[rawr]

Based on the DxOMark low-light metrics, I would say that you could use the K-1 at up to about ISO 2800 and still get acceptable image quality.

In DxOMark terms, ''An SNR value of 30dB means excellent image quality. The low-light ISO [metric] is the highest ISO setting for a camera that allows it to achieve an SNR of 30dB while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits".
Use Case Scores - DxOMark

The other cameras that use the Sony 36MP sensor have the following DxOMark low-light scores:

- Nikon D800: 2853
- Nikon D800E 2979
- Nikon D810: 2853
- Sony A7R: 2746

So I reckon ISO 2800 for the K-1 would be about right.

[Kerrowdown]

Anchorage too mate, Anchorage too.

That's why we turn to drink, is that the same for you folk too?

[Quartermaster James]

But what if your day-to-day photography was indoors... in not-so-well-lit environments?

Then what constraints of aperture and shutter speed do you also have? They're interconnected. As I am sure y'all know.
ISO is just another variable. Much easier to change now that we're digital!

---------- Post added May 22nd, 2016 at 02:05 PM ----------

That's why we turn to drink, is that the same for you folk too?

Turn "to"? We never turned away!

[Kerrowdown]

Turn "to"? We never turned away!

Good man.

[BigMackCam]

We all look forward to those in Scotland, it's sometimes a long time between each occasion.

I think you folks in Scotland have us beat, but only slightly... an average of 19 days with rainfall for May, for the part of England where I live

BUT... apparently, we have a three month heatwave coming, starting early June... Woohoo!!!!!

[Na Horuk]

Keep in mind you can do some things to reduce noise, like ETTR, using specialized NR software, dark frame NR, pixel shift..

[BigMackCam]

Then what constraints of aperture and shutter speed do you also have? They're interconnected. As I am sure y'all know.
ISO is just another variable. Much easier to change now that we're digital!

I agree, of course I was just a little surprised to see what your appetite was as far as ISO is concerned, but I guess we cut our coats according to the cloth

[john5100]

This is interesting. As a concert and wedding/event photographer, I shoot at ISO 4000 and above routinely with my K3. Please tell me that I won't have to worry about this with the K1 otherwise it's not worth upgrading.

[BigMackCam]

This is interesting. As a concert and wedding/event photographer, I shoot at ISO 4000 and above routinely with my K3. Please tell me that I won't have to worry about this with the K1 otherwise it's not worth upgrading.

This is exactly what I'm getting at, John... "acceptable" is subjective, based on individuals' tolerance for luminance and chrominance noise. I think we already know that the K-1 isn't as noisy at higher ISOs as the K-3 / K-3II, so whatever you're happy with on the K-3, you can step it up further still on the K-1 (quite considerably, from what I understand).

[john5100]

This is exactly what I'm getting at, John... "acceptable" is subjective, based on individuals' tolerance for luminance and chrominance noise. I think we already know that the K-1 isn't as noisy at higher ISOs as the K-3 / K-3II, so whatever you're happy with on the K-3, you can step it up further still on the K-1 (quite considerably, from what I understand).

Thank you, I've been talked off of the ledge. LOL

[Quartermaster James]

I agree, of course I was just a little surprised to see what your appetite was as far as ISO is concerned, but I guess we cut our coats according to the cloth

Okay. I think I am getting what you're getting at now. I guess my best answer then is "as low as I can get away with."

This shot is nothing great, but one I am happy to have been able to take. Handheld, indoors, and poor lighting. Don't think I could have got it save for the SR and ISO 6400.

[rawr]

Please tell me that I won't have to worry about this with the K1

Well, the DxOMark low-light 'acceptable IQ' cross-over for the K-3 is 1216 ISO, whilst the D800/D810/A7R cross-over is about 2800 ISO.

A lot depends on the light, of course, but one can certainly be more relaxed about what the auto ISO is doing on the K-1 than on the K-3.

[Adam]

That's interesting, Adam, and kind of confirms what I said above in my slightly earlier reply - an acceptable level of noise is a very subjective thing. Out of interest, what's your preferred maximum ISO on the K-3 / K-3II? As I mentioned, I routinely shoot at ISO 6400 and sometimes above, with results the I'm happy with - but that's just me!

EDIT: I should add, I'm talking about shooting RAW and post-processing with LR6...

800 I guess, but on crop I always try hard to stay at 400 or below.

[BigMackCam]

800 I guess, but on crop I always try hard to stay at 400 or below.

OK, that's useful to know... So, if you prefer to stick between ISO 1600-3200 on the K-1 vs ISO 400 - 800 on the K-3, what I believe you're saying - and what I think is probably most relevant to @Kerrowdown's original question - is that you're seeing roughly a two-stop benefit (give or take) on the K-1 vs the K-3 in day-to-day shooting, in terms of noise. Is that a fair comment?

[Adam]

OK, that's useful to know... So, if you prefer to stick between ISO 1600-3200 on the K-1 vs ISO 400 - 800 on the K-3, what I believe you're saying - and what I think is probably most relevant to @Kerrowdown's original question - is that you're seeing roughly a two-stop benefit (give or take) on the K-1 vs the K-3 in day-to-day shooting, in terms of noise. Is that a fair comment?

Yes, and that would be quite consistent with my findings using the D800 as well, which I've had in my kit for a while now, mainly for product photography but also for a bit of fun on the side. The biggest benefit is that files are really quite a bit cleaner when shooting at night, plus there's the added resolution.