 20 02-01-2013 02:36 PM
K5 High ISO Noise Reduction Setting daphnejohn Pentax K-5 2 11-06-2011 07:45 PM
High ISO Noise vs. Underexposure Correction yoon395 Photographic Technique 7 08-27-2011 06:13 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:20 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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