Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-18-2014, 09:03 AM   #16
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,502
Yep, looks good, though I would caution that photos of furry creatures fair better with high ISO that many other subjects. The same photo of a human face would not look quite as good.


Steve

12-18-2014, 09:49 AM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
narual's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: South Bend (Notre Dame), Indiana
Posts: 1,942
Scaling it down to the size for the forum probably helps, too. At full size, it might look a bit smeary with noise reduction.

Or it might not. high ISO photos in good light don't usually look as bad as high ISO photos in low light, from what I've seen, which could be totally wrong.
12-18-2014, 09:55 AM   #18
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,869
I had to try.. since my K-3 seems to be noisier than most....
16000 ISO


16000 ISO with my normal NR routines..


Not great but completely doable. I have a few 400 ISO film images that are a lot worse...
12-18-2014, 09:58 AM   #19
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
My experience is that if you can get your exposure right in camera, the noise levels actually stay decent to surprisingly high. The hard part is when you have to bring up the exposure in post.

12-18-2014, 11:03 AM   #20
Veteran Member
enoxatnep's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The edge of nowhere, Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 467
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
K-5 and K-3 are the same size sensor. both are APS-c.
I should have specified: There are 50% more pixels on the K-3 jammed into the same space as the sensor on the K-5. A sure recipe for more noise - or so I thought.

---------- Post added 12-18-2014 at 11:05 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by LeRolls Quote
Image looks quite good for such a high ISO. The quality of light must have also played a role in how well the image came out.
It was pitch-black outside, and the only light came from a lamp which had the dimmer at less than half. So I would argue that the light quality was mediocre at best.
12-18-2014, 11:08 AM   #21
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,623
QuoteOriginally posted by enoxatnep Quote
A sure recipe for more noise.
Yes, it often is, and that's always been my assumption as well; but the picture you've posted here certainly demonstrates that it isn't necessarily so.
12-18-2014, 11:10 AM   #22
Veteran Member
enoxatnep's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The edge of nowhere, Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 467
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by narual Quote
Scaling it down to the size for the forum probably helps, too. At full size, it might look a bit smeary with noise reduction.

Or it might not. high ISO photos in good light don't usually look as bad as high ISO photos in low light, from what I've seen, which could be totally wrong.
That's one of the things that surprised me the most. When adjusting my K-5 images, I really noticed the smear and at way lower ISOs like 3200. But when I zoom in 100% on this and do a before/after check with the "\" key in Develop module, the NR applied still leaves a very good amount of detail. And in my reply to another post, the light quality was mediocre at best. I sure wish I knew how to export 100% crops or I'd post the before-and-after results.
12-18-2014, 11:14 AM   #23
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
I think the K5 cameras have some noise reduction built into the RAW at higher isos and if you are willing to do some post processing, you can probably get better results from the K3.

12-18-2014, 11:23 AM   #24
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,502
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I have a few 400 ISO film images that are a lot worse...



Steve
12-18-2014, 11:28 AM   #25
Site Supporter
wtlwdwgn's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Billings, MT
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,333
As long as you can get the proper exposure then noise at high ISOs becomes much easier to control. Where the noise becomes troublesome is when the shadows are underexposed. That's an excellent example of a high ISO exposure.
12-18-2014, 11:41 AM   #26
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,623
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I have a few 400 ISO film images that are a lot worse...
So have I. I once pushed Tri-X to 1600 and developed it in D76. Just a wee bit grainier than when shot at 400 and developed in Microdol. LOL
12-18-2014, 11:48 AM   #27
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,869
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
So have I. I once pushed Tri-X to 1600 and developed it in D76. Just a wee bit grainier than when shot at 400 and developed in Microdol. LOL
Ah, good old Microdol. I used to shoot 32 ISO copy film and process in Microdol for that "no grain" look. It gave me incredibly fine grain, incredibly high contrast images... sigh, the good old days.
12-18-2014, 12:13 PM   #28
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Photos: Albums
Posts: 87
QuoteOriginally posted by Michaelina2 Quote
AND... Want to do more...?
Try this in LR (should take less than 10 seconds)...

1. Open the DNG file in the DEVELOP module.
2. Open the EFFECTS dialog box and go to the Noise Reduction set of sliders.
3. Press the "Alt" key on your PC to turn the image to B&W, then with your mouse pointer, push the Luminance slider to the place on the scale where the noise speckles start to fade, then adjust to suit your fancy (some like to leave a few speckles to keep the image from looking plastic...). Be patient as it may take a moment for the effect to become apparent.
4. Press the Alt key, again and adjust the COLOR slider to remove the color speckles. Again, be patient as it may take a moment or two for the color speckles to dissolve.
5. Go to the SHARPENING set of sliders (above the NR set in the EFFECTS dialog box).
6. In your mind, subtract the Luminance adjustment number from 100 and enter that calculation into the AMOUNT slider's adjustment result box. For example, if your Luminance number was 30, enter 70. Notice that the luminance noise you erased earlier has returned. UGH ! Get rid of it by...
7. Press the Alt key on your PC, again, and adjust the MASKING slider to the point that your image appears to be a B&W line drawing.
8. Release the Alt key...

BINGO ! You have killed the image noise AND sharpened it, as needed to fit your taste. Now, get that pesky WB under control...

Cheers... M
Would that make a good preset?
12-18-2014, 12:45 PM - 1 Like   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 878
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I had to try.. since my K-3 seems to be noisier than most....
16000 ISO


16000 ISO with my normal NR routines..


Not great but completely doable. I have a few 400 ISO film images that are a lot worse...
With or without NR, they both look pretty good to me.

I got spoiled by my Canon 6D's seeming lack of noise at 6400 or even 12,800. I kind looked down on both on my K5IIs and the K3 as a lost cause for anything above 800. After seeing your post and the OP's image, I am now warming up to my K3 being capable of better high ISO shots.

Thanks for the post.
12-18-2014, 01:14 PM   #30
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I had to try.. since my K-3 seems to be noisier than most....
16000 ISO


16000 ISO with my normal NR routines..


Not great but completely doable. I have a few 400 ISO film images that are a lot worse...
I actually like the one better without NR. The noise in that photo isn't that bad and doesn't detract from the photo at all.
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, image, iso, k-3, k-5, k3, light, nr, pentax k-3, quality, sensor, shot
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can't Believe I Didn't Know This (Feeling Stupid) OrangeKx General Photography 31 12-22-2014 11:15 AM
I didn't think much of that photo from the fair (the Vortex) ASheffield General Talk 10 11-03-2013 07:29 AM
I didn't think my first lens would be a teleconverter! KHatfull Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 08-18-2012 04:32 PM
I didn't know this about IS... FHPhotographer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 02-10-2009 10:31 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:18 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