Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-24-2019, 10:54 AM - 1 Like   #16
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,075
QuoteOriginally posted by Ronald Oakes Quote
So on the MkII I can disable NR below 800 ?
And above, which you can't do with Mark II, and that's why I didn't upgrade...

07-24-2019, 12:36 PM - 1 Like   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
EssJayEff's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Hillsborough, NC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 249
QuoteOriginally posted by Ronald Oakes Quote

---------- Post added 07-24-19 at 10:53 ----------

Its a formidable beast carrying in the field ...
Perhaps because for many years I used a Hasselblad 500CM on a tripod in the field, I didn't find my year of owning a 645D to be beastly at all . . . nor my K-1, which is sometimes criticized for being too heavy. I guess it all depends on one's perspective.
07-24-2019, 03:16 PM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,683
I have a K-1 II. It is a great camera.
07-24-2019, 07:01 PM - 1 Like   #19
Lens Hoarder
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,924
I have never read a complaint about the NR on the KP, which also has the Accelerator Unit. Even DPR thought the idea was good - on the KP. They only (disingenuously) objected on the K-1. I know I can shoot KP at ISO 3200 and get the same final image quality (all else equal) as I get on K-1 at ISO 1600. As far as my personal, unscientific opinion goes - from my experience with KP and K-1 side by side all the noise about the “baked” K-1 RAWs is intellectual tomfoolery. KP images are better than K-1 images in available light, STOP, so I suspect K-1 ll images are likewise better.

Is there something I don’t understand?

07-24-2019, 11:50 PM   #20
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,075
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Is there something I don’t understand?
Yes. In body NR is not always the best choice. But if your RAW has been NRed and you try to apply your own NR, the result shows loss of details, which is not the case with not NRed RAWs.
07-25-2019, 04:13 AM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,595
I have both and tend to keep my ISO below 400 so no image quality differences. My K1-II does not suffer from shutter shock like my K1 does.
07-25-2019, 04:43 AM   #22
Lens Hoarder
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Louis, MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,924
QuoteOriginally posted by fs999 Quote
Yes. In body NR is not always the best choice. But if your RAW has been NRed and you try to apply your own NR, the result shows loss of details, which is not the case with not NRed RAWs.
Loss of detai versus what? Theoretically and perhaps logically versus an unprocessed RAW, but I don’t believe there is any such animal as an unprocessed RAW from any camera. A mathematically derived graph comparing one file theoretically to another just doesn’t convince me of anything that actually matters in real life.

If in body NR is such a big deal on K-1, why wasn’t there such a firestorm about it on KP?

Last edited by monochrome; 07-25-2019 at 04:49 AM.
07-25-2019, 05:44 AM - 3 Likes   #23
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 20,527
The accelerator isn't a big deal -- saves a bit of time in processing high iso images. I defy anyone to look at my images on Flickr and tell which ones I shot with my K-1 and which ones with the K-1 II without browsing the exif. The auto focus is a touch better on the K-1 II, but that's about it.

I'd get which ever is cheaper and leave it at that.

07-25-2019, 06:46 AM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,080
QuoteOriginally posted by Ronald Oakes Quote
Its a formidable beast carrying in the field
I have tried it at trade shows and you are right it is a formidable beast. It is big and heavy but balances nicely when I am holding it. Maybe one day when the prices drop even further, I might consider getting one with a few lenses for the ultimate landscape work. For now, My K1 is my 645Z!
07-25-2019, 06:48 AM   #25
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,075
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Loss of detai versus what?
If you have only one NR applied. This has nothing to do whith processed or unprocessed. It has to do with in body NR or not in body NR applied.
07-25-2019, 06:54 AM   #26
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,771
QuoteOriginally posted by Ronald Oakes Quote
So on the MkII I can disable NR below 800 ?
The Protons-to-Photos seem to show noticeable effect of the 'accelerator' at ISO 640 or so. Incidentally the 'accelerator' does so much more than Noise Reduction - color fidelity and Dynamic Range are seriously improved at higher ISO values.
07-25-2019, 07:42 AM   #27
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,105
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The accelerator isn't a big deal -- saves a bit of time in processing high iso images. I defy anyone to look at my images on Flickr and tell which ones I shot with my K-1 and which ones with the K-1 II without browsing the exif. The auto focus is a touch better on the K-1 II, but that's about it.

I'd get which ever is cheaper and leave it at that.
Arlington Camera has both in stock for $200 off. The K-1 is actually more expensive than the K-1II, $1699 Vs $1599....trying to decide.

---------- Post added 07-25-19 at 07:45 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Loss of detai versus what? Theoretically and perhaps logically versus an unprocessed RAW, but I don’t believe there is any such animal as an unprocessed RAW from any camera. A mathematically derived graph comparing one file theoretically to another just doesn’t convince me of anything that actually matters in real life.

If in body NR is such a big deal on K-1, why wasn’t there such a firestorm about it on KP?
Thas what Im trying to figure out ? Does it really matter or what ? I love my images on the KP...…..sooooo…..
07-26-2019, 08:56 PM - 1 Like   #28
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,105
Original Poster
Since I have the "Z" I have decided to hold off on replacing the K-1 in whatever form for now in the immediate future.
Between the Z and my KP Im quite happy.....at least for now.
08-05-2019, 08:16 AM   #29
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: North Texas
Posts: 56
I have an original K1 that was upgraded and is now a K1 MkII. After hearing about the potential issues of additional noise levels, I went out and recently purchased at a great price a gently used K1. I first performed unscientific tests on whether or not the K1 MkII or the K1 focused faster with my older screw driven FA 77/1.8 Limited, FA31/1.7 Limited, and FA*85/1.4. I could not really see or hear any "significantly" faster AF focusing. Also I cannot detect any significant AF speed difference using the D FA 24-70/2.8 and the D FA 28-105 and the D FA 100/2.8 Macro and the D FA 70-200/2.8 on either bodies. I shot also into some lowlight scenes at night and did not notice a significant difference between the two bodies. I recent was doing some astro shots with both bodies and after looking at only the jpg outputs, I cannot see any real significant difference in the noise. Again, this was unscientific and I have yet to pixel creep any of the RAW files. I labored over getting the MkII upgrade. I originally feared the worse about the noise levels. Now I have both bodies and I do not see significant differences and I have the benefit of another spare K1 body in addition to my K3 body.
08-05-2019, 09:51 AM   #30
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,396
QuoteOriginally posted by fs999 Quote
My point was to say that with the Mark II you cannot disable NR from 800 ISO and up, but with the Mark I, you can and make your own NR on a raw which hasn't a NR already applied.
I've yet to see an example of any possible benefit to that.
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!
afs, beast, camera, dslr, fa, fuji, full frame, full-frame, ii, im, images, k-1, k1, lag, landscape, mark, noise, nr, pentax k-1, quality, sensor, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Replacing my k5iis - need input on upgrading or replacing mishmatta Pentax DSLR Discussion 32 10-09-2019 07:33 AM
Replacing my Canon 60D with a Pentax K-S2 Shuggzi Pentax K-S1 & K-S2 7 06-27-2018 02:58 PM
Replacing my K-x Wise Owl Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 03-14-2018 09:13 PM
Replacing my FA 35mm F/2 and FA 50mm 1.4 for the FA 43mm 1.9. What do you think? jjdgti Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 03-21-2014 09:49 AM
Which lenses do I keep and which do I sell ? Isnwm Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 32 08-17-2012 01:30 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:07 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