Originally posted by BarryE 
I didn't. The physics rather determines the sensors' DR, so no great expectation at low ISO. At higher ISO then differences are likely to occur, but then the DR is falling. So for users that rely on trying to achieve the best DR (ie tripod/MUP/low ISO techniques), the now old K-1 is still out in the lead and the K-3 variants are very similar. The K-3iii is not designed to better the older K-3 in this area, so I've been surprised when folk have claimed it approaches the K-1.
It is a good and helpful report that answers many questions and is helpfully written in the same style as for the older Pentaxes.
Pentax reported noise levels similar to a K-1, not DR. I would have noticed. Pentax never said anything about DR. I notice they have the camera listed at a DR of 8 plus. I'm waiting to see what DxO says. They report a K-1 at about 15 EV and a K-3 at about 14. The authors clearly use a different scale to measure DR than what most sites do. What do they say film is.
On other sites the most you see or film is about 9 EV. Yet digital is rated as high as 15 EV. If they claim film is higher than 7 EV by their method, there is a problem with their methodology, at least compared to everyone else, who all have the DR of the best digital as higher than film.
Post #1 by BarneyL
Similar Threads 
