Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-09-2011, 09:42 PM   #46
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by outsider Quote
I agree with what you're saying. I actually had a K-7 on it's way until I found out about it's "noise" "problems" and decided to refuse the package and send it back to amazon before it even got here. Indeed the biggest issue with the k7 is it's sensor. In this fast evolving world of digital photography, it was a mistake. I have the kx and it spoils me everytime. I can't imagine upgrading to a k-7 and dealing with such a lesser performing sensor. You can compensate for the k-7's shortcomings in a roundabout way by tweaks in camera and post processing, or admire the photos for their film look, but I think ultimately people are too spoiled by advancing technology to forgive. They'd rather shoot fearlessly and add noise and character rather by choice rather than deal with it this or that way. I can't wait to get the k-5. Hopefully most if not all of the stained sensors are filtered out of the market by now.
So you didn't appreciate the nicer packaging, the better metering, the faster AF, faster frame rate, larger buffer, video capability, etc?
That's kinda loopy.

04-09-2011, 10:34 PM   #47
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by JHD Quote
Even if it means using a tripod, I'd rather shoot at the lowest possible ISO and retain detail. The only thing the K-5 has over the K-7 for me is its dynamic range.
the dynamic range of the K-5 is a very important aspect especially in terms of detail and IQ preservation and restoration is concerned. just imagine a base ISO quality image with an ISO 800 exposure equivalent. you got enough exposure adjustment and details in the shadows, not to cleaner images as well. you can't for more than that. I couldn't care less about HiGH ISO sensitivity. if I were to say this, the K-5 would be a heck of a camera even if it's max ISO is set at ISO 1600 if one was looking to get the best IQ results. the ISOs from 3200 and above would be more or less extra capability for those who want to shoot with something decent or ok for lowlights, but not necessarily you would use for optimal IQ.
04-10-2011, 10:17 AM   #48
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,414
QuoteOriginally posted by JHD Quote
Even if it means using a tripod, I'd rather shoot at the lowest possible ISO and retain detail. The only thing the K-5 has over the K-7 for me is its dynamic range.
The DR issue is huge. I don't think people realize just how much DR effects an image. It does not just improve the detail captured in the shadows or highlight regions. It improves the details captured across the entire range.

12-bit K-7 has an approximate contrast ratio of 4,000:1
14-bit K-5 has an approximate contrast ratio of 16,000:1
Obviously there are a lot of possible variables that impact the scene, and the final image, but DR is one of the big ones.
04-10-2011, 11:23 AM   #49
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 412
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
So you didn't appreciate the nicer packaging, the better metering, the faster AF, faster frame rate, larger buffer, video capability, etc?
That's kinda loopy.
Haha, Nope! Never even laid hands on the package. Yeah, I've read about the buffer, the autofocus should be o.k. for me, but don't really know how much of an issue low light is for it. The other things shouldn't be an issue for my shooting style. The K-5 will actually be a tad overkill for what I need, but sh*t, how many times does a poor, guy like myself find 1500 bucks to throw to the wind? There will be pros and cons to every camera it seems. The pentax gurus are smart enough to get everything right in the next model, but only to the detriment of their profit. You wouldn't have to buy another camera for perhaps decades, unless there were big changes to the digital format. Cameras, like many forms of technology are like politicians. Deep down inside their full of it, and designed to keep you coming back for more (dung). However, I must say that the Pentax K-x is one of the most satisfying, no nonsense pieces of technology i've experience. It's got it all, or all I need, then some, for an affordable price. The deal maker for the k-5 for me is the sensor (DR, noise, Megapixels), then the tweaks and controls that come with such a camera, then the build and then classic pentax back compatability. All huge. The rest just don't impact my style. If no one told me, perhaps I'd never know they were/weren't there.

04-14-2011, 03:06 AM   #50
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: south africa, johannesburg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 228
Go for the K5

QuoteOriginally posted by JHD Quote
Even if it means using a tripod, I'd rather shoot at the lowest possible ISO and retain detail. The only thing the K-5 has over the K-7 for me is its dynamic range.
You see, that's the thing - better DR means better detail in darker areas of the pix, plus less clipping and therefore you can bump the iso without loss of detail, so e.g. iso 100 on the K7 is same as iso 400, or more, on the K5.

It is not for nothing that the K5 is currently widely rated as the best APS-C cam on the market - the only thing that stops it overtaking Nikon as the one to have is the name and the better flash system of the Nikons.
04-14-2011, 03:21 AM   #51
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Fly-over, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,170
QuoteOriginally posted by jlaubza Quote
You see, that's the thing - better DR means better detail in darker areas of the pix, plus less clipping and therefore you can bump the iso without loss of detail, so e.g. iso 100 on the K7 is same as iso 400, or more, on the K5.

It is not for nothing that the K5 is currently widely rated as the best APS-C cam on the market - the only thing that stops it overtaking Nikon as the one to have is the name and the better flash system of the Nikons.
You're going to use it anyway, so... who needs flash when you've got Photoshop?
04-14-2011, 04:16 AM   #52
JHD
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by jlaubza Quote
You see, that's the thing - better DR means better detail in darker areas of the pix, plus less clipping and therefore you can bump the iso without loss of detail, so e.g. iso 100 on the K7 is same as iso 400, or more, on the K5.

It is not for nothing that the K5 is currently widely rated as the best APS-C cam on the market - the only thing that stops it overtaking Nikon as the one to have is the name and the better flash system of the Nikons.

The thing is one has to pay a considerable premium for a K-5. Just because the K-7 doesn't have the dynamic range of the K-5 doesn't make the K-5 worth that premium, which IMO could be better spent on a nice piece of glass. K-5 hype aside, the K-7 is by no means a bad camera. It was and still is a very capable camera.
04-14-2011, 04:39 AM   #53
Banned




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Williston, VT
Posts: 268
QuoteOriginally posted by JHD Quote
The thing is one has to pay a considerable premium for a K-5. Just because the K-7 doesn't have the dynamic range of the K-5 doesn't make the K-5 worth that premium, which IMO could be better spent on a nice piece of glass. K-5 hype aside, the K-7 is by no means a bad camera. It was and still is a very capable camera.
Especially considering the price it's available at now.

04-14-2011, 07:40 AM   #54
Junior Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 34
I am enjoying the ISO 100 shots on the K-7 when I can shoot that but there is one thing on the K-7 that is bothering me and I can't figure out if it is normal or not.

I am seeing black dots in the shadows when I shoot people on the K7. I see it at higher ISO and I also see it at ISO 250. I look back at my *stDL at ISO 400-800 and peoples faces in the shadows look much cleaner, there are no what I call black dots.

Here is an example. Is this low dynamic range? Sensor issue? Camera issue? But if you click on the magnifying glass you can zoom in to 100%.

Does this look normal to you? I see it in less extreme shadows on people's faces too and in one example in bright sunlight though someone was moving in that one. Maybe anything beyond 100% magnification is fine? I just didn't see this on the DL at all.

https://picasaweb.google.com/corvairfan/YellowColorShift#5595239386090410290

But I lived for a few years with the DL and the all menu based design drove me nuts. I use the top lcd a lot and I am loving the two wheels which is why I jumped to the K-7 over the low light K-X/K-R. I cannot justify the expense of the K-5 right now because I need a tripod and I need better glass than the kit so K-7 made sense but still worried I made a mistake mainly because what I see above in my images.

Last edited by Corvairfan; 04-14-2011 at 08:11 AM.
04-14-2011, 08:16 AM   #55
Junior Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 34
And here is ISO 250 with lots of chroma noise, good glass but a slow shutter speed. Does shutter speed increase noise?

https://picasaweb.google.com/corvairfan/NoisyLowIso#5564420677135498162
04-14-2011, 08:32 AM   #56
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Corvairfan Quote
I am enjoying the ISO 100 shots on the K-7 when I can shoot that but there is one thing on the K-7 that is bothering me and I can't figure out if it is normal or not.

I am seeing black dots in the shadows when I shoot people on the K7. I see it at higher ISO and I also see it at ISO 250. I look back at my *stDL at ISO 400-800 and peoples faces in the shadows look much cleaner, there are no what I call black dots.

Here is an example. Is this low dynamic range? Sensor issue? Camera issue? But if you click on the magnifying glass you can zoom in to 100%.

Does this look normal to you? I see it in less extreme shadows on people's faces too and in one example in bright sunlight though someone was moving in that one. Maybe anything beyond 100% magnification is fine? I just didn't see this on the DL at all.

https://picasaweb.google.com/corvairfan/YellowColorShift#5595239386090410290

But I lived for a few years with the DL and the all menu based design drove me nuts. I use the top lcd a lot and I am loving the two wheels which is why I jumped to the K-7 over the low light K-X/K-R. I cannot justify the expense of the K-5 right now because I need a tripod and I need better glass than the kit so K-7 made sense but still worried I made a mistake mainly because what I see above in my images.

looks like you have a dirty lens here. try cleaning your lens.
04-14-2011, 08:35 AM   #57
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Corvairfan Quote
And here is ISO 250 with lots of chroma noise, good glass but a slow shutter speed. Does shutter speed increase noise?

https://picasaweb.google.com/corvairfan/NoisyLowIso#5564420677135498162
are you shooting jpegs? this is worse when you are using jpeg. actually this doesn't look as bad if you are going to compare it with ISO 3,200-6,400. btw, the trick on using the K-7 is exposing correctly or exposing to the right. also, I would suggest that you do some pixel mapping since there are some traces of stucked pixels on that image.
04-14-2011, 12:56 PM   #58
Pentaxian
Just1MoreDave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Aurora, CO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,814
QuoteOriginally posted by Corvairfan Quote
And here is ISO 250 with lots of chroma noise, good glass but a slow shutter speed. Does shutter speed increase noise?

https://picasaweb.google.com/corvairfan/NoisyLowIso#5564420677135498162
No, but Picasa does if you let it. The original image is ISO 250, but increasing the effective exposure in software is nearly the same as using a higher ISO. The DL would have done the same thing. The K-7 files might initially look terribly noisy at 100% compared to the DL, because they have so many more pixels. Resize or print for a fair comparison.

The EXIF from your other photo seems to say your camera is still on its original firmware. I can't remember what the firmware changes but I'd upgrade that.
04-14-2011, 01:20 PM   #59
Banned




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Williston, VT
Posts: 268
Yeah, that second one definitely looks like you pushed the exposure in post processing. And this is exactly what people were referring to in this thread: shadows can display an alarming amount of noise when the exposure gets pushed. The K-5 is much better behaved that way. Especially if you're working on JPG files.
04-15-2011, 07:17 AM   #60
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,414
QuoteOriginally posted by Corvairfan Quote
And here is ISO 250 with lots of chroma noise, good glass but a slow shutter speed. Does shutter speed increase noise?

https://picasaweb.google.com/corvairfan/NoisyLowIso#5564420677135498162
It looks like the image was under exposed and then the exposure was increased in post processing. Without knowing what the original exposure was and how it was processed I am just guessing.

I have shot 1600 ISO at a night concert and with basic post processing (DeNoise) I have really good images.

The key to an image like what you have there is proper exposure. It is hard for a camera with a relatively narrow DR to nail those kind of shots. That is why the K-5 is such a big step forward for APS-C. If you want great results shooting images like you have in the link, then learn the zone system and how to spot meter. You will be much happier with the results and the K-7.

The original question in this thread "is the sensor in the K-7 really that bad"........
The K-7 has a sensor that is slightly better than what was in My Olympus E-3. So, in relative terms the K-7 has a rather poor sensor. There are two National Geographic photographers that I know of who shoot professionally with Olympus 4/3 cameras and are quite successful. In real terms the K-7 is more than capable of professional results.
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!
camera, control, dslr, iso, issues, k-7, k-x, noise, photography, quality, samsung, sensor, updates
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K20D - Bad Sensor (Banding?) JamesToyski Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 07-03-2012 02:57 PM
Are the sensor stains really that bad?? bobby_navy Pentax K-5 6 12-29-2010 04:19 PM
myth: video mode bad for K-x sensor? macky112 Video and Pentax HDSLRs 2 08-22-2010 05:44 PM
K10d bad sensor? gatekeeper Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 01-11-2009 04:54 PM
New K10D, bad spot on sensor?? tommy3 Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 02-21-2007 07:53 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:51 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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