Originally posted by Kunzite
Here is the ISO 100 pushed with the same sharpening settings (outline emphasis 27, ringing artifact ctrl 12, bokeh preservation 0 - the ISO 800's defaults).
Am I the only one who thinks that the K-1 II-processed ISO 800 shot looks better?
There is less noise, there are less colour artefacts, the hairs are not as jagged and frayed.
It is difficult to say which of the two images is more correct. It would be ideal to have a PixelShift image for comparison as a reference. Potentially, the ISO 800 image comes closer to what we'd see from the PixelShift image.
The only part in the ISO 100 shot that I possibly like better is the apparently higher contrast of the little black curly hair (near the top left corner) against the white hairs. Potentially, the loss of detail/contrast here could suggest some "smearing". However, again, unless someone can show that the K-1 ISO 800 image would a) look different and b) would be more faithful, I don't see how it does make any sense at all to be "unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings". I really don't.
May I ask the OP to "show me the money"?