Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-11-2015, 06:38 PM - 1 Like   #1
Pentaxian
Wingincamera's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Spanaway, WA. USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 571
Pentax K-200 vs Nikon D810

I thought this was a interesting



---------- Post added 06-11-15 at 06:40 PM ----------

Woops, I guess this has already been posted.

06-11-2015, 10:01 PM   #2
Pentaxian
esrandall's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sumner, WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 965
Already posted, but still enjoyable for the second time
06-11-2015, 11:01 PM   #3
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,620
That was very entertaining.
I was actually rooting for the underdog in this one, but let's face it.
This little experiment relied heavily on a highly selective set of ideals. Which wouldn't like carry very far in RW shooting conditions. Which "sort-of" reminds me of Pentax's pixel shift technology. Which looks nothing short of staggering when successful, though so narrow in the usage range that it almost seems more like a teaser than a feature.
06-12-2015, 11:48 AM   #4
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,442
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
That was very entertaining.
My thoughts as well, she a little more so than him

The conditions for the match-up were sort of corny unless your consider that the the K200D is one of the better choices available for dirt cheap dSLR, though a K20D would not be a whole lot more. The real points of distinction outside of format and resolution would be the lenses used. The Sigma 24-105/4 (Art) is a distinctly good lens and a real value at its $899 USD price point. The Pentax 18-55/3.5-5.6 v1 is good for what it is, but clearly not in the same league. I guess it fits with the dirt cheap aspect of the comparison, though I suspect that if a Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 (C) were mounted to the Pentax, the comparison might not have required all the PP voodoo.


Steve

06-13-2015, 07:46 AM   #5
Site Supporter
joebob's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 168
I enjoyed the music.
06-14-2015, 03:15 PM   #6
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
Not sure why he picks an almost 10 year old model with a CCD, and a lousy lens, but OK. Photoshop can work wonders.
06-15-2015, 05:57 AM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
What I liked about it was the "where there's a will, there's a way" attitude which is one of the reasons I like photography as a hobby. While I am a gear head, and have a hard time resisting obtaining new to me gear for different situations, I also enjoy devising work arounds when the gear I have with me doesn't really suit the situation ideally. . .

Although I don't use the PP tricks illustrated, I do occasionally spend a lot of time tweaking images if they are worthwhile, and enjoyed seeing what can be done at the extreme.

Scott
06-15-2015, 12:49 PM   #8
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,442
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
Not sure why he picks an almost 10 year old model with a CCD, and a lousy lens, but OK. Photoshop can work wonders.
Because it is cheap and capable of very good results even with the "lousy" lens and pedestrian CCD sensor. The comparison was intended to show that with appropriate care and PP you can get results comparable to kit costing 50x more.


Steve

(...not really sure were the CCD comes in here, they were shooting in bright winter daylight. Even with CMOS at base ISO the D810 has superior signal-to-noise ratio.)

06-15-2015, 02:45 PM   #9
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Because it is cheap and capable of very good results even with the "lousy" lens and pedestrian CCD sensor. The comparison was intended to show that with appropriate care and PP you can get results comparable to kit costing 50x more.


Steve

(...not really sure were the CCD comes in here, they were shooting in bright winter daylight. Even with CMOS at base ISO the D810 has superior signal-to-noise ratio.)
If the kind of difference in performance that exists at the enlargements in question matters at all, they did not show the Pentax to be capable of good results. The results with normal PP looked pretty bad. What was then applied was extraordinary effort. Photoshop can do just about anything with enough effort. With time, talent and software, you don't need a camera at all.
06-15-2015, 03:30 PM   #10
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,442
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
If the kind of difference in performance that exists at the enlargements in question matters at all, they did not show the Pentax to be capable of good results. The results with normal PP looked pretty bad. What was then applied was extraordinary effort. Photoshop can do just about anything with enough effort. With time, talent and software, you don't need a camera at all.
After reviewing the video, I definitely agree. My K10D had the same sensor and I was usually able to use the kit lens to better advantage than the comparison image with normal PP they used. I suspect they were shooting both cameras at ISO 800 or above to prove the point of his PP solution. The initial shot could have been nicely shot at f/8 and ISO 100 hand held and delivered better than what they showed.


Steve
06-15-2015, 03:36 PM   #11
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,442
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
they did not show the Pentax to be capable of good results.
I was just wondering why they did not do the comparison using a D40X with cheapo Nikon kit lens that shipped with the camera
06-24-2015, 01:36 PM   #12
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
After reviewing the video, I definitely agree. My K10D had the same sensor and I was usually able to use the kit lens to better advantage than the comparison image with normal PP they used. I suspect they were shooting both cameras at ISO 800 or above to prove the point of his PP solution. The initial shot could have been nicely shot at f/8 and ISO 100 hand held and delivered better than what they showed.

Steve
My K10d is also capable of much better than what they showed. Unless someone were making a billboard out of it, I think most people would have found that scene reproduced just fine.
06-27-2015, 09:46 PM   #13
Pentaxian
kyteflyer's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,338
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
My K10d is also capable of much better than what they showed. Unless someone were making a billboard out of it, I think most people would have found that scene reproduced just fine.
Agreed. I sometimes wonder why people go to such extremes to "prove" some point or other. The vid was interesting, but I really could not be bothered doing what he did with his K200D. Mine works just fine as it is (especially since I had the sensor professionally cleaned). Not as sharp as a D810, but why even bother trying to make it so. That seems like a massive waste of time.
06-30-2015, 06:52 PM   #14
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
QuoteOriginally posted by kyteflyer Quote
Agreed. I sometimes wonder why people go to such extremes to "prove" some point or other. The vid was interesting, but I really could not be bothered doing what he did with his K200D. Mine works just fine as it is (especially since I had the sensor professionally cleaned). Not as sharp as a D810, but why even bother trying to make it so. That seems like a massive waste of time.
I have used that multiple shot technique for cameras all the way up to the K3. It can be useful, but not that often. Interestingly, the newer Sony cameras have it built in. They rapid fire and make a single jpeg out of 3 to 5 exposures. It does get rid of some noise.
07-01-2015, 06:53 PM   #15
Pentaxian
kyteflyer's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,338
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
I have used that multiple shot technique for cameras all the way up to the K3. It can be useful, but not that often. Interestingly, the newer Sony cameras have it built in. They rapid fire and make a single jpeg out of 3 to 5 exposures. It does get rid of some noise.
I think its fine to use that technique if theres something you want to do which can't otherwise be done. I've never been bothered by the K200D noise, I tend to use it when I know I can get some decent noise reduction via DFine2 or similar without compromising the shot. Otherwise, I'll use my K5 instead, or X100, depending on circumstance.

Interesting about the Sony cams.
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, k-200 vs nikon, pentax k-200 vs, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Comparison K-3 II vs Nikon D810 and Pentax 645Z by imaging Resource Cyril_K5 Pentax K-3 22 06-06-2015 03:51 PM
FF vs APS-C - D810 vs K200D - $4K vs $200 wtlwdwgn General Photography 9 04-08-2015 11:11 AM
Nikon D600 vs. Pentax K-3 strangeboy Pentax DSLR Discussion 16 11-07-2014 05:38 AM
Nikon D810 Officially Announced Adam Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 34 06-28-2014 07:04 AM
Pentax K 200/f2.5 vs DA 200/f.28? Mr_Canuck Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 11-03-2012 05:11 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:30 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