Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-10-2018, 05:50 PM - 2 Likes   #181
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,479
QuoteOriginally posted by Shivaess Quote
Most sadly of all it looks like the weather will be lousy this weekend meaning I won’t be able to test it. I AM excited that I have a work around to test it thought (as I said previously).
The thing is, the Mark ii is kind of a specialized camera - a Weather Resistant camera which does better, comparatively speaking, at higher ISO values. Lousy weather seems like exactly the conditions which would allow it to show what it can do.

05-10-2018, 06:27 PM   #182
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,391
QuoteOriginally posted by longbow Quote
Guess I'm in the minority, having both the K-1 & K-1 II, I do like the improvements, especially in the AF. They both make great images, what else is needed, the rest is up to the photographer. As far as DPR, the best way to hurt them is to ignore them, don't click on their website, that's how they make their money whether you agree with them or not.
+1
Been saying the same for DPR and DXOmark.
05-10-2018, 06:52 PM - 4 Likes   #183
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,456
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Excellent point.

The test is not measuring smoothing (reduction of detail), but noise. This is a fact. Extending the conclusion of a test that measures one parameter to a different parameter should be regarded with extreme suspicion.
Unless there's some hard proof that they're correlated?
For linear filters (e.g., averaging adjacent pixels together or various convolution-based noise filters), the relationship between noise reduction and detail reduction is a mathematical fact. And if Ricoh is only using simple NR, then people have reason to be concerned about the accelerator.

Nonlinear filters are a differ beast entirely. There's a lot of really clever signal reconstruction methods that use what is known about the statistical properties of noise versus the statistical properties of signals to maximize noise removal while minimizing signal degradation. Maximum likelihood estimators, for example, can look at a set of pixels and slightly correct them to make them less noise-like and more signal-like. And we must admit that the splotchy saturated speckles of chroma noise, for example, are extremely unlike any image. Moreover, even if you take a picture of chroma noise splotches, a properly designed filter would notice that the image is "too splotchy" for just noise and not entirely remove the splotches that are actually in the scene.

It's going to take a lot more that an FFT of the noise to characterize what the chip is doing and whether it affects images in any detrimental way.
05-10-2018, 08:35 PM   #184
Pentaxian
madbrain's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,178
Andrea,
QuoteOriginally posted by Andrea K Quote
Where the k-1 MkII absolutely shines is in the DPR Low Light test.... I can't explain why so much difference between the two scenes:


at:
Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

This with RAW comparison... If you select JPEG the result is reversed again...
FYI, your screenshot doesn't look anything the same as when I go into the DPreview tool differently. Colors are different, and your crop seems like it's more than a 100% crop. And less detail in your crop, probably due to JPEG compression.

When I go to the DPreview tool directly, K-1 II looks fine to me at12,800 ISO.
Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

It definitely has less grain than the K-1 image, but still plenty. The numbers on the bill look cleaner.
D850 has the least grain, so probably doing little to no NR.
I would say the K-1 II image is closest to the A7R III, a much more expensive camera. Both the D850 and A7R III are higher resolution, too.

05-10-2018, 10:16 PM - 4 Likes   #185
New Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: VA
Posts: 17
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
This is the way the world works these days.



Some one says something "appears to be true." and therefore something "might" be a good strategy.

And a bunch of people start talking like it is true, and test the solution. Internet wisdom at it's best.

Well, don't guess, if you think something is true, prove it. Don't speculate based on a speculation.
And post irrefutable evidence that everyone can agree on. If that was your proof, it's sorely lacking.

And personally, it's my opinion that people should be banned from the site for quoting DPR over here. If that's all you've got, you've got nothing.
What is wrong with you? This is an inflammatory post when I have been nothing but polite. The person I quoted is a well respected technical expert who owns a business analyzing sensor data. He has also been nothing but professional on "the site that shall not be named". I have used the technique outlined because while its not fool proof I'm not about to buy a K-1 to test my K-1ii against to determine if I should swap them out.

Iso invariance - PentaxForums.com
There now I'm quoting this site. Please have some manners in the future.
05-10-2018, 10:25 PM   #186
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Far North Qld, Australia
Posts: 184
QuoteOriginally posted by madbrain Quote

When I go to the DPreview tool directly, K-1 II looks fine to me at12,800 ISO.
Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

It definitely has less grain than the K-1 image, but still plenty. The numbers on the bill look cleaner.
D850 has the least grain, so probably doing little to no NR.
I would say the K-1 II image is closest to the A7R III, a much more expensive camera. Both the D850 and A7R III are higher resolution, too.


On that image comparison, the K1 II looks the best to me and the A7RIII looks the worst at all ISO's.
05-10-2018, 11:06 PM   #187
Pentaxian
madbrain's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,178
QuoteOriginally posted by curlednoodles Quote
On that image comparison, the K1 II looks the best to me and the A7RIII looks the worst at all ISO's.
Odd. I think the A7R III actually does great at all high ISOs. For example, at ISO 102,400 , the highest supported by all 4 cameras, A7R III is clearly best, with the K-1 II coming in second. Well, "best" is all relative, since none of those 4 images would be usable for large prints of cropped images, regardless of what kind of NR you did in post.

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

At ISO 51,200, I would say both K1-II and A7 III do best. The images from K-1 and D850 at that level are simply too noisy to be usable.

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

Same at 25,600 :

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

Clearly, I love the noise reduction that both Pentax and Sony are doing . Cannot stand the color noise is the black background in the D850 and K-1 v1 .

The only ISOs where the A7R III looks worse to me than the others are low ISO, 100 to 400 . Looks like smoothing / NR is applied in the Sony there, which is unnecessary and does come at the cost of detail visibly. Same charge that DPR has against the K-1 II vs K-1 .

DPR says their analysis shows the NR on the K-1 II starting at ISO 640 . I compared the ISO 400 to 800 shots of the K-1 II, and cannot observe any notable loss of sharpness or detail at 100%. I have a calibrated 32" 4K monitor and 20/20 vision. Even put my face inches from the screen. Still no difference. I could not tell these 2 images apart if I didn't know which was which before hand.

A every single ISO, I like the K-1 II pic better than K-1 .

For my money, the K1-II and Sony both look very good, but Sony has much more expensive lenses and limited choice of them. For stills the K-1 II is arguably a better value. Sony is way ahead in video.
05-11-2018, 12:16 AM - 1 Like   #188
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,281
QuoteOriginally posted by madbrain Quote

Clearly, I love the noise reduction that both Pentax and Sony are doing .
The only ISOs where the A7R III looks worse to me than the others are low ISO, 100 to 400 . Looks like smoothing / NR is applied in the Sony there, which is unnecessary and does come at the cost of detail visibly. Same charge that DPR has against the K-1 II vs K-1 .
Dpr worded the A7Riii NR this way.
"Like the Pentax K-1, there look to be signs of noise reduction creeping in, with a degree of smoothing between pixels."
The k1ii like this
"Baked-in noise reduction results in Raw files with progressively less detail than the original K-1 as the ISO increases. This can not be turned off."

In your opinion they are both good and thats not at all what I get from reading the above.

05-11-2018, 12:41 AM   #189
Pentaxian
madbrain's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,178
QuoteOriginally posted by swanlefitte Quote
Dpr worded the A7Riii NR this way.
"Like the Pentax K-1, there look to be signs of noise reduction creeping in, with a degree of smoothing between pixels."
The k1ii like this
"Baked-in noise reduction results in Raw files with progressively less detail than the original K-1 as the ISO increases. This can not be turned off."

In your opinion they are both good and thats not at all what I get from reading the above.
I guess it's a matter of opinion. But I have never gotten good results with NR in post that didn't blur the image. Maybe I'm using the wrong RAW converter, or I'm not good at the settings. I just haven't been very happy with it. The JPEGs out of camera are clearly too blurred for K1-II, but that is not a big concern.
I'm really not seeing much blur in those images from K-1 II and Sony RAW files, except as noted above. Certainly, opinions will vary on that. My personal preference as someone who shoots in low-light a lot is to have less noise. But clearly, I'm not a pro who spends a lot of time on each image.
05-11-2018, 12:55 AM - 1 Like   #190
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,739
I hope everyone here downloads the files and processes themselves.


If someone uses an Adobe product, the "camera profile" comes into play. Most noobs believe this only affects "color rendition".
No, it also can include tone curves = contrast enhancements. Best example is the "landscape profile":


And "sharpness" depends on contrast perception.


The Pentax DNG embedded default profile is Pentax typically conservative in this regard, relatively flat



dpr use the default embedded profile.


So any other maker with a more agressive default profile tone curve adjustment will look "better".


To find signs of these types of manipulations via profile you just need to compare the blackness of the black. If one camera shows much more blackness e.g. in the letters of the texts, viola.
05-11-2018, 01:05 AM - 1 Like   #191
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,665
Using Exiftool to switch camera model to K-1 (mk1) instead of MK2 enables all mk1 profiles in Lightroom. Yes, some contain aggressive curves. But it is in user's best interest to export flat material to Photoshop (or any other editor) should it be used later on to handle the processing.

---------- Post added 05-11-18 at 01:09 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by madbrain Quote
Looks like smoothing / NR is applied in the Sony
Sony applies NR in all images with exposure times greater than 3.2 seconds. End result destroys minimal details such as sand grains or single pixel stars.
05-11-2018, 01:13 AM   #192
Pentaxian
Andrea K's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 494
QuoteOriginally posted by madbrain Quote
Andrea,


FYI, your screenshot doesn't look anything the same as when I go into the DPreview tool differently. Colors are different, and your crop seems like it's more than a 100% crop. And less detail in your crop, probably due to JPEG compression.

When I go to the DPreview tool directly, K-1 II looks fine to me at12,800 ISO.
Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

It definitely has less grain than the K-1 image, but still plenty. The numbers on the bill look cleaner.
D850 has the least grain, so probably doing little to no NR.
I would say the K-1 II image is closest to the A7R III, a much more expensive camera. Both the D850 and A7R III are higher resolution, too.
Have you read the first line of the my post that you are quoting?
Is this:
"... the crops are from this procedure: K-1II review... Opportunity to get banned on DPR - Page 2 - PentaxForums.com"
05-11-2018, 01:20 AM - 2 Likes   #193
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,281
Madbrain, I was pointing out how dpr chooses wording differently. How they spin things. With the sony nr is a no biggie but we will note it kind of presentation and with pentax its a DANGER! This is terrible kind of presentation.

---------- Post added 05-11-18 at 01:32 AM ----------

Beholder3, even the k1ii raw are different like -.4 ev to +.25 ev and different color temps on the 2 images I downloaded and the k1 images are different still.
05-11-2018, 01:34 AM - 1 Like   #194
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,665
Yes and no. Jim Kasson has done complete analysis of how Sony nr works. It activates after 3.2 seconds no matter if nr is disabled or not. Before that the files are good to go. Using compressed RAW has another kind of issues but not NR related.
05-11-2018, 01:42 AM   #195
Pentaxian
madbrain's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,178
QuoteOriginally posted by Andrea K Quote
Have you read the first line of the my post that you are quoting?
Is this:
"... the crops are from this procedure: K-1II review... Opportunity to get banned on DPR - Page 2 - PentaxForums.com"
Maybe I did, or maybe not, but my reply was about your crop/screenshots of the DPR review tool, not the crops of your own processing of the RAW files.
What I was saying is that those JPEGs of the DPR tool look completely different than when I go directly to the corresponding DPR review tool URL for the same cameras and ISO.
They looked different both in terms of colors and amount of detail. Unfortunately, Pentaxforums very highly compresses any files uploaded. I have some Pixelshift files from my K-1 II which are nearly 200MB. I can generate a 3MB JPG from them. And then PF compresses them to 180KB ... That makes PF uploads pretty useless for purposes of image comparison, unfortunately
Closed Thread

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!
dslr, full frame, full-frame, hardware, ii, k-1, k1, kicking, lens, lot, model, panasonic, pentax, pentax k-1, quality, rate, release, screen, sony, successor, upgrade, upgrades, video, yadda
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
an opportunity: Super Blue Blood Moon aslyfox General Photography 37 01-31-2018 10:23 PM
where and how to find " wild life " photography opportunity aslyfox General Photography 37 08-21-2017 01:20 PM
Another "Supermoon" Opportunity RobA_Oz General Photography 8 12-28-2016 11:11 PM
Banned on DPR, anyone else? KL Matt General Talk 44 11-22-2013 03:51 PM
Keep K-x buy premium lens, get K-r and get good lens, get the K-7 w/ lens or K-5? crossover37 Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 02-06-2011 10:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:06 PM. | 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