Originally posted by ogl NR in RAW without the possibility to turn off is the worst thing for RAW shooters. I'm disappointed of such decision for K-1II.
You can turn it off, shoot between 100 and 400 ISO. By the time you get to 800 ISO your image is seriously degraded anyway in terms of noise reduction. You haven't established which is worse and for what type of image. What ruins most of your images, noise, or lack of detail? I know what it is for me, it's noise. I rarely need the level of detail I capture with either my K-3 or my K-1. In fact I can show you landscape images where my K-1 and my wife K-5 using the same lens at different focal lengths produce identical landscapes when viewed on a 4k monitor. The extra resolution of the K-1 made no improvement at all to the image.
Folks don't seem to understand that noise is not part of what you were looking at when you framed the image. All noise is artifacts. You may be more comfortable enlarging artifacts but I have taken many images where noise made using sharpening or even adding an appropriate level of contrast was impossible because sharpening, definition and contrast all increase noise artifacts. As well getting to 800 ISO you are going to see decreases in dynamic range becoming factor. I just have no understanding of why people are opposed to deceasing the effect of artificial artifacts cause by the sensor cleanly and efficiently.
I guess astrophotgrpaher would rather see what was there, with a lot of artifacts, tham a cleaned up image that looks more like what was actually there.
Each to heir own I guess, but forgive me if i don't buy in to the hysteria. Don't want the accelerator chip and if you can be happy with the same level of noise control you get on a K-P, fine use a K-1. If you don't like sensor artifacts and choose to give up bit of resolution, which by the way is ridiculous on a K-1, buy a K-ii. You have choices.
Last edited by normhead; 05-07-2018 at 09:58 AM.