[normhead]

For landscape.

What is the dynamic range... that is going to have a huge impact on it's DxO rating....
And low light performance. How do the noise reduction algorithms perform at low light? Ditto with the DxO ratings.

I'd still be working with a K20D if it weren't for those two functions, for landscape, the rest I can live with happily.

[wissink]

High ISO is my biggest deciding factor as well.

[enoeske]

Do you really care about the dynamic range if you are shooting jpeg?

[K(s)evin]

Do you really care about the dynamic range if you are shooting jpeg?

WHAT!?! No RAW setting available? Pentax is DOOMED!!!

[normhead]

Do you really care about the dynamic range if you are shooting jpeg?

Short answer, yes you do.

Long answer
Obvious question, do you understand what dynamic range is? Dynamic range is how many EV the camera is capable of capturing. It is an input metric. jpeg is an output file type.

The adage garbage in, garbage out applies. In this case, low dynamic range input, in many landscape situations means garbage in. Jpeg is not some super function that equalizes sensors among all cameras and means a cheap point and shoot can match images with any camera that has more dynamic range.

The jpegs from my K-5 are better than the jpegs from my K20D which are better than the images from my Optio 90W, in many situations because the K-5 sensor captures more DR than the K20D, which captures more DR than the Optio 90W. Shooting jpeg does not get you out of benefitting from the best sensor possible.

[kenspo]

DxO ratings.

Who cares about Dxo ratings? On ISO, it shall be around a stop better then the D810. I can't confirm this yet, cause i only have pre-production model to play with.

[normhead]

Who cares about Dxo ratings? On ISO, it shall be around a stop better then the D810. I can't confirm this yet, cause i only have pre-production model to play with.

DxO's focus is low light performance, so much so, that they compromise their overall ratings for good light shooters by placing so much weight not them, and that's usually a bad thing, unless what you're interested in is DR and low light. Everything has it's uses, even DxO.

DR and low light is one area where I will see what they have to say.

But, if it's a stop better than a D810, I'll be happy. That would put it up in 645z territory.

Unlike you, I'm looking for a complimentary system, a system I can put in my camera bag to extend my K-3 system. SO I want this camera to be really good at the things the k-3 doesn't do well. The things the K-3 does well, (magnification for wildlife and macro, and frame rate) I'm happy with already.
I know a lot of people go poo poo when I say I miss the DR loss from the K-5 to the K-3... but for me it's just a fact of life, I miss it, and i want it back. Sounds like the K-1 might give it back tome and then add some extra, just for good measure.

The only reason DxO is of interest, is because as far as I can tell, Pentax didn't list the Dynamic Range on the spec sheet. Weird since the DR is listed on both the K-3 and K-5 spec sheets. If Pentax won't tell me, DxO will.

---

Last edited by normhead; 02-18-2016 at 08:41 AM.

[kenspo]

What DxO says and how things work in real work and photo environments, hardly ever match up. Thats my point. So i never care much about what they write

Unlike me? How do you know what i need?

[DeadJohn]

I found one 3200 ISO raw file posted on DPR. Here are my initial feelings based on that single sample:

3200 ISO looks good enough to use on a regular basis. Printing at 16x20 might be okay.

There's more luma noise than chroma noise. That's good because chroma is harder to reduce during processing.

There wasn't much color in the scene, just a guy wearing dark clothes in front of a white wall. The lighting was flat. I couldn't tell much about the dynamic range nor the colors.

[normhead]

What DxO says and how things work in real work and photo environments, hardly ever match up. Thats my point. So i never care much about what they write

When comparing sunsets, and other low light high DR situations, with my K-3 and K-5 , DxO has been bang on. For us nature guys, people look at all your artsy nature shots from creative angles , and then buy wildlife or a sunset. Anything you can do to improve those sunsets is a good thing, and as far as I can tell DxO ratings are actually good for that.

Unlike me? How do you know what i need?

You've told me, several times, real loud , you need a full frame.

APS-c just doesn't do it for you.

[kenspo]

Unlike you, I'm looking for a complimentary system

Yes, i need a FF to a specific part of photo. But i was talking about this. How do you know i dont need one too?

I have WG-M1, Ricoh GRII, K-3, K-3II, K-1 (soon with finished firmware) and 645Z. So i think i have a complimentary. Because i need and want.

[LFLee]

I found one 3200 ISO raw file posted on DPR. Here are my initial feelings based on that single sample:

3200 ISO looks good enough to use on a regular basis. Printing at 16x20 might be okay.

There's more luma noise than chroma noise. That's good because chroma is harder to reduce during processing.

There wasn't much color in the scene, just a guy wearing dark clothes in front of a white wall. The lighting was flat. I couldn't tell much about the dynamic range nor the colors.

I saw that too. I think it was pretty good for ISO3200. Especially the shutter speed shown is not very high (meaning the place is actually pretty dark).
(it also have a very 'film-like' pleasing look to it).

[tuco]

The best chart DXO produces is DR vs ISO. You will see that your DR really starts to suck over ISO 6400. So much so that it is a moot point to be talking what camera has the highest top-end ISO in terms of noise or value unless there is good DR to go with it.

[normhead]

The best chart DXO produces is DR vs ISO. You will see that your DR really starts to suck over ISO 6400. So much so that it is a moot point to be talking what camera has the highest top-end ISO in terms of noise or value unless there is good DR to go with it.

I have no images taken with a K-3 or K-5 that I'd use taken over 1600 ISO, so 6400 sounds really good. Out in the blind shooting birds with the A-400, that's the difference between 1/500s and motion blur, and 1/2000s and freezing the wings in a lot of light. And anything I currently take with my 60-250 and TC I should be able to take with the A-400 and TC. IN late afternoon light, or morning light, frequently the DR is well inside the curves even at high ISO. SO while DR is great for landscape when you have a brilliantly lit scene, there are a lot of wildlife scenes where you don't come close to using the full DR of the camera, even at high ISO.

For a lot of wildlife, DR is not really a critical component.

[tuco]

For a lot of wildlife, DR is not really a critical component.

Your examples are low contrast scenes. When more light is in the scene, a 12-14 stop DR shot will be much higher quality than a 6-stop DR shot less noise or not. But when your desperate for the shot, what choice do does a person have.