Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-17-2012, 09:55 AM   #16
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,644
Agreed V5planet. I would add that the K-x has higher dynamic range than a K100DS. This is verifiable at DXOMark by comparing a Nikon D40 (same Sony CCD sensor as K100D) to the K-x.

01-17-2012, 10:11 AM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,036
QuoteOriginally posted by aruk5 Quote
.... its really bad manufacturing of the sensor! Wonder how they got away with such a thing! In their ads Pentax make tall claims about how great the pics look when clicked with the K-x when a serious issue such as a lack of detail [especially in smaller objects] is there with this camera!
You are throwing the baby out with the bath water. You are way over reaching in your conclusions with a faulty analysis.

First of all its is NOT bad manufacturing of the sensor of the sensor. Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, etc. have all switched over to CMOS for a variety of reasons. Power is the primary reason. Batteries only hold so much, and the CCD consumes 100x more power than the CMOS, and the consumption only increases as the density of the chip increases. However CMOS inherently produces more noise for the same pixel density. There are characteristics of each type of sensor - CCD and CMOS that perform differently. What it comes down to is the trade off that the camera designers have made in terms of designing a complete system.

Pentax by virtue of their K5 has found a way to image at a lower noise threshold than Nikon (D7000) using the same Sony CMOS sensor. Its the application of technology. You also have to understand the price point. The Kx was an entry level camera that is a generation old. Compare it with the same entry level models from Canon, Nikon and Sony and you will find exactly the same problem. Cost of CCD manufacturing is relative high, and thus the sensors cost more - hence, their use at higher densities in the higher end cameras - i.e., 645D. You are welcome to pay $10,000 for one of the best CCD sensors - it also comes with a much larger body form factor which also supports a larger battery.

You also have the option of post processing to your level of noise in the images.

01-17-2012, 10:15 AM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,731
My 1st post here in quite a while!

QuoteOriginally posted by aruk5 Quote
So I wasnt imagining after all when I felt the k-x images lacked detail compared to the K100d. For a while I was thinking it was a fault with my camera's sensors but after reading some of your replies I can understand its not! its really bad manufacturing of the sensor! Wonder how they got away with such a thing! In their ads Pentax make tall claims about how great the pics look when clicked with the K-x when a serious issue such as a lack of detail [especially in smaller objects] is there with this camera!

By the way I wonder if this problem of pentax's cmos sensor based camera showing less detail is only restricted to pentax cameras and not to cmos sensor based cameras made by the biggies such as Canon or Nikon. Any of u having such cameras might wanna share your experience in regard to the issue of detail.
Aruk, I think you are misunderstanding what other folks here have said. The K-x does capture more detail than the K100D. I have had the K100D, K-m (10mp CCD) and currently the K-x. There is a certain look and crispness to CCD-based images @ low ISO that, IMO, is better than CMOS. But "crisper" does not mean "more detailed". There is no "really bad manufacturing of the sensor", it works well and Pentax seems to get as much (or more) out of it than other camera manufacturers.

QuoteQuote:
Thats another major major gripe I have this camera, its tendency to blow out the highlights! Inspite of lots of trial and error I kept getting shots with lots of blown highlights! its worse when I shoot street scenes with lots of lights and darks at the same time. In order for the dark areas to appear clearly I would expose more but the highlights would get blown way too much and there was no way to recover it in raw either! By the way this is regard to handheld shots in the night! When I click with a tripod and stop down the aperture then I get a better image but the purpose gets defeated as my aim is really to shoot handheld shots at night!
By the way I will try the settings mentioned in ur reply and see if it works!
Yes, the K-x does expose brighter than the K100D, more in line with other camera manufacturers, although still not as bright (generally) as Canon. However, the K-x certainly gives you more latitude with recovering highlights and shadow areas than the K100D, because the K-x has greater dynamic range. If you are shooting jpeg, you can make adjustments to the color and contrast in the camera's menu, this might help you.

For those who think that CMOS is a relatively new sensor technology, many of those VGA-resolution cameras that began penetrating the consumer market 2 decades ago had CMOS sensors.
01-17-2012, 12:28 PM   #19
Veteran Member
ihasa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: West Midlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,054
Yep there's a difference between capturing more detail, and looking sharper and more detailed when images are viewed on screen. I found the Pentax 6mp images to be very crisp looking and highly sharpened. More so than my K7. I think this is because, viewed on screen, the sharpening applied at the 'pixel level' looks more obvious on a smaller image.

Anyway, looking at the sample images on dpreview proves the Kx resolves more detail than the K100d:



I'll let you decide which is the Kx and which is the scaled up K100d image :wink:

What happens if we scale *down* the Kx image to the same size as the K100d?



On top is the sharpened K100d file, then the straight K100d, then the straight (resized) Kx, then the resized and sharpened Kx file on the bottom.

01-17-2012, 01:28 PM   #20
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Romania, Cluj-Napoca
Posts: 8
Gentlemen,
i had a k100d for several years and it was a pleasure to shoot with it. Wonderful images , great colors and contrast. After achieving a very high shutter count, i sold it and bought the new K-r.
It was a big big disappointment. Great "Pentax" colors gone, weird noise and unpleasant artifacts, and the worst thing: the dreaded "mirror flap" with my precious M-series lenses.

Sorry Pentax, but i cannot bear such a big disappointment.
01-17-2012, 01:43 PM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dallas / Yucatan
Posts: 994
So, if someone already had a K200D and decided to keep it, using the K200D for brightly lit (low ISO) outdoor shots would be a good use. And the weather-proofing would come in handy as well. If someone were to then acquire a K-x or K-r or whatever the K-r replacement is, that would make a good "indoor" or low-light exterior shots (high ISO) camera.

I mean, just considering that both were available, that would be the most straightforward (less PP) way of using the equipment to their particularly suited capabilities, wouldn't it? I'm just trying to digest the CCD / CMOS and other discussion into practical advice for myself.

Please feel free to correct me. And by the way, I still love my K200D, but have been eye-balling some type of replacement / or supplemental camera for awhile.
01-17-2012, 04:23 PM   #22
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by aruk5 Quote
So I wasnt imagining after all when I felt the k-x images lacked detail compared to the K100d.
No, as others have said, you have completely misunderstood what it being said. It *is* your imagination - all else equal, the K-x will show *more*, not less, detail than the K100D. It's just that there are some things that can go give the *illusion* that the K100D has more detail (for instance, comparing at different print or display sizes), and there are also things that you can do wrong when shooting with *either* camera that can cause you to lose detail, but you are more likely to make those kind of mistakes (like blowing highlights) with the camera you are less familiar with.

You might consider doing a controlled test - same scene with both cameras using the same lens, same exposure settings, etc, tripod and timer to remove camera shake as a variable, etc - then posting the results here.
01-17-2012, 10:57 PM   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,812
Taken from the standardized test images on Imaging-Resource.com:


Showing the full sized 100% crops then I also downsized the K-x crop to the equivalent of 6Mp.

Seems to me to be pretty obvious the larger full-sized 100% K-x crop shows more detail than the smaller full-sized 100% K100D crop.

But when downsized to the 6Mp equivalent the K-x crop does not show much (if any) advantage over the K100D.
One might argue that the K100D maybe punchier - but that is mainly the difference between the default Bright Tone/Color setting where:

Pentax K100D @ dpReview:
QuoteQuote:
The K100D's color response was quite similar to that of previous Pentax digital SLR's, that is quite highly saturated (vivid) in the default 'Bright' image tone, as can also be seen earlier in this review, it can lead to color clipping in certain situations (such as red flowers in direct sunlight).
Pentax K-x @ dpReview:
QuoteQuote:
The K-x produces an almost identical color response to its bigger brother, the K-7. As we've seen in other reviews the standard hues are also very similar to most other SLRs in this class, with minor saturation and brightness differences but essentially the same color response.
So the K-x default setting is more muted compared to the K100D default setting even though both claim to be "Bright" - therefore the K100D on default will look punchier as it is more saturated and has higher contrast.

To me it was over-blown enough that I shot with the Natural color setting on the K100D.


Last edited by UnknownVT; 01-17-2012 at 11:41 PM.
01-18-2012, 06:53 AM   #24
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 73
Original Poster
Hi all!

Thank you posting replies and providing lots of useful information about the k-x.

Apologies to anyone who felt my observations about the k-x were incorrect and thank you for clarifying on some of them.

Someone mentioned that cameras were manufactured with cmos to increase battery power. Thats partially true but I think its more to do with saving manufacturing costs than about us users saving on battery. Cmos based sensors are cheaper to manufacture than ccd. If ccd supposedly uses more battery power why do my duracell 2400 batteries last twice as longer in my k100d as compared to k-x? by the way i am talking about shooting pics without using live view, lcd switched off and no af [just using a prime]. Even when using the kit lens with af on the k100d gives more shots than k-x.

When I said bad manufacturing I was referring to dslrs coming with sensors which have certain limitations to them as the manufacturers want to cut down costs and sell their cameras to as many ppl as they can! A common problem with cmos sensors is the rolling shutter effect when you shoot videos. Doesnt matter if u have a 5d mk2 or a k-x you always get the rolling shutter effect when you pan the scene. This can be corrected by implementation of a global shutter but dslr manufacturers chose not to and sold you a camera which is technically useless to capture video! Its such things which made me say Bad manufacturing.

Technically the k-x might be superior to k100d in many aspects but there are still some areas where it lags behind but i guess we need to accept the k-x limitations and try to make the best out of it

Oh one more thing, as I told you all I like to do night time photography. Can anyone recommend a good setting with the k-x for handheld shooting of street scenes which have a mixture of very bright lights and darkness? The setting should obviously solve the problem of blown highlights and at sametime also expose the dark regions well. I usually used my sigma 28mm prime [the legacy one] and as its a fully manual lens there wont be any auto aperture features when using in av mode. I am willing to go upto iso 1600 max and none above as the noise will be too much to handle. I am also willing to expose 1 to 2 stops less as I can recover some of the dark regions using dcu or lightroom. Its ofcourse the blown highlights which never get recovered thats causing the problem. So any good settings recommended will be highly appreciated.

Last edited by aruk5; 01-18-2012 at 09:50 AM.
01-18-2012, 10:26 AM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Plymouth
Posts: 359
QuoteOriginally posted by aruk5 Quote
. Can anyone recommend a good setting with the k-x for handheld shooting of street scenes which have a mixture of very bright lights and darkness? The setting should obviously solve the problem of blown highlights and at sametime also expose the dark regions well. I usually used my sigma 28mm prime [the legacy one] and as its a fully manual lens there wont be any auto aperture features when using in av mode. I am willing to go upto iso 1600 max and none above as the noise will be too much to handle. I am also willing to expose 1 to 2 stops less as I can recover some of the dark regions using dcu or lightroom. Its ofcourse the blown highlights which never get recovered thats causing the problem. So any good settings recommended will be highly appreciated.
Do you use the AE-L button at all? If not, that should solve most of your problems. Meter the part of the scene you want, lock the AE and recompose. I like to use centre-weighted or spot when using AE-L myself. If you already do this then I apologise for telling you what you already know.
01-18-2012, 01:14 PM   #26
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by aruk5 Quote
Someone mentioned that cameras were manufactured with cmos to increase battery power. Thats partially true but I think its more to do with saving manufacturing costs than about us users saving on battery. Cmos based sensors are cheaper to manufacture than ccd. If ccd supposedly uses more battery power why do my duracell 2400 batteries last twice as longer in my k100d as compared to k-x?
There are probably thousands of differences between the K100D and the K-x that could affect power consumption. assuming it is CCD versus CMOS is naive.

QuoteQuote:
A common problem with cmos sensors is the rolling shutter effect when you shoot video
I see, and CCD snesors are immune to that effect when shooting video? Let's see some of those K100D videos...

QuoteQuote:
a camera which is technically useless to capture video!
And yet millions of people manage to shoot video! Ovviously, not useless.

QuoteQuote:
Technically the k-x might be superior to k100d in many aspects but there are still some areas where it lags behind
Perhaps, but you have thus far failed to prove the existence of any.

if you want, though, I can name two offhand - no focus point indicators in viewfinder, mirror flips during optical DOF preview with manual lenses.

QuoteQuote:
Oh one more thing, as I told you all I like to do night time photography. Can anyone recommend a good setting with the k-x for handheld shooting of street scenes which have a mixture of very bright lights and darkness?
which direction the nearest library or bookstore is, set you feet in that direction. There are no magic camera settina that replace good old-fashioned understand of exposure.

QuoteQuote:
I usually used my sigma 28mm prime [the legacy one] and as its a fully manual lens there wont be any auto aperture features when using in av mode.
Not only that, there is no Av mode, period. When you put the dial in Av mode, the aperture ring is ignored, and it shoots wide open all the time. Only M mode works correctly with fully manual lenses. Furthermore, it defaults to center-weighted metering, which is incapable of evaluating individual areas of the frame in order to blown hghlights. so you need to think like a center weighted meter in deciding when and how much compensation to apply.
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, detail, dslr, k-x, k100d, lens, lots, objects, pentax, photography, ppl, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Abstract Figment of My Imagination Bob Harris Post Your Photos! 10 05-23-2011 09:21 AM
K-x Autofocus ..... Defect or imagination ... Nightwings Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 08-07-2010 03:20 PM
catching sky detail with people detail Genshu Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 04-15-2010 06:40 PM
Architecture with K100d and kit lens. Imagination building feronovak Post Your Photos! 4 04-27-2007 01:56 AM
Screen Captures of the Secret Mode of the K100D RiceHigh Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 02-16-2007 05:46 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:39 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