Wow @ 6400

varnco · 04-10-2011, 10:35 AM

I recently upgraded from a k100d to a K-X, due to what I heard about it's low-light capability.

Wow.

Here's a crop of an untouched photo taken at 6400

Attached Images

RioRico · 04-22-2011, 03:17 AM

High-ISO is justified! That's about all I don't like about my K20D, its less-than-sterling high-ISO performance. A Kx or Kr are on my dream list... but so is a Sony NEX, to able to mount almost any lens, including cheap f/1.x cine lenses. But yeah, a Kx or Kr with a decent lens is pretty awesome at high ISO. Nice shot! (Cute dancer, too.)

gebco · 04-22-2011, 09:25 AM

That photo illustrates one of the reasons I chose the K-x. My kids are in numerous activities, including dance, and I *need* the high ISO capabilities.

I don't have an artistic eye to save myself (just look at some of my photos posted here and at DPR

) but I DO like being able to get decent shots of my kids during their games, recitals, etc.

Raybo · 04-22-2011, 06:44 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

High-ISO is justified! That's about all I don't like about my K20D, its less-than-sterling high-ISO performance. A Kx or Kr are on my dream list... but so is a Sony NEX, to able to mount almost any lens, including cheap f/1.x cine lenses. But yeah, a Kx or Kr with a decent lens is pretty awesome at high ISO. Nice shot! (Cute dancer, too.)

I actually kinda like the detail in the Samsung sensor.............but what do I know!

Raybo · 04-22-2011, 07:05 PM

K20 vs K-5 at ISO 1600 from IR (both Jpegs from camera, so take it with a grain of salt)......I still prefer the K20 image for some reason.

RioRico · 04-22-2011, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by Raybo

K20 vs K-5 at ISO 1600 from IR (both Jpegs from camera, so take it with a grain of salt)......I still prefer the K20 image for some reason. :cool

My discomfort with the K20D at high ISO is a function of how well (or badly) a subject is lit. In good light, it's fine. But for me, high ISO means shooting in low light, with shutter speeds that aren't exceptionally fast. The K20D is a bit noisy there. My favorite solution is to shoot in B&W with Orange or Cyan filtration, and pretend it's Tri-X pushed to ASA 3200. Hell yeah, it's SUPPOSED to look like that!

JohnBee · 04-22-2011, 09:04 PM

Originally posted by Raybo

K20 vs K-5 at ISO 1600 from IR (both Jpegs from camera, so take it with a grain of salt)......I still prefer the K20 image for some reason.

I might help if the K-5 was exposed properly

But even at that, the K-5 still outperforms the K20D at ISO1600 no matter how we slice it.

PS. I too like the K20 btw. its just that it can't keep-up with the K-5 amazing performance at higher ISO

JohnBee · 04-22-2011, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by Raybo

K20 vs K-5 at ISO 1600 from IR (both Jpegs from camera, so take it with a grain of salt)......I still prefer the K20 image for some reason.

I might help if the K-5 was exposed properly

But even at that, the K-5 still outperforms the K20D at ISO1600 no matter how we slice it.

PS. I too like the K20 btw. its just that it can't keep-up with the K-5 amazing performance at higher ISO

04-10-2011, 10:35 AM	#1
varnco Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Phoenix Photos: Albums Posts: 100	Wow @ 6400 I recently upgraded from a k100d to a K-X, due to what I heard about it's low-light capability. Wow. Here's a crop of an untouched photo taken at 6400 Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
People ISO 6400 Portrait	kevinschoenmakers	Post Your Photos!	7	11-10-2010 02:11 AM
K-5... Wow wow wow wow wow!! Hugely impressive.	65535	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	85	11-08-2010 08:45 PM
K-5 ISO 6400 developed	sirluke	Pentax DSLR Discussion	24	09-23-2010 10:57 AM
Iso 6400 on the Kx is a Homerun	Igilligan	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	01-02-2010 03:52 PM
Shoot at 6400 iso using the k10d and 50 mm	alexfoto	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	09-01-2009 10:45 PM

04-22-2011, 03:17 AM	#2
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	High-ISO is justified! That's about all I don't like about my K20D, its less-than-sterling high-ISO performance. A Kx or Kr are on my dream list... but so is a Sony NEX, to able to mount almost any lens, including cheap f/1.x cine lenses. But yeah, a Kx or Kr with a decent lens is pretty awesome at high ISO. Nice shot! (Cute dancer, too.)

04-22-2011, 09:25 AM	#3
gebco Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Winnipeg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 329	That photo illustrates one of the reasons I chose the K-x. My kids are in numerous activities, including dance, and I need the high ISO capabilities. I don't have an artistic eye to save myself (just look at some of my photos posted here and at DPR ) but I DO like being able to get decent shots of my kids during their games, recitals, etc.

04-22-2011, 06:44 PM	#4
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	Originally posted by RioRico High-ISO is justified! That's about all I don't like about my K20D, its less-than-sterling high-ISO performance. A Kx or Kr are on my dream list... but so is a Sony NEX, to able to mount almost any lens, including cheap f/1.x cine lenses. But yeah, a Kx or Kr with a decent lens is pretty awesome at high ISO. Nice shot! (Cute dancer, too.) I actually kinda like the detail in the Samsung sensor.............but what do I know!

04-22-2011, 07:05 PM	#5
Raybo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 872	K20 vs K-5 at ISO 1600 from IR (both Jpegs from camera, so take it with a grain of salt)......I still prefer the K20 image for some reason.

04-22-2011, 08:35 PM	#6
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by Raybo K20 vs K-5 at ISO 1600 from IR (both Jpegs from camera, so take it with a grain of salt)......I still prefer the K20 image for some reason. :cool My discomfort with the K20D at high ISO is a function of how well (or badly) a subject is lit. In good light, it's fine. But for me, high ISO means shooting in low light, with shutter speeds that aren't exceptionally fast. The K20D is a bit noisy there. My favorite solution is to shoot in B&W with Orange or Cyan filtration, and pretend it's Tri-X pushed to ASA 3200. Hell yeah, it's SUPPOSED to look like that!

04-22-2011, 09:04 PM	#7
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by Raybo K20 vs K-5 at ISO 1600 from IR (both Jpegs from camera, so take it with a grain of salt)......I still prefer the K20 image for some reason. I might help if the K-5 was exposed properly But even at that, the K-5 still outperforms the K20D at ISO1600 no matter how we slice it. PS. I too like the K20 btw. its just that it can't keep-up with the K-5 amazing performance at higher ISO

04-22-2011, 09:32 PM	#8
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by Raybo K20 vs K-5 at ISO 1600 from IR (both Jpegs from camera, so take it with a grain of salt)......I still prefer the K20 image for some reason. I might help if the K-5 was exposed properly But even at that, the K-5 still outperforms the K20D at ISO1600 no matter how we slice it. PS. I too like the K20 btw. its just that it can't keep-up with the K-5 amazing performance at higher ISO

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search