[jatrax]

I have never had a lens slower than 2.8, and prefer not to

I think many people think that way, myself included. When the 28-105 came out many were upset it was not faster and constant aperture. It got a lot of negative comments including "cheap kit lens". Until people actually bought it and started posting the results. Pentax as usual did things their way and produced an exceptionally high quality lens with a variable aperture to hold down cost and weight. With the high ISO ability of newer cameras having f/2.8 is not (IMHO) nearly as important as it used to be.

[clackers]

Clackers,
Just curious. Would you happen to be shooting with a new 24-70? I just want to know what your opinion is of this lens. I have the 3 FA limited lenses, and the 100 macro for flowers this summer. I am thinking about the 24-70 for travel this summer.
Thanks,
Terry

If I had the cash, that'd be the one I'd get, Terry!

I 'make do' with a Tamron 28-75 (seldom), the DFA 28-105 (quite a bit) and various primes, including two of the FA Limiteds.

[clackers]

Thank you Jatrax. That's good to know. I am partial to fixed aperture. I have never had a lens slower than 2.8, and prefer not to. But, I know the 28-105 is a very popular lens.
Terry

You know, one thing to be proud of in Pentax land is the image quality of its variable aperture zooms of late - the DA20-40 (a Limited), the DA16-85, the DA18-135 and DFA 28-105 really punch above their weight.

But sure, the Holy Trinity of Pentax zooms would be the 15-30, 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8s.

Pro setup.

[MrB1]

Terry - It costs almost nothing but time to use a digital camera. As you already have the gear, why don't you shoot several series of images of the sorts of subjects you like to shoot, increasing the ISO step by step between shots, and find out the ISO limit beyond which you are dissatisfied with the results? Others will have different or similar opinions, but the only opinion that matters is your own.

[TerryL]

I think many people think that way, myself included. When the 28-105 came out many were upset it was not faster and constant aperture. It got a lot of negative comments including "cheap kit lens". Until people actually bought it and started posting the results. Pentax as usual did things their way and produced an exceptionally high quality lens with a variable aperture to hold down cost and weight. With the high ISO ability of newer cameras having f/2.8 is not (IMHO) nearly as important as it used to be.

Hi Jatrax,
That is a very good point. I'm very old school, and haven't caught up with what DSLRs can really do. I'm just now getting used to the idea of shooting at 1600 iso. That really shines a new light on the 28-105. I just saw some beautiful images from the K-1 and 28-105. I like the reach, too.
Terry

---------- Post added 03-20-18 at 03:45 PM ----------

Terry - It costs almost nothing but time to use a digital camera. As you already have the gear, why don't you shoot several series of images of the sorts of subjects you like to shoot, increasing the ISO step by step between shots, and find out the ISO limit beyond which you are dissatisfied with the results? Others will have different or similar opinions, but the only opinion that matters is your own.

That is a very good point, Sir. I will make a point to do that, this week. That will really tell me.
Terry

[rawr]

What is the highest iso I can use without having soft images?

I am surprised that no-one in the thread has mentioned DxOMark's testing of the K-1, where it found that you can shoot up to 3280 ISO with the K-1 whilst preserving excellent image quality:

Pentax K-1 : Tests and Reviews - DxOMark

And even above ISO 3200, the visible image quality fall-off may be quite gradual, up to rather extreme ISO's.

That score also makes the K-1 the best performing non-mirrorless DSLR for high-ISO on the market today, FWIW.

[Ex Finn.]

I am surprised that no-one in the thread has mentioned DxOMark's testing of the K-1, where it found that you can shoot up to 3280 ISO with the K-1 whilst preserving excellent image quality:

Pentax K-1 : Tests and Reviews - DxOMark

And even above ISO 3200, the visible image quality fall-off may be quite gradual, up to rather extreme ISO's.

That score also makes the K-1 the best performing non-mirrorless DSLR for high-ISO on the market today, FWIW.

The KP is pretty good also... although it is a crop camera.

[rawr]

The KP is pretty good also... although it is a crop camera.

True. By all accounts KP is in FF territory with regards to high-ISO quality.

I eagerly await some technical tests appearing - like DxOMark or even from Bill Claff - to profile the KP's performance.

[mikesbike]

For many years the Pentax DSLR line has been known by independent test labs for the preservation of detail at higher ISO settings compared to Canon and Nikon. For example, testing by POP Photo of the K-r found its noise control to be above the rest at the time, especially in its price range, while at the same time it amazed the technicians by beating all others at virtually no loss of detail, turning in close to the same lines of resolution all the way up to ISO 3200! Other labs had similar findings. My main body at the time was the K20D, which was pretty fair for low noise, and very good for detail preservation. But based on the reviews, I added the K-r to my arsenal because its low noise at higher ISO was easily lower than the K20D. Only a year ago I gave away the K-r, since I had gotten the K-S2.

Reviews of the K-5 series went along the same lines. The K-70, the KP, and the K-1 have taken things even farther in this regard. Terry, now that you have optimized your sharpening for JPEG images in your K-1, you should get very fine results at least to ISO 3200, and probably more! Don't believe what is said by those who don't even know about optimizing sharpening first, because the K-1 is known to have sharpening set low by default, causing some overall softness in JPEGs even at low ISO settings.

I've been getting sharp shots with my K-5 IIs at ISO 2500 when shooting roller hockey, for which the higher ISO allows the shutter speed I need. No doubt my KP could perform even better! The only thing there is the faster write speed of the K-5 IIs due to its lower mp sensor, and its deeper buffer, in case I should occasionally do some burst shooting.

[MrB1]

.....The only thing there is the faster write speed of the K-5 IIs due to its lower mp sensor.....

Is this a comparison with the same settings in each camera? Applying the same settings (but with both at their maximum MP) and using the same memory card, the K-70 processing seems much faster than the K-5IIs, and I would expect the same of the KP. Or am I misunderstanding something here?

[TerryL]

If I had the cash, that'd be the one I'd get, Terry!

I 'make do' with a Tamron 28-75 (seldom), the DFA 28-105 (quite a bit) and various primes, including two of the FA Limiteds.

Well, I certainly understand the need for cash. I had to sell my Phantom 4 Pro for $1,100 to buy this lens. I still have the Phantom 1, 2, 3 Standard, and 3 Pro. I hated to see the 4 Pro go, but Photography is my real passion.
Terry

[TerryL]

For many years the Pentax DSLR line has been known by independent test labs for the preservation of detail at higher ISO settings compared to Canon and Nikon. For example, testing by POP Photo of the K-r found its noise control to be above the rest at the time, especially in its price range, while at the same time it amazed the technicians by beating all others at virtually no loss of detail, turning in close to the same lines of resolution all the way up to ISO 3200! Other labs had similar findings. My main body at the time was the K20D, which was pretty fair for low noise, and very good for detail preservation. But based on the reviews, I added the K-r to my arsenal because its low noise at higher ISO was easily lower than the K20D. Only a year ago I gave away the K-r, since I had gotten the K-S2.

Reviews of the K-5 series went along the same lines. The K-70, the KP, and the K-1 have taken things even farther in this regard. Terry, now that you have optimized your sharpening for JPEG images in your K-1, you should get very fine results at least to ISO 3200, and probably more! Don't believe what is said by those who don't even know about optimizing sharpening first, because the K-1 is known to have sharpening set low by default, causing some overall softness in JPEGs even at low ISO settings.

I've been getting sharp shots with my K-5 IIs at ISO 2500 when shooting roller hockey, for which the higher ISO allows the shutter speed I need. No doubt my KP could perform even better! The only thing there is the faster write speed of the K-5 IIs due to its lower mp sensor, and its deeper buffer, in case I should occasionally do some burst shooting.

I remember, Mike. You were a really big help. Stuck with me until the end. Again, thank you.
Terry