Originally posted by Kiwizinho Impressive for that high ISO.
I should note that shot is "fully processed" including significant noise reduction. The beauty of the situation is that the noise I see from high ISO on the KP is actually quite pleasant to look at. Not like what I used to get when pushing the K10D. That was just ugly. Below is a full-sized sample direct from the DNG where the noise is most obvious. I do still reduce it, but it's easy to pass off as texture up to a point.
---------- Post added 08-27-2018 at 11:29 AM ----------
Originally posted by GUB You gotta be happy with that shot!
Indeed! It wasn't the only good shot, either. Most of the fails were down to partial obstruction behind foliage — my approach in such situations is take plenty and hopefully some will work!
Originally posted by GUB The shot brings up something I notice with small birds. Look at the eyes,beak ,feet - they are tack sharp. And yet the body despite being on the same plane of focus doesn't appear quite as sharp. Is it just an illusion because of the feather texture or do they perhaps tremor a little with their tiny but super high metabolisms.
I have seen that, and I think you're probably right. I've got a shot of a tui that's super sharp, including where you can see the edges of the primaries, but the white bits are somewhat fuzzy. I think it's down to overall resolution. An edge can be super sharp at low resolution far moreso than a fine line.
Originally posted by GUB As for Iso-invariance- naaa --- hi Iso performance is not what that is about. It is about the ability to apply image gain in the computer afterwards. Requirements - Raw and Manual settings. It is a subtle to no change in outright image quality but makes for quite a mindset change out shooting. The only gain in this image from utilising it would be the ability to retains perhaps some detail in the white blaze.
Yeah, not for me, I don't think. And yes, the blaze was the one properly blown area. Not that I was too concerned with that!