Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-02-2011, 04:56 PM   #16
Veteran Member
Larsenio's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Andenes
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 361
Hi,
I`m one of those that took the little step from K10D->K20D and miss the extreme quality sharpness/colour rendition of the CCD-sensor @ISO100-200.

It`s really not the same with K20D; I mean it`s a great camera and all ( larger files, theoretically more PP-possibilities @higher ISO...) but I just find myself missing the ... I don`t know; it looks as the pixels just are more visible viewed close with my K20D.

If I find a cheap K10D; I actually think I`ll use that for low-ISO shots when possible

With the K5 of course there are just so many appreciated specs. that can lead one to choose it, and the large DR of course is one of the main reasons...

Good luck anyway

07-02-2011, 06:19 PM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Larsenio Quote
Hi,
I`m one of those that took the little step from K10D->K20D and miss the extreme quality sharpness/colour rendition of the CCD-sensor @ISO100-200.

It`s really not the same with K20D; I mean it`s a great camera and all ( larger files, theoretically more PP-possibilities @higher ISO...) but I just find myself missing the ... I don`t know; it looks as the pixels just are more visible viewed close with my K20D.
It's because you're zooming in closer. Happens when you look at images at 100% and move up the MP tree.
07-03-2011, 12:21 AM   #18
Veteran Member
Larsenio's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Andenes
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 361
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
It's because you're zooming in closer. Happens when you look at images at 100% and move up the MP tree.
I`m afraid you`re misunderstanding... 1:1 view is 1:1.
07-03-2011, 12:40 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Larsenio Quote
I`m afraid you`re misunderstanding... 1:1 view is 1:1.
No, I know 1:1 is 1:1. But the image from the k20d is magnified more at 1:1. Because the k10d is 3872 pixels across, and the K20D is 4672 pixels, the image on your screen is a smaller piece of the sensor; that is, higher magnification.

Perhaps you're seeing the resolution limits of your lenses, or some change in the process workflow. I assure you the K20D doesn't typically have noticeably more aliasing ("stair stepping") than the K10D, and I routinely got single-pixel level resolution out of the K20D combined with several lenses.

If you're using lightroom, try this: Pick your images that you're comparing at 1:1, export them both to, say, fit into 1200x1200 pixels, sharpened for screen display. Then compare them at 1:1. Or scale them both to, say, 20MP and compare them.

Or, even better, take the images in question and get an 8x10 of each, and THEN compare them.

07-04-2011, 06:35 AM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Durban, South Africa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,051
I had a K10D (given to son) from 2006 and have taken several hundred pics and I can honestly say that the new Sony sensor (I shoot Nikon D7000, same sensor) blows it away from base ISO and can easily be used up to ISO 2000 with negligible IQ hit.

Obviously I have gone back and inspected all of my K1OD pics and they lack for nothing in the IQ dept but the new sensor has something special and I don't miss the K10D.

There is one thing that did change dramatically was in the pp dept.

I had to unlearn everything , get the right setup in camera and change my pp process.

Initially I really detested cmos sensors (I could never get it right with Canon cmos for some odd reason) but had some practice with a Sony HX5 p&s and so was an easier transition with the Sony 16mp cmos.

Images from this sensor on a 24 inch led monitor can be simply breathtaking.
07-04-2011, 07:13 AM   #21
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
Great in colors and resolution as K10D is, I still find pulling shadows even from ISO 100 can get the image looking noisy. This seems to be much improved in K-5. Depending on your kind of shooting, if the shoot allows bracketing etc, this might not be an issue, but just something to consider.

Also K5 files have that Canon 5DII look, very very pleasing. K10D is very filmlike, which is a good thing in itself, but I honestly think it would be impossible to produce K5-like results with K10D without significant amount of work.
07-04-2011, 09:34 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Andi Lo Quote
Great in colors and resolution as K10D is, I still find pulling shadows even from ISO 100 can get the image looking noisy. This seems to be much improved in K-5. Depending on your kind of shooting, if the shoot allows bracketing etc, this might not be an issue, but just something to consider.

Also K5 files have that Canon 5DII look, very very pleasing. K10D is very filmlike, which is a good thing in itself, but I honestly think it would be impossible to produce K5-like results with K10D without significant amount of work.
It's amusing, sometimes, how subjective this business can be. I was just reflecting the other day that I was glad the K-5's images didn't look "Canon-like", because the Canon sensors are the ones I like the least. I suspect we're seeing different characteristics, but still, it's amusing...
07-04-2011, 09:57 AM   #23
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
It's amusing, sometimes, how subjective this business can be. I was just reflecting the other day that I was glad the K-5's images didn't look "Canon-like", because the Canon sensors are the ones I like the least. I suspect we're seeing different characteristics, but still, it's amusing...
Canon 5Dii and 5Di looks quite different from the other canon bodies, especially the cheap rebels which colors I loathe. It has the "canon fullframe look". My personal definition of it is that it just looks like it's very well rendered with very nice contrast and rather subtle colors, but has no problems being bumped up in saturation or contrast either. When I first saw the K-5 pictures, I thought it's like a cropped 5Dii Like you said it's hugely personal though.

On contrary I find the K10D pictures look very "full", like a welldone steak There's way less subtlety in it.

07-04-2011, 11:29 AM   #24
Pentaxian
8540tomg's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Waterloo, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,446
Images from the K10 at ISO 100 are pretty hard to beat. They are OK up to ISO 400 but after that forget it IMO. I'm looking to add the K5 to my collection as I do a lot of birding with my M 400/5.6. The performance of the K5 at higher ISOs is a big plus for me. I won't be getting rid og my K10 though. Still a very good camera for certain applications.

Tom G
07-04-2011, 12:42 PM   #25
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,683
As mentioned, the K-5 not only excels in high ISO performance, but also in low ISO DR. It's one of the main reasons I went from K20D to K-5 after losing that brilliant low ISO rendition of the K10D. The K-7 wasn't an upgrade from the K20D in this regard, so the K-5 indeed brings us that much closer to complete photographic satisfaction.
07-04-2011, 01:21 PM   #26
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,591
TBH. I have no idea how a quantum leap could translate to anything less than a 645D.
But.. maybe this will help set things straight;



Granted the K10D sample was processed in ACR and the latter in Raw Therapee. However, I think we both know that this wouldn't change much in terms of detail when all is said and done.

Last edited by JohnBee; 07-04-2011 at 01:33 PM.
07-04-2011, 01:56 PM   #27
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,187
I really wish you guys would quit! I've been dying to upgrade my K10D to a K5, but all these comments are killing that! Dang you...
07-04-2011, 02:09 PM   #28
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,591
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
As mentioned, the K-5 not only excels in high ISO performance, but also in low ISO DR. It's one of the main reasons I went from K20D to K-5 after losing that brilliant low ISO rendition of the K10D. The K-7 wasn't an upgrade from the K20D in this regard, so the K-5 indeed brings us that much closer to complete photographic satisfaction.
I can testify to that;
This composite was made-up of ISO1600 images and pushed 5 stops(ie. ISO51200):

Last edited by JohnBee; 07-04-2011 at 02:20 PM.
07-04-2011, 03:41 PM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by 8540tomg Quote
Images from the K10 at ISO 100 are pretty hard to beat. They are OK up to ISO 400 but after that forget it IMO. I'm looking to add the K5 to my collection as I do a lot of birding with my M 400/5.6. The performance of the K5 at higher ISOs is a big plus for me. I won't be getting rid og my K10 though. Still a very good camera for certain applications.

Tom G
I've loved every Pentax DSLR I've had - the K10D isn't one of them. I still have my K20D, though, and many images from K10Ds, and even at ISO100 the K-5 is a significant upgrade in image quality. Higher resolution, higher dynamic range, and lower noise at every ISO. I can certainly see how someone might become attached to the "look" of a given machine, but that doesn't mean that the K-5 doesn't have better technical numbers in every category. I would say it's probably easier to make a K-5 image look like a K10D image than vice versa...
07-04-2011, 03:42 PM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
I really wish you guys would quit! I've been dying to upgrade my K10D to a K5, but all these comments are killing that! Dang you...
Borrow one, rent one, whatever. Shoot one for a week. You'll see.
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, dslr, format, k10d, k5, medium, photography, quality
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-5 vs Nikon D7000 image quality seliscan Pentax K-5 5 11-02-2010 01:54 AM
K10d image quality question/issue vagabond79 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 7 11-12-2009 12:29 PM
Image Quality of K10D versus K-x BobRad Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 10-31-2009 06:09 PM
Pentax Optio A30 image quality falconeye Pentax Compact Cameras 2 10-16-2008 10:36 AM
Pentax K10D - RAW or jpeg for maximum image quality? rrobinson54 Photographic Technique 31 09-09-2007 11:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:55 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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