Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-08-2014, 10:37 AM   #46
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,187
QuoteOriginally posted by btnapa Quote
The K3 with its advertised SR should give you sharp images say on a 50mm lens down to 1/8 of a second easily.
Define sharp. Define easily. Show me where it says three stops.

I have no problem pulling two stops with acceptable results using SR, but acceptable is only acceptable when exceptional is not the goal.

According to your profile, you shoot with a K-5 IIs and various film cameras. Have you compared SR vs. tripod shots with your K-5 IIs? If so, care to share the results (full resolution crops preferred)? Perhaps your camera is inferior as well. How about your film cameras? Which of them are you comfortable doing critical work with TMax 100* handheld at 1/50s with a 50mm lens? Conventional wisdom says that 1/50s is hand-holdable, but is it? Put the negatives under a loupe and tell me they are sharp.


Steve

(...base resolution is about the same...)


Last edited by stevebrot; 12-08-2014 at 10:45 AM.
12-08-2014, 10:38 AM   #47
Pentaxian
MJSfoto1956's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Boston
Posts: 1,285
QuoteOriginally posted by Tjompen1968 Quote
One thing to keep in mind is that you need to wait a bit at half way press before pushing the shutter button all the way. The hand symbol must light up, i.e wait for the SR to get ready.
A very good point.
This is why I prefer to use back button focusing + AF-C.

Michael
12-08-2014, 11:03 AM   #48
Veteran Member
Flugelbinder's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Toronto - missing the ocean
Posts: 466
I would have to agree with much, if not all above, but, I don't believe anyone has mentioned, with the slow(er) shutter speeds come in fact another parameter, and this one beyond the camera or lenses' image stabilisation capabilities, subject movement. This may appear like camera movement/shake, but it might have been induced by slight movements from the subject. A unplanned wind that gently moves the leaves, a slight movement from a human if the camera is set to a shutter speed of less than 1/80 is 'risky'...

Last edited by Flugelbinder; 12-08-2014 at 11:11 AM.
12-08-2014, 11:25 AM   #49
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 4,989
As a bit of an aside, when shooting with long telephotos on a tripod when I've still got my hands on the camera and where vibrations are still somewhat present (but not the kind of rotational moves the SR is designed to compensate for), I've found that using SR with 60%-80% of the focal length dialed-in can help. (Not speaking specifically of the K-3 here.) In other words if I'm shooting with a 600mm on the tripod, I might turn on SR and set the focal length to 400mm - 500mm. Of course on newer lenses where it reads the focal length, you can't choose to override (only SR on or off), which annoys me, but anyway...

12-08-2014, 11:30 AM   #50
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
The only sharpness issue with the K-3 is that people can view it at 24mp resolution. They compare the results, sometimes from memory, vs. a 16mp camera viewed at 16mp and think they've lost something. View similar images at 16mp, you will see no difference.

I have seen no cause for concern at all with my K-3 photos, and I crop a lot for birding. With good technique and good lens, images are pixel sharp.
12-08-2014, 12:16 PM   #51
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,457
I turned every form of NR OFF !
Even set custom to OFF in every aspect.
Now I wasnt shooting anything above ISO 1000 and moving subjects arent one of my pursuits.
However I Noticed an immediate improvement in my images . Havent had mine but for a few days , so cant offer any other input than that.
It was a BIG issue why I kept passing on the K3.......uncertain about the Noise reputation on reviews almost stopped me.
I can only compare it to a K30........there is much better detail , and sharpness is about equal.
I dont know what your exact problem is , but after turning NR OFF in every form........my satisfaction with my K3 quickly turned into..... Happy...Happy....Happy !
12-08-2014, 04:32 PM   #52
Pentaxian
emalvick's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Davis, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,466
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
The only sharpness issue with the K-3 is that people can view it at 24mp resolution. They compare the results, sometimes from memory, vs. a 16mp camera viewed at 16mp and think they've lost something. View similar images at 16mp, you will see no difference.

I have seen no cause for concern at all with my K-3 photos, and I crop a lot for birding. With good technique and good lens, images are pixel sharp.
This is very important; if I ignore pixel peeping on an initial shot from my K-3, even the "softer" shots end up fairly sharp once I scale them to the resolution I use for my finals (usually around 12 MP tops). However, I do notice that many of my shoots come out very sharp right out of the camera when I do pixel peep, probably because I've upgraded from the K5 to K3 (and thus the lack of AA filter).

That aside, I am not very steady with my hands. Because my K-3 can produce quite sharp shots with almost every lens I've thrown at it, I notice more the differences between sharp shots and not sharp shots, and I can almost always tell that camera or subject movement is the culprit.

Additionally, regardless of any focal length, I have an outright minimum shutter speed that I can work with (for handheld shots) no matter what lens it is, which is generally about 1/60sec. That number has gotten faster with each generation of Pentax camera I buy. This is usually with SR on; I only turn it off for tripod shots. 1/8sec is something I can only dream of. Even on a 10mm shot, I could never do that with success without a tripod. Of course for telephoto shots, I find I need the 1/FL rule so that even at 300 mm my shots are coming out ok.
12-08-2014, 06:51 PM   #53
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,211
QuoteOriginally posted by btnapa Quote
i understand all the caution taken for sharp images.

But let's face it, you do not get a K3 caliber camera; built in SR, 8 frame per second capable, clearly a pro spec camera to put it on a tripod to make sure you get sharp images. The K3 with its advertised SR should give you sharp images say on a 50mm lens down to 1/8 of a second easily. If the camera or the system cannot do that then something is wrong. And I do not mean user error.

Again, in my opinion, the SR is not what it is advertised to be. It is good, at best, for two stops and that is a stretch. So I guess we are back to either pumping up the ISO so that we can up the shutter speed or a tripod for low shutter speeds.
You are assuming that it is movement blur. I would look for slight out of focus. I was having trouble with one lens, so I did a test and found that it was soft.

12-08-2014, 08:28 PM   #54
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 817
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Define sharp. Define easily. Show me where it says three stops.

I have no problem pulling two stops with acceptable results using SR, but acceptable is only acceptable when exceptional is not the goal.

According to your profile, you shoot with a K-5 IIs and various film cameras. Have you compared SR vs. tripod shots with your K-5 IIs? If so, care to share the results (full resolution crops preferred)? Perhaps your camera is inferior as well. How about your film cameras? Which of them are you comfortable doing critical work with TMax 100* handheld at 1/50s with a 50mm lens? Conventional wisdom says that 1/50s is hand-holdable, but is it? Put the negatives under a loupe and tell me they are sharp.


Steve

(...base resolution is about the same...)
Hi Steve,
I gave my K5iis to my brother about a year ago. I should update my profile. I have not shot film since 1999. My camera has been the K3 for a while. I have two of them because I shoot assignments and I have to have a back up just in case. The kind of work I do is generally studio product shots and for that I use strobes and the highest shutter speed the camera allows. My blurry work is mostly my personal work family shots and such.
12-08-2014, 10:08 PM   #55
Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 54
Original Poster
Thanks for the inputs. I'm sure my technique is not adequate, and was assuming the increased resolution was just highlighting that fact even more than the K-01 or K200D do. I will post some pics as examples ( I deleted the ones I took yesterday of Nutcrackers on stage after getting frustrated), but will say this: I turned on and off SR, with no noticeable difference, turned off high ISO and other corrections without seeing the benefit also. I was using the 43mm limited set at 2.8 (see below) with no more than 1600 ISO.

I had noticed this phenomena a while back and decided to purchase a Spyder Lenscal for my own review. I set it up on a tri-pod and set each of my cameras on another tri-pod and went thru each lens, all stops. I found the 43mm limited to be clear from 2.8 to 14 (not full range). I found the DA 40 XS clear everywhere surprisingly. I also found the reason why some of the cheaper lenses are cheap...

During this process, it was clear the K-3 was more detailed than the K-01 and obviously the K200D. But it seems I can't get the hang of handheld picture taking with it. I look forward to reading the Nikon link (thanks rawr) to see if I can pick up some tips.

Z
12-08-2014, 10:36 PM   #56
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by HomeMadeSin Quote
I turned on and off SR, with no noticeable difference, turned off high ISO and other corrections without seeing the benefit also. I was using the 43mm limited set at 2.8 (see below) with no more than 1600 ISO.
Shutter speed? It's possible you should have used higher ISO. Motion blur is not correctable, noise is correctable.
12-09-2014, 01:10 PM   #57
Pentaxian
Wired's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,494
Any other K-3 owners feel like a tri-pod is the only way to get crisp photos?

Two things that I may have missed reading this over that could lend to lack of sharpness in images that is arguably not user error.

The first is back/front focus. You need to calibrate your lenses. All my Pentax glass was out of whack on both K5 and K3. It can make things look a little soft, especially when using a thin depth of field.

The other is constant AF mode. If your using single shot AF and finding your getting some blur I highly recommend looking into the AF-back button focusing technique and start using it. It's a little strange at first but my "keeper" rate jumped dramatically.


I do get some motion blur shooting concerts, but rarely do I get hand motion blur when I have the camera setup correctly.


I shoot with a D800 as well and I can honestly say with both setups anytime an image isn't sharp it has been from user error, either too low a shutter speed an poor stabilization technique, not calibrating the focus, not using a high enough aperture, etc. etc.


I also stopped pixel peeping and that cured a lot of my problems.
12-09-2014, 01:13 PM   #58
Veteran Member
cbope's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 664
QuoteOriginally posted by Wired Quote
I also stopped pixel peeping and that cured a lot of my problems.
Is there a 12-step program for that?!?
12-09-2014, 01:16 PM   #59
Veteran Member
Flugelbinder's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Toronto - missing the ocean
Posts: 466
QuoteOriginally posted by cbope Quote
Is there a 12-step program for that?!?
Hehehe
12-09-2014, 02:04 PM   #60
Pentaxian
emalvick's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Davis, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,466
QuoteOriginally posted by cbope Quote
Is there a 12-step program for that?!?
It's tough. A few step program: Get some prints of photos that look good in fit to screen but not necessarily when pixel-peeped. When they come out good, you'll realize pixel peeping doesn't matter. That's helped me quite a bit. It helped me with reducing my need for NR and accepting much higher ISO shots. Even prints out of my old K10d look a lot better despite its supposed bad performance at ISO 800 on up.

It's liberating and leads to enhanced LBA and more time shooting.
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!
artifacts, cause, compression, crop, dslr, exif, galore, hand, image, iso, jpeg, k-3, k-3 owners, k3, matter, pentax k-3, yes
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any K-3 owners use the DA 17-70? IchabodCrane Pentax K-3 6 11-08-2014 05:48 PM
Any NYC-area K-3 owners want to come out and play? frogoutofwater Pentax K-3 11 12-03-2013 06:30 PM
Ever feel like you were born too late to get the good shots? PPPPPP42 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 22 07-22-2012 10:11 PM
Wanted to know if their is any way to get back the deleted photos? caedmon General Talk 4 01-25-2012 08:50 AM
Is there any way to convert K-7 movie to a series of jpgs? raider Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 21 04-15-2010 08:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:35 AM. | 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