[john5100]

Thank you, here's another one at ISO 5000 where I exposed the to the right and cleaned in LR4


ISO 8000 and this was just see if you can get it kind of thing.

[Ryan Cole]

Thank you, here's another one at ISO 5000 where I exposed the to the right and cleaned in LR4


ISO 8000 and this was just see if you can get it kind of thing.

Nice couple of shots. It seems a fair amount of detail was retained even at iso 8000. I may have to give my K-R another chance and spend a bit more time on the noise reduction.

[Na Horuk]

The 16MP Pentax cameras handle noise better than the 12MP ones. The other thing is, if you scale down the image or print it, the noise will also be reduced. And if you shoot raw with some good post processing, you can use all sorts of anti-noise software (topaz? noiseninja?)
Generally speaking, newer technology has better high ISO performance. And often bigger sensor will have better noise control as well (when compared to a smaller sensor).
I keep my K-r's max iso much lower than on my K-01. Overall, you might want to consider buying a K-01, while its still such a good deal. (costs less than a lens) I think it has much better IQ than the K-r, but the K-r has its strengths. So these two cameras kind of complement each other.

[bobpur]

Hi Bobpur. In what way is the K-R better than the fuji at capturing the scene as it appears to the naked eye? I do understand though that there are other factors affecting the noise. That's why I decided to test them head to head in a controlled test, as my casual experience was showing a difference I wanted to confirm.

The FUJI seems to make a punchier color and contrast pic much like their film colours whereas the Pentax keeps it looking real.
Regardless if it is from RAW or JPG the look is always very subjective but most default settings are accented.
The colour of the wooden desk is the thing that stands out to me. The tonal range and colour rendition are more important than any noise,
what used to be called "grain" and was actually used as part of the image.
A print is the only real way to compare side by side against the original scene, something that shows on a monitor at 72 dpi won't look
the same at 500 dpi on paper.

[Ryan Cole]

The 16MP Pentax cameras handle noise better than the 12MP ones. The other thing is, if you scale down the image or print it, the noise will also be reduced. And if you shoot raw with some good post processing, you can use all sorts of anti-noise software (topaz? noiseninja?)
Generally speaking, newer technology has better high ISO performance. And often bigger sensor will have better noise control as well (when compared to a smaller sensor).
I keep my K-r's max iso much lower than on my K-01. Overall, you might want to consider buying a K-01, while its still such a good deal. (costs less than a lens) I think it has much better IQ than the K-r, but the K-r has its strengths. So these two cameras kind of complement each other.

Well I just thought I would update everyone and thanks very much for all the replies by the way.. It turns out, after doing some reading and confirming for myself that Aperture sucks for noise reduction on raw files. It would appear that the built in reduction doesn't perform very well either. I tried neat image plugin for aperture last night, and what a difference! It has made shots at iso 3200, 4000 very useable. I'm sure any of the other recommended noise reduction software packages would perform similarly well and a huge improvement compared to aperture.

[audiobomber]

I'm reasonably sure that the X100 uses the same Sony sensor as the K-r, so raw noise is the same. Are you sure the Tamron 17-50 isn't the source of your trouble at the wedding? That lens has a reputation for missing focus, regardless of which make of camera it's used on.