[house]

I disagree. Today using modern software it is easy to produce a HDR image that looks natural with bracketed exposures.

I often struggle even with pixelshift files. You have to loose contrast somewhere when you compress it. Usually I lift the exposure because I underexposed to preserve highlights. I find the appearance shifts in small ways that makes it look unnatural. A 'correct' exposure always looks best for me but then you may loose detail you want.

[pschlute]

I often struggle even with pixelshift files. You have to loose contrast somewhere when you compress it. Usually I lift the exposure because I underexposed to preserve highlights. I find the appearance shifts in small ways that makes it look unnatural. A 'correct' exposure always looks best for me but then you may loose detail you want.

Pixel shift files are all taken at the same exposure. Nothing like a HDR merge.

A HDR merge is done using 3 or 5 or 7 or even more exposures of the same image. Use the right software and you will get a better image than "correct exposure"....whatever that is.

[house]

Pixel shift files are all taken at the same exposure. Nothing like a HDR merge.

A HDR merge is done using 3 or 5 or 7 or even more exposures of the same image. Use the right software and you will get a better image that "correct exposure"....whatever that is.

I know what HDR is, just used the pixelshift example to explain how I find even modestly high dynamic range can still be quite difficult to manage.

[pschlute]

I know what HDR is, just used the pixelshift example to explain how I find even modestly high dynamic range can still be quite difficult to manage.

PS is not HDR

[house]

PS is not HDR

That's exactly what I said above.

[pschlute]

That's exactly what I said above.

It really is not. I am struggling to understand your point about HDR merges. What software do you use for it. Maybe that is the issue ?

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

If you want to compare them, the best place is probably Photons to Photos.

It is a great site but you always have to consider that the data is not based on a normalized exposure. For one camera it can have a drastically larger exposure over another.

While PhotoDR can give a you useful information seldom does it tell you everything. one of the more important is the SNR over the entire tonal range this has for more important aspects to most people photography
A great deal of people think it is the absolute DR but seldom do many ever hit the bottom of that DR Take the D7200 it has a rather large DR but it is the SNR over the tonal range that diminishes IQ with any editing done to the lower tonal ranges while having a larger DR for a cropped camera.

People also get fixated on the SNR at 18% while this can again be helpful much of the time its the lower tonal ranges that really reduce color accuracy and how noise will appear and how much you can push the final image.

A classic example is to look at a blue sky this often times where noise and blotching happen, all of the time that tonal range easily fall well within the DR the noise causes us issue. It is the signal within that tonal range that is causing us issues

I will also add that Photon to photo is very nice and easy way to understand how to use your camera to optimize your IQ based on how the camera operates, this can be done by looking at the other areas of the site

---

Last edited by Ian Stuart Forsyth; 11-30-2021 at 10:24 PM.

[stevebrot]

I disagree. Today using modern software it is easy to produce a HDR image that looks natural with bracketed exposures.

I concur. One does not have to apply tone mapping over HDR unless the desire is to be garish.


Steve

[Jonathan Mac]

To try to bring this thread back on track, rather than a discussion of the merits of dynamic range, the difference between the K200D and the K-.3 (the only two DSLRs I've owned) is sixteen points in DXOmark's scoring system. That's quite a difference, and the K200D was very good for APS-C of it's generation.

I don't think you can argue that having a poorer sensor overall makes for better photos and a very important part of shopping around for a new DSLR is checking the quality of the sensor in the model you're considering. These days of course, the only manufacturer still producing cameras with markedly worse sensors in them (not all models though, these days) is Canon. For anything else there's not much need to worry, but it's nice to know what sort of jump you're making if you're coming from a much older generation of technology.

[house]

I don't think you can argue that having a poorer sensor overall makes for better photos and a very important part of shopping around for a new DSLR is checking the quality of the sensor in the model you're considering.

The CCD crowd is real and numerous!

[Rush2112]

The other day I wanted to compare my K-3's sensor to some newer models and was surprised to find that all the newer Pentaxes are missing - the K1 II, K-70, KP and K-S2 are all missing. The K-3 III is missing too but then that only just came out really.

Sensors Database - DxOMark

Take a look at this chart with other cameras using a 26mp BSI sensor. Mostly the K3III blows away everything else on the chart using a 26mp BSI sensor, two stops better than everything else from 400 ISO through 25,600 ISO, with exception to the X-Pro3 which it leads by a full stop or more at most of the ISO settings.

What's really telling is comparing it to some full frame cameras from Nikon, especially the D780 and D850 that are highly regarded. In my comparisons here in my home lab, these figures ring true. I have many Nikon and Canon cameras and I am blown away at the K3III's performance compared to them. Now that ACR is adjusted to handle the K3III files, I can see a fair comparison to when I did my three part review last year.

[4Vn_Shotter]

If you want to compare them, the best place is probably Photons to Photos. https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm

Loook like they need data for k70. Just wonder how can we help? I'm sure we have many k70 in the forum

[luftfluss]

Loook like they need data for k70. Just wonder how can we help? I'm sure we have many k70 in the forum

K-70 is in their database.