Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-15-2018, 12:33 PM   #1
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,289
K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings

Yeah, so...

I took this as a part of my new series.



K-1 mk2, Samyang 35/1.4 (perfect sample), ISO800, DNG RAW, Lightroom 7.3 default sharpening settings

Closer look at lower left corner:



Horrible pixel level quality @ ISO800 (looks like cellphone image) from a sensor which gave a lot better results back in 2012 in D800(E) Nikon body. This is looking like filtering what happens with Sony A7x bodies after 3.2second exposures. Some examples of Sony filtered mess @ 100% crop:





Upper Sony crop is from a distant landscape, lower is part of a sand pile filtered to mush. That crop from K-1 MK2 is not far off. Everything in the crops are in perfect focus with lens stopped down far enough.


Last edited by BigMackCam; 04-15-2018 at 12:54 PM.
04-15-2018, 12:38 PM   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 440
Very interesting. I'm keen to see more of these.
04-15-2018, 12:48 PM   #3
tax
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2017
Photos: Albums
Posts: 113
I am confused. Does it mean that K-1 II is over processing images in comparison to the old plain K-1?
04-15-2018, 12:59 PM - 2 Likes   #4
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 12,272
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Horrible pixel level quality @ ISO800 (looks like cellphone image) from a sensor which gave a lot better results back in 2012 in D800(E) Nikon body. This is looking like filtering what happens with Sony A7x bodies after 3.2second exposures.
Interesting results - I'm looking forward to seeing what other users experience... especially side-by-side comparisons with the K-1, so we can draw some conclusions from like-for-like testing.

I'm going to take issue with your phrase "looks like cellphone image", though. I'm sorry, but that kind of exaggeration is ludicrous, inflammatory and unhelpful. Let's stay objective and helpful on this. If there's a problem, we should acknowledge it, but comparing the output to a phone camera is taking things too far

Would you be prepared to post a RAW file somewhere for us to download and work with? That would be very helpful indeed.

QuoteOriginally posted by tax Quote
I am confused. Does it mean that K-1 II is over processing images in comparison to the old plain K-1?
It means nothing until we see results from a number of owners with different camera / lens / software combos (I mention software specifically, as it's a key component in final image quality where processing of RAW images is concerned). MJKoski's results are certainly interesting, but let's not jump to any conclusions until these results can be reproduced and validated

04-15-2018, 12:59 PM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 144
what are your noise reduction settings?
04-15-2018, 01:03 PM - 1 Like   #6
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 48,350
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Yeah, so...

I took this as a part of my new series.



K-1 mk2, Samyang 35/1.4 (perfect sample), ISO800, DNG RAW, Lightroom 7.3 default sharpening settings

Closer look at lower left corner:



Horrible pixel level quality @ ISO800 (looks like cellphone image) from a sensor which gave a lot better results back in 2012 in D800(E) Nikon body. This is looking like filtering what happens with Sony A7x bodies after 3.2second exposures. Some examples of Sony filtered mess @ 100% crop:





Upper Sony crop is from a distant landscape, lower is part of a sand pile filtered to mush. That crop from K-1 MK2 is not far off. Everything in the crops are in perfect focus with lens stopped down far enough.
Can you compare this with a OOC JPEG? (i.e. develop the sample file in-camera) It's possible that LR's profiles are butchering the data.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

04-15-2018, 01:06 PM   #7
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,289
Original Poster
Upper crop was with default sharpening & settings (noise reduction sliders turned to 0) as per Lightroom 7.3. Here is example from RawTherapee 5.4 which has support for MK2, I did not touch any settings just exported the file and cropped to jpg.



All fur which should have good details at this ISO have melted together. Can anyone with both Mk-1 and Mk-2 compare their results? I do not recall mk1 doing anything like this. Gonna check with PEF file next. Maybe it is DNG which causes problems.

Last edited by BigMackCam; 04-15-2018 at 01:11 PM. Reason: Removed unnecessary / inflammatory comparison
04-15-2018, 01:10 PM - 2 Likes   #8
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 12,272
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Upper crop was with default sharpening & settings (noise reduction sliders turned to 0) as per Lightroom 7.3. Here is example from RawTherapee 5.4 which has support for MK2, I did not touch any settings just exported the file and cropped to jpg.



All fur which should have good details at this ISO have melted together. Can anyone with both Mk-1 and Mk-2 compare their results? I do not recall mk1 doing anything like this. Gonna check with PEF file next. Maybe it is DNG which causes problems.
Now, see, the RT rendering looks better to me. I'm pretty sure I see more detail. It's less sharpened, but that can be added later. I'm sure I see more detail, though.

This is what I mean about validating our results before drawing conclusions.

Again, if you could post a RAW (PEF or DNG) that others could work with, we could potentially isolate the issue to the camera, software, or combination of both. I'm not encouraged to accept the level of this *possible* issue until we have more to work with.

04-15-2018, 01:12 PM - 1 Like   #9
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 1,740
Could you do this again (jpeg export) using the up to date version of DCU that shipped with the camera? That should hopefully eliminate any software anomalies.

Thanks
04-15-2018, 01:13 PM - 1 Like   #10
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2014
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 144
DNG hasn't caused my any problems yet.

So, you shot it with a 35mm/f1.4? at what aperture settings? what was the light like? I mean 800 ISO outdoors can be deceiving for the viewer. ISO doesn't necessarily retain detail from my pov. Not if the light isn't substantial. The sensor still needs to be able to see.

If you are shooting at f1.4 how sharp is the lens throughout at that aperture?

I mean before you blame the camera, which I can't agree with, at least from my experience. There are many factors that need to be considered.
04-15-2018, 01:39 PM   #11
Journeyman Cat Wrangler
Loyal Site Supporter
SSGGeezer's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Maine, U.S.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,665
Fuzz from the dead bunny throughout the crop and you expect it to look sharp when the light is filtered through that fuzz? the parts of the original image that are in focus seem quite sharp.
04-15-2018, 02:03 PM   #12
Resident fiddler
Loyal Site Supporter
LensBeginner's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,513
One could take issue all he wants, but - IMHO and trying to keep civil - that kind of painterly effect is surely similar to the kind of aggressive NR found in cellphone pictures.

The crop(s) from the Sony is much more similar to a cellphone picture than the one from the Pentax, even if, not knowing the settings used in the Sony shots we can't compare the two.
04-15-2018, 02:19 PM - 5 Likes   #13
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 12,272
QuoteOriginally posted by LensBeginner Quote
One could take issue all he wants, but - IMHO and trying to keep civil - that kind of painterly effect is surely similar to the kind of aggressive NR found in cellphone pictures.

The crop(s) from the Sony is much more similar to a cellphone picture than the one from the Pentax, even if, not knowing the settings used in the Sony shots we can't compare the two.
With respect, I do take issue here - not just as a regular member but as a moderator. Why? Comparing the output of any modern DSLR or mirrorless camera to a phone camera is provocative - and especially so when we're talking about Pentax on a Pentax-oriented site. Remember, many posts here are available to view publicly. If we want the best for Pentax as a brand, we should consider how we phrase our critique and make it relevant and objective, not provocative (unless that's valid and warranted).

I agree that phone cameras produce a very "painterly" effect. In that sense, there is a similarity between that effect and aggressive noise reduction and over-sharpening in any other camera and / or post-processing software, albeit to a much lesser extent.

But until we understand the full details of the shot, software and processing parameters, how it looks as an in-camera-processed JPEG, a JPEG produced from RAW by the latest DCU, comparisons from various other RAW development tools, and like-for-like comparisons with the K-1, it's potentially counter-productive to conclude there's a problem with the K-1II. I'm not saying there isn't - just that we ought to be fully informed and do some research before we draw conclusions

Last edited by BigMackCam; 04-15-2018 at 02:40 PM.
04-15-2018, 02:21 PM - 2 Likes   #14
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,480
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Everything in the crops are in perfect focus with lens stopped down far enough.
Interesting concept. Plane of focus for the bunny is a fair amount in front of area of the detail crop, not much, but too much for f/5.6 and hardly perfect or enough for pixel peeping.

That sniggle aside, it does appear there is some overprocessing present, but whether it was done in-camera or in-PP is hard to determine. This image may have made a round trip from LR into Photoshop as a TIFF and the XMP show CA correction, additional sharpening, NR, vignette adjustment and so forth. While it is possible that none of the above caused the artifact, it would be nice to see a cleaner version.

Would you object to making the original DNG of the bunny available for download from somewhere on the cloud? I would like to see what a dcraw process to TIFF looks like.


Steve

Last edited by stevebrot; 04-15-2018 at 02:34 PM. Reason: clarity
04-15-2018, 02:25 PM - 1 Like   #15
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,480
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
But until we understand the full details of the shot, software and processing parameters, how it looks as an in-camera-processed JPEG, a JPEG produced from RAW by the latest DCU, and comparisons from various other RAW development tools, and like-for-like comparisons with the K-1, it's potentially counter-productive to conclude there's a problem with the K-1II. I'm not saying there isn't - just that we ought to be fully informed and do some research before we draw conclusions
I requested access to the DNG. It will be nice to see how much was introduced in PP.


Steve
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!
accelerator, camera, claims, crop, dslr, exposure, full frame, full-frame, image, information, iso800, iv, k-1, k-1 mk2, k1, mess, mk2, op, pentax k-1, sensor, settings, software, sony, unit
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Macro Best moderate priced macro lens for newbie HGMerrill Photographic Technique 18 10-20-2014 06:08 PM
Old Moderate Mitt is Back! boriscleto General Talk 3 10-10-2012 02:12 PM
"Moderate" Mitt jeffkrol General Talk 2 10-08-2012 01:59 PM
Excesive noise in moderate light, please help Al_s14 Pentax K-r 4 08-03-2011 03:28 PM
Pentax lens all-in-one with moderate zoom fevbusch Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 01-27-2007 05:13 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:50 AM. | 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