1600 is the new 400

672 · 07-02-2014, 07:08 AM

I don't have the D with me to do a shoot out , but , after 42 months with the D i would say that the Z 1600 iso looks similar to the D 400 iso. It's pretty amazing……

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

**TER-OR** · 07-02-2014, 07:27 AM

Wow, talk about depth...

jimr-pdx · 07-02-2014, 07:46 AM

Excellent, inquiring minds wanted to know

tuco · 07-02-2014, 08:13 AM

Yes that's great. But should that be of any surprise? I mean it's a CMOS sensor and they have already demonstrated noise vs ISO in the smaller sensors so naturally you'd expect the same or better with a larger sensor.

672 · 07-02-2014, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by tuco

Yes that's great. But should that be of any surprise? I mean it's a CMOS sensor and they have already demonstrated noise vs ISO in the smaller sensors so naturally you'd expect the same or better with a larger sensor.

Just reporting my personal finds, I'm aware its not ground breaking news to everyone. Its pretty shocking to experience in person after having a 1DS3 and the 645D in recent years. Those cameras go pretty quickly around 640 in terms of IQ.

jonojono · 07-02-2014, 09:53 AM

honestly, i would be dare say ISO3200 is the new 400. I really can't find grain artefacts

Ryan Tischer · 07-02-2014, 10:00 AM

Excellent to hear...I may have to bite the bullet and get a 645Z...anyone interested in buying a 645D??

672 · 07-02-2014, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by jonojono

honestly, i would be dare say ISO3200 is the new 400. I really can't find grain artefacts

I haven't looked closely at 3200 yet , but would not be at all surprised. Now if I could just figure out how to pack the Epson 7800 in my luggage, I could really make accurate tests on the road…………..

Thomas · 07-03-2014, 05:22 AM

Thank for the posts; I would love to hear your thoughts on the color of the Z vis-à-vis the D.

672 · 07-03-2014, 05:54 AM

Originally posted by Thomas

Thank for the posts; I would love to hear your thoughts on the color of the Z vis-à-vis the D.

Well , I won't return to my home (printer) until late July. That, to me is the true test of color.

bull drinkwater · 07-11-2014, 03:26 AM

Originally posted by TER-OR

Wow, talk about depth...

i'm sticking with my 645D i'm happy with iso 800. if I had to go to iso 1600, i'd do my best to fix it in p.p.

stillsandvideo · 07-11-2014, 03:46 AM

Originally posted by 672

I don't have the D with me to do a shoot out , but , after 42 months with the D i would say that the Z 1600 iso looks similar to the D 400 iso. It's pretty amazing……

Thanks for the post. I recently received a Z and will be running it through the paces in a studio environment this weekend (contingent my rental lenses arrive - Pentax hasn't shipped the rereleased lenses in the US as of yet). I'm curios as to whether or not you were able to formulate an opinion on color, skin tone, etc. between the D vs. the Z at low ISO's. I'm used to shooting a CCD (I only need high ISO on occasion) and I'm curios as to whether or not we'll give up anything for the high ISO capability. IMO, it is very hard to beat the look of CCD, especially for portraits and skin tones, there just something magical about it and I'm struggling with the thought of giving it up. Any of your thoughts on this would be most appreciated.

07-02-2014, 09:02 AM	#5
672 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: santa monica Photos: Gallery Posts: 486 Original Poster	Originally posted by tuco Yes that's great. But should that be of any surprise? I mean it's a CMOS sensor and they have already demonstrated noise vs ISO in the smaller sensors so naturally you'd expect the same or better with a larger sensor. Just reporting my personal finds, I'm aware its not ground breaking news to everyone. Its pretty shocking to experience in person after having a 1DS3 and the 645D in recent years. Those cameras go pretty quickly around 640 in terms of IQ. Last edited by 672; 07-02-2014 at 08:01 PM. Reason: wrong info

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax announces new 1600 MP camera	jon404	Pentax News and Rumors	20	04-03-2013 09:39 AM
Pentax 18-135 WR - Is it worth the $400-500?	reivax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	43	03-24-2013 10:10 AM
People 400 ISO pushed to 1600	icywarm	Post Your Photos!	3	07-16-2010 10:31 PM
K-7 ISO 1600 - What is the maximum size print we can make?	raider	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	7	11-23-2009 04:53 PM
Any sample of a 400 film pushed to 1600? BW only	SuperAkuma	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	18	03-13-2009 10:00 AM

07-02-2014, 07:27 AM	#2
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	Wow, talk about depth...

07-02-2014, 07:46 AM	#3
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	Excellent, inquiring minds wanted to know

07-02-2014, 08:13 AM	#4
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,030	Yes that's great. But should that be of any surprise? I mean it's a CMOS sensor and they have already demonstrated noise vs ISO in the smaller sensors so naturally you'd expect the same or better with a larger sensor.

07-02-2014, 09:53 AM	#6
jonojono Forum Member Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 81	honestly, i would be dare say ISO3200 is the new 400. I really can't find grain artefacts

07-02-2014, 10:00 AM	#7
Ryan Tischer Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Duluth, Minnesota Photos: Albums Posts: 458	Excellent to hear...I may have to bite the bullet and get a 645Z...anyone interested in buying a 645D??

07-02-2014, 08:00 PM	#8
672 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: santa monica Photos: Gallery Posts: 486 Original Poster	Originally posted by jonojono honestly, i would be dare say ISO3200 is the new 400. I really can't find grain artefacts I haven't looked closely at 3200 yet , but would not be at all surprised. Now if I could just figure out how to pack the Epson 7800 in my luggage, I could really make accurate tests on the road…………..

07-03-2014, 05:22 AM	#9
Thomas Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 434	Thank for the posts; I would love to hear your thoughts on the color of the Z vis-à-vis the D.

07-03-2014, 05:54 AM	#10
672 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: santa monica Photos: Gallery Posts: 486 Original Poster	Originally posted by Thomas Thank for the posts; I would love to hear your thoughts on the color of the Z vis-à-vis the D. Well , I won't return to my home (printer) until late July. That, to me is the true test of color.

07-11-2014, 03:26 AM	#11
bull drinkwater Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: pontiac mi. Posts: 392	Originally posted by TER-OR Wow, talk about depth... i'm sticking with my 645D i'm happy with iso 800. if I had to go to iso 1600, i'd do my best to fix it in p.p.

07-11-2014, 03:46 AM	#12
stillsandvideo New Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Posts: 13	Originally posted by 672 I don't have the D with me to do a shoot out , but , after 42 months with the D i would say that the Z 1600 iso looks similar to the D 400 iso. It's pretty amazing…… Thanks for the post. I recently received a Z and will be running it through the paces in a studio environment this weekend (contingent my rental lenses arrive - Pentax hasn't shipped the rereleased lenses in the US as of yet). I'm curios as to whether or not you were able to formulate an opinion on color, skin tone, etc. between the D vs. the Z at low ISO's. I'm used to shooting a CCD (I only need high ISO on occasion) and I'm curios as to whether or not we'll give up anything for the high ISO capability. IMO, it is very hard to beat the look of CCD, especially for portraits and skin tones, there just something magical about it and I'm struggling with the thought of giving it up. Any of your thoughts on this would be most appreciated.