A K-7 K200D comparisom

Class A · 04-04-2011, 03:57 AM

Originally posted by cbaytan

Real creepy question is when I see K200 RAW files are about 16MB when K-7's are about 14MB, I guess that shows K-7 compresses RAW files, I hope it is using a not a lossy compression method like Nikon does. Anyone knows?

PEF compression is lossless. No information lost, just stored in a more compact form. Also note the higher file sizes don't necessarily indicate more detail. They might as well just indicate more noise. The more a signal resembles noise, the less compressible it becomes.

BTW, your comparison images differ in so many ways that you can not honestly believe you are seeing a difference between CCD vs CMOS. You'd need a much more controlled experiment to even begin to touch up the differences.

Originally posted by JohnBee

TBH, I don't think any of the images posted expose the differences(if at all possible) given that were talking minute dynamic range difference, and so I'm guessing your images are showing the in-camera settings/processing between both units rather than that of substantial image attributes.

+1

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

I dowloaded the raw of the "peppers" And opened them both in lightroom and applied the exact same WB to each and did a resize for upload and nothing more, here are the results-

Your nice comparison shows that the backgrounds are very different in the two images. One cannot even begin to start discussing sensor differences when the comparison images differ that much.

TOUGEFC · 04-04-2011, 04:10 AM

Originally posted by Class A

Your nice comparison shows that the backgrounds are very different in the two images. One cannot even begin to start discussing sensor differences when the comparison images differ that much.

And thats exactly why i didnt say which one i think is better because they are not the same image and because its not a controlled enviroment it makes no sense to make a valid comparison

cbaytan · 04-04-2011, 05:26 AM

Originally posted by Class A

PEF compression is lossless. No information lost, just stored in a more compact form.

BTW, your comparison images differ in so many ways that you can not honestly believe you are seeing a difference between CCD vs CMOS. You'd need a much more controlled experiment to even begin to touch up the differences.

Your answer about PEF is very intriguing, do you mean DNG compression is lossy on K-7 maybe even in K-5?

Also, I believe tests should be separated as real life experiments and lab/studio experiments, you can never control everything in real life tests, at least clouds are moving sun is moving etc, if you are against real life experiments you know what to do.

**Lowell Goudge** · 04-04-2011, 05:45 AM

I have both a K10D and K7D.

I use them interchangeably, (sort of) and can tell you that neither camera is a bad camera, but the K10D definitely has a much lower dynamic range

it is very very prone to blown highlights.

My biggest issue with the K10D and the K200 is the same sensor, so I believe it applies is that it is best at low ISO and low contrast shots, due to the limited dynamic range.

The K7 is much better at higher iso, and much better at very harsh lighting situations.

Actually they make a good pairing due to the differences in sensors.

A-z · 04-04-2011, 05:22 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Actually they make a good pairing due to the differences in sensors.

When you say a good pairing, is there somethings that you like better about the k10 sensor?

I'm looking at getting a K10D (or K200D) as I need a WR body to supplement my k-x and i'm being thrifty on a body due to LBA

Class A · 04-04-2011, 06:17 PM

Originally posted by cbaytan

Your answer about PEF is very intriguing, do you mean DNG compression is lossy on K-7 maybe even in K-5?

DNG compression is not lossy either.
One of the DNG variants may specify a lossy compression scheme but that is definitely not used for "Converted DNG"s or in DNGs from the K-7/K-5.

Originally posted by cbaytan

... if you are against real life experiments you know what to do.

I'm not against "real life experiments" per se, but if one cannot control certain variables one should not hope to discover differences as subtle as CMOS vs CCD rendering.

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Actually they make a good pairing due to the differences in sensors.

When would you prefer the K10D (in terms of its sensor)?

Pentaxor · 04-04-2011, 10:02 PM

what I noticed between the two is the saturation level. but I would have to say that the only difference between the two cameras are their performance and capabilty/functionality. the K200D's High ISO performance is fairly good as well considering it's age and it's capability during it's time. it's still a decent camera in today's age honestly speaking.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-x AF vs K200D AF	alexulo	Pentax DSLR Discussion	3	05-15-2010 11:39 AM
From K200d to K7	lurchlarson	Pentax DSLR Discussion	21	04-29-2010 06:06 AM
K200D - Need Help!	IJCoolen	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	02-06-2010 12:29 PM
k200d	nutkasse	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	12-13-2009 06:30 PM
Where to get a K200D	jct us101	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	05-09-2009 11:28 PM

04-04-2011, 03:57 AM	#16
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by cbaytan Real creepy question is when I see K200 RAW files are about 16MB when K-7's are about 14MB, I guess that shows K-7 compresses RAW files, I hope it is using a not a lossy compression method like Nikon does. Anyone knows? PEF compression is lossless. No information lost, just stored in a more compact form. Also note the higher file sizes don't necessarily indicate more detail. They might as well just indicate more noise. The more a signal resembles noise, the less compressible it becomes. BTW, your comparison images differ in so many ways that you can not honestly believe you are seeing a difference between CCD vs CMOS. You'd need a much more controlled experiment to even begin to touch up the differences. Originally posted by JohnBee TBH, I don't think any of the images posted expose the differences(if at all possible) given that were talking minute dynamic range difference, and so I'm guessing your images are showing the in-camera settings/processing between both units rather than that of substantial image attributes. +1 Originally posted by TOUGEFC I dowloaded the raw of the "peppers" And opened them both in lightroom and applied the exact same WB to each and did a resize for upload and nothing more, here are the results- Your nice comparison shows that the backgrounds are very different in the two images. One cannot even begin to start discussing sensor differences when the comparison images differ that much.

04-04-2011, 04:10 AM	#17
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Originally posted by Class A Your nice comparison shows that the backgrounds are very different in the two images. One cannot even begin to start discussing sensor differences when the comparison images differ that much. And thats exactly why i didnt say which one i think is better because they are not the same image and because its not a controlled enviroment it makes no sense to make a valid comparison

04-04-2011, 05:26 AM	#18
cbaytan Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Trabzon/Turkey Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,010 Original Poster	Originally posted by Class A PEF compression is lossless. No information lost, just stored in a more compact form. BTW, your comparison images differ in so many ways that you can not honestly believe you are seeing a difference between CCD vs CMOS. You'd need a much more controlled experiment to even begin to touch up the differences. Your answer about PEF is very intriguing, do you mean DNG compression is lossy on K-7 maybe even in K-5? Also, I believe tests should be separated as real life experiments and lab/studio experiments, you can never control everything in real life tests, at least clouds are moving sun is moving etc, if you are against real life experiments you know what to do.

04-04-2011, 05:45 AM	#19
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	I have both a K10D and K7D. I use them interchangeably, (sort of) and can tell you that neither camera is a bad camera, but the K10D definitely has a much lower dynamic range it is very very prone to blown highlights. My biggest issue with the K10D and the K200 is the same sensor, so I believe it applies is that it is best at low ISO and low contrast shots, due to the limited dynamic range. The K7 is much better at higher iso, and much better at very harsh lighting situations. Actually they make a good pairing due to the differences in sensors.

04-04-2011, 05:22 PM	#20
A-z Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: London, England Posts: 93	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Actually they make a good pairing due to the differences in sensors. When you say a good pairing, is there somethings that you like better about the k10 sensor? I'm looking at getting a K10D (or K200D) as I need a WR body to supplement my k-x and i'm being thrifty on a body due to LBA

04-04-2011, 06:17 PM	#21
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by cbaytan Your answer about PEF is very intriguing, do you mean DNG compression is lossy on K-7 maybe even in K-5? DNG compression is not lossy either. One of the DNG variants may specify a lossy compression scheme but that is definitely not used for "Converted DNG"s or in DNGs from the K-7/K-5. Originally posted by cbaytan ... if you are against real life experiments you know what to do. I'm not against "real life experiments" per se, but if one cannot control certain variables one should not hope to discover differences as subtle as CMOS vs CCD rendering. Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Actually they make a good pairing due to the differences in sensors. When would you prefer the K10D (in terms of its sensor)?

04-04-2011, 10:02 PM	#22
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	what I noticed between the two is the saturation level. but I would have to say that the only difference between the two cameras are their performance and capabilty/functionality. the K200D's High ISO performance is fairly good as well considering it's age and it's capability during it's time. it's still a decent camera in today's age honestly speaking.