Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-23-2014, 01:40 PM   #46
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
I didn't mean to imply that it would be better than anything else.
I think we settled this now.

But others may think indeed that medium format combined with state of the art CMOS may break new grounds for low light.

Therefore, I think our little discussion was still worth it

01-23-2014, 09:18 PM   #47
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,247
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
I have not used X-Rite Color Checker but I have done extensive work adjusting the color levels in camera and, so far, the K5iis still lags in this area.
I have used the X-Rite Color Checker on both K100D and K-5 II.

I find the K100D colours more pleasing out of the box (with or without using the X-rite-generated profiles).

I also find the K-5 II colours hard to massage to something that looks more like the K100D.

There appears to be a fundamental difference to the K-5 II colours that not only makes them look different to begin with but also respond differently to adjustments like Lightroom white balance changes.

The K-5 II is a vast improvement over the K100D in almost all aspects, but I wish it had retained the same colour response.
01-23-2014, 09:32 PM   #48
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,247
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Unfortunately, tools like the ColorChecker use preregistered ISO colors which means, they cannot be used to make K-5 colors look like K10D's
What do you mean by that?

Are you referring to the values of the colour patches on the Color Checker?

Note that the DNG Profile Editor allows you to take any arbitrary colour and transform it to another colour (within limits). You can also use any arbitrary image to apply the transformations too.

I tried emulating the K100D with the K-5 II by tweaking the automatic adjustments generated by the chart calibration. I've only had very moderate success so far (with limited time spend on the effort).

I noticed that the automatic chart calibration does not appear to be able to pick the correct source colours for the patches for transformation. In several cases, when I tweaked the source colour, any colour transformations had a much higher impact on the target patch compared to the initial source colour. This suggests to me that the initial source colour was only overlapping with the patch colour, not sitting at its centre. Perhaps Adobe optimised the source colour and/or their recognition for certain other camera brands.

Another reason for my moderate success is also probably that ideally the transformation should occur at the tri-stimulus level, instead of a post-twisting of individual islands of colour areas.

Summarising, I feel that even with the ability to generate and tweak your own profiles that the initial colour filter choices for the sensor still play a significant role.

P.S.: It could very well be that the K100D colours are less accurate compared to the K-5 II colours. I did not investigate that. First, I don't care that much about accuracy but how much I like it. Second, I don't care much about how it looks like without changes, but more about to what I can take it to and how long it takes me till I'm satisfied. With respect to the latter, the K-5 II has been slightly frustrating to me. Maybe I need to upgrade from LR 3.6, but Adobe has not impressed me with their recent LR developments.
01-23-2014, 09:57 PM   #49
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Lightroom 4 definitely improved over 3... better noise reduction etc.

Don't recall the 'colors' changing though.

01-24-2014, 01:21 AM   #50
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,513
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
But others may think indeed that medium format combined with state of the art CMOS may break new grounds for low light.

Therefore, I think our little discussion was still worth it
I agree (Until someone constructs an 85mm/1.4 for 645FF, that would be slightly better than 50mm/1.2 for 35FF )

I do think that it will break new ground for the 645D as an all round hand held camera, though, especially if they also manage to make it less bulky!

Last edited by gazonk; 01-24-2014 at 01:42 AM.
01-24-2014, 06:18 AM   #51
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,294
Phase One announces IQ250 50MP CMOS medium format back: Digital Photography Review

it's 44*33 mm sensor
01-24-2014, 06:23 AM   #52
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 340
Phase One IQ250 - 11 things to know - DT Blog

Sony sensor it is, which is surprising considering the low volume. Quite likely Pentax will be using CMOS too. Exciting change in the medium format market.
01-24-2014, 06:47 AM   #53
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,101
Not sure Pentax will go for CMOS...
Wouldn't bet on it, as i don't really see that to be necessary.

And it would increase Ricoh's dependance on Sony as a sensor supplier...

Actually, a larger truesense made sensor would make much more sense...

01-24-2014, 09:56 AM   #54
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Pioneer's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Elko, Nevada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,238
Sheez, I swear that no one must shoot in daylight anymore. They wait until it is totally black and then try to shoot at ISO 6400 or some such thing.

For crying out loud folks, whatever happened to learning how to use flash? This high ISO thing has gotten worse than the megapickel race. I hope that Pentax exercises a little commonsense. The CCD sensor produces beautiful images without having to turn up the gain.

Even werewolves wait until the full moon is out!
01-24-2014, 10:05 AM - 1 Like   #55
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,610
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
For crying out loud folks, whatever happened to learning how to use flash?
Flashes? Flashes?

We don't need no stinking flashes!!*




* Misquoted from Treasure of the Sierra Madre.
01-24-2014, 10:46 AM   #56
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,147
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
...
For crying out loud folks, whatever happened to learning how to use flash?
Higher ISO is often needed to get more shutter speeds for acton. Perhaps one day an indoor football game will see some MFD cameras on the sidelines, for example.
01-24-2014, 01:15 PM   #57
Veteran Member
eurostar's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albareto, Italy
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 820
QuoteOriginally posted by Zygonyx Quote
Not sure Pentax will go for CMOS...
Wouldn't bet on it, as i don't really see that to be necessary.
It's more than a year that Pentax and Ricoh's people talk about how great would be a Pentax 645D with live view, I bet it's Sony CMOS and not Transcend CCD. Unless the larger 50 MP CCD could allow for a cheaper camera, while the 50 CMOS will get to the third iteration of the 645D, in a couple of years.
01-24-2014, 01:21 PM   #58
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
ivanvernon's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Medina, OH
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,201
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
So how many here would prefer a 645D II for about $10,000 or a full frame 36mp Pentax DSLR for about $2,300 with K mount to use with their full frame PK mount lenses ?
Why not have both?
01-24-2014, 01:26 PM   #59
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,610
QuoteOriginally posted by ivanvernon Quote
Why not have both?
Isn't that the Plan?
01-24-2014, 02:45 PM   #60
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by ivanvernon Quote
Why not have both?
Wow, some deep pockets here !
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!
645d, cmos, density, hasselblad, light, mp cmos 645dii, pentax news, pentax rumors, pixel, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
645DII - 50 MP with crop 1.1. - is it good upgrade? ogl Pentax News and Rumors 58 09-11-2012 04:55 AM
36 MP Sony FF coming soon too! Jasvox Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 11 10-19-2011 08:02 PM
Native ISO of the 14.6 MP CMOS Sensor (with !shocking! attempt to lighten mood!) solar1 Pentax DSLR Discussion 22 01-27-2008 06:15 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:39 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