Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

filorp · 01-13-2009, 03:56 PM

i just get new toy: k20d to complete the couple (k10+k20) and what i have noticed is very dramatic... it come to light that new k20 doesnt have less noises than my 2 years old k10d and i would say case is worse: k20 loses. Anyone had any experience with comparing those two cameras regarding noises? I was comparing at AWB and the same lens the same light... fact is that k20 reproduces more details, and when i was comparing cameras with chosen WB according to light conditions, results was opposite... does anybody know something about it? Any advice?

Marc Sabatella · 01-13-2009, 05:54 PM

Were you comparing images at the same sizes, or were making the comparison unfair to the K20D by blowing it up bigger just because it had more pixels? Could you post sample images?

filorp · 01-13-2009, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

Were you comparing images at the same sizes, or were making the comparison unfair to the K20D by blowing it up bigger just because it had more pixels? Could you post sample images?

There you go.... Gues which one is from k10? Which from k20.

Best regards!
http://en.fotoalbum.eu/filorp2/a209350/slideshow

kenyee · 01-13-2009, 07:26 PM

filorp: did you turn on NR on the K20D? It's turned *completely* off by default and is on for the K10D by default. I changed mine to "weakest".
Those images also look underexposed...neither camera is going to do well w/ underexposed images...

Marc Sabatella · 01-13-2009, 07:28 PM

Hmm. Neither looks particularly fabulous, and if there is supposed to be a one-stop advantage to the K20D, you couldn't prove it by these pictures. Is this ISO 1600 on both cameras? #1 is probably better overall, but the noise in the black plug is better controlled in #2. Although it looks like #2 has heavier noise reduction applied, and perhaps is not focused quite as well or is suffering from some camera shake, such that some detail has been smeared away in the texture of the wall. So it might look better overall but show more noise in the black plug if those issues were addressed.

filorp · 01-14-2009, 05:33 AM

i have left EXIFs, so both images are 1600iso 100% crops, nr on (on the k20 weak nr) Below are day light shots this time i have switch nr off...
Fotoalbum.eu - Create Your Free Online Fotoalbum
something else more convincing:
Fotoalbum.eu - Create Your Free Online Fotoalbum
will you help me to determin whether im supposed to send it back or not?
i suspect that k10 switchs on nr on high iso regardles what you chose, exactly like k20 do it on iso 3200 and higher but i cant find it on the k10 manual; pictures from k10 looks like nr is on...

palmor · 01-14-2009, 06:06 AM

Both those examples don't look like anything I've experienced at ISO 1600 for either the K10 or K20. Have these been PP at all? I ask because (at least IMO) when using high ISO you really have to be good at getting the exposure as close to perfect as possible. If you have to increase/decrease it by any significant amount then the noise will just pop, although I do feel like I have a little more room to play with when using the K20 vs the K10 and I like the pattern of the noise better with the K20.

I sold my K10 when I got my K20 so I don't have any direct comparisons but these are the type of results I see when using ISO 1600 and getting the exposure correct in camera

K10:
Ice Hotel photo - palmor photos at pbase.com
Trish by fire light photo - palmor photos at pbase.com

K20:
Northern Cardinal photo - palmor photos at pbase.com
Ash at Home photo - palmor photos at pbase.com

John

filorp · 01-14-2009, 07:58 AM

Yeah, i know about proper exposure and haw it effects to the noise but the problem is when you make allowance for shadows - lokks like k20 simply loses there... and im afraid its a conclusin...

kenyee · 01-14-2009, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by filorp

i have left EXIFs, so both images are 1600iso 100% crops, nr on (on the k20 weak nr) Below are day light shots this time i have switch nr off...
Fotoalbum.eu - Create Your Free Online Fotoalbum

Both of these still look a little underexposed.
Some people dial in +1ev for the K20D because they think it underexposes (mine seems ok). One ugly "feature" of the K20D is it seems to have a bit excessive chroma noise in shadows (the theory is it's because they used a 14-bit ADC instead of the K10D's 22-bit ADC) but it looks less blotchy than the K10D's noise. Also, the higher ISO you push the K20D, the more you have to get the exposure exactly right.

You should see roughly 1 stop improvement in noise between the K10D and K20D. Pixel peep and ISO1600 on the K20D should look like ISO800 on the K10D. If this isn't true, you should see if you can exchange it if you bought it locally.

I prefer using only ISO100-400 on the K10D and ISO100-800 on the K20D. The K20D's ISO1600 is ok in bright enough light, but I don't like how noisy it gets in low light (it's still ok when resized down so I'll use it if I have to).

filorp · 01-14-2009, 01:43 PM

Thanx guys - your responds has opened my eyes to some aspects of exposure and noises i didnt realised...

Gooshin · 01-14-2009, 01:46 PM

photographing a scene with no contrast or light is going to produce shit pictures no matter which camera you use.

steve500 · 01-14-2009, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by Gooshin

photographing a scene with no contrast or light is going to produce shit pictures no matter which camera you use.

word........

rfortson · 01-14-2009, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by Gooshin

photographing a scene with no contrast or light is going to produce shit pictures no matter which camera you use.

Yes, but Canon's shit doesn't stink.

At least, that's what everyone says.

01-14-2009, 05:33 AM	#6
filorp Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Aberdeen Scotland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 398 Original Poster	i have left EXIFs, so both images are 1600iso 100% crops, nr on (on the k20 weak nr) Below are day light shots this time i have switch nr off... Fotoalbum.eu - Create Your Free Online Fotoalbum something else more convincing: Fotoalbum.eu - Create Your Free Online Fotoalbum will you help me to determin whether im supposed to send it back or not? i suspect that k10 switchs on nr on high iso regardles what you chose, exactly like k20 do it on iso 3200 and higher but i cant find it on the k10 manual; pictures from k10 looks like nr is on... Last edited by filorp; 01-14-2009 at 06:10 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K200, K20 or K10	Jools	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	05-05-2010 05:42 PM
k10 or k20	houstonmacgregor	Pentax DSLR Discussion	13	03-06-2010 10:37 AM
used K10 VS used K20	MacKay	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7	02-17-2010 11:23 PM
K10 vs K20 - go	thePiRaTE!!	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	03-09-2008 03:28 PM

01-13-2009, 03:56 PM	#1
filorp Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Aberdeen Scotland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 398	k10 vs k20 reg noises i just get new toy: k20d to complete the couple (k10+k20) and what i have noticed is very dramatic... it come to light that new k20 doesnt have less noises than my 2 years old k10d and i would say case is worse: k20 loses. Anyone had any experience with comparing those two cameras regarding noises? I was comparing at AWB and the same lens the same light... fact is that k20 reproduces more details, and when i was comparing cameras with chosen WB according to light conditions, results was opposite... does anybody know something about it? Any advice?

01-13-2009, 05:54 PM	#2
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Were you comparing images at the same sizes, or were making the comparison unfair to the K20D by blowing it up bigger just because it had more pixels? Could you post sample images?

01-13-2009, 07:04 PM	#3
filorp Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Aberdeen Scotland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 398 Original Poster	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella Were you comparing images at the same sizes, or were making the comparison unfair to the K20D by blowing it up bigger just because it had more pixels? Could you post sample images? There you go.... Gues which one is from k10? Which from k20. Best regards! http://en.fotoalbum.eu/filorp2/a209350/slideshow

01-13-2009, 07:26 PM	#4
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	filorp: did you turn on NR on the K20D? It's turned completely off by default and is on for the K10D by default. I changed mine to "weakest". Those images also look underexposed...neither camera is going to do well w/ underexposed images...

01-13-2009, 07:28 PM	#5
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Hmm. Neither looks particularly fabulous, and if there is supposed to be a one-stop advantage to the K20D, you couldn't prove it by these pictures. Is this ISO 1600 on both cameras? #1 is probably better overall, but the noise in the black plug is better controlled in #2. Although it looks like #2 has heavier noise reduction applied, and perhaps is not focused quite as well or is suffering from some camera shake, such that some detail has been smeared away in the texture of the wall. So it might look better overall but show more noise in the black plug if those issues were addressed.

01-14-2009, 06:06 AM	#7
palmor Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: North of Boston, MA Posts: 798	Both those examples don't look like anything I've experienced at ISO 1600 for either the K10 or K20. Have these been PP at all? I ask because (at least IMO) when using high ISO you really have to be good at getting the exposure as close to perfect as possible. If you have to increase/decrease it by any significant amount then the noise will just pop, although I do feel like I have a little more room to play with when using the K20 vs the K10 and I like the pattern of the noise better with the K20. I sold my K10 when I got my K20 so I don't have any direct comparisons but these are the type of results I see when using ISO 1600 and getting the exposure correct in camera K10: Ice Hotel photo - palmor photos at pbase.com Trish by fire light photo - palmor photos at pbase.com K20: Northern Cardinal photo - palmor photos at pbase.com Ash at Home photo - palmor photos at pbase.com John

01-14-2009, 07:58 AM	#8
filorp Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Aberdeen Scotland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 398 Original Poster	Yeah, i know about proper exposure and haw it effects to the noise but the problem is when you make allowance for shadows - lokks like k20 simply loses there... and im afraid its a conclusin...

01-14-2009, 08:52 AM	#9
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Originally posted by filorp i have left EXIFs, so both images are 1600iso 100% crops, nr on (on the k20 weak nr) Below are day light shots this time i have switch nr off... Fotoalbum.eu - Create Your Free Online Fotoalbum Both of these still look a little underexposed. Some people dial in +1ev for the K20D because they think it underexposes (mine seems ok). One ugly "feature" of the K20D is it seems to have a bit excessive chroma noise in shadows (the theory is it's because they used a 14-bit ADC instead of the K10D's 22-bit ADC) but it looks less blotchy than the K10D's noise. Also, the higher ISO you push the K20D, the more you have to get the exposure exactly right. You should see roughly 1 stop improvement in noise between the K10D and K20D. Pixel peep and ISO1600 on the K20D should look like ISO800 on the K10D. If this isn't true, you should see if you can exchange it if you bought it locally. I prefer using only ISO100-400 on the K10D and ISO100-800 on the K20D. The K20D's ISO1600 is ok in bright enough light, but I don't like how noisy it gets in low light (it's still ok when resized down so I'll use it if I have to).

01-14-2009, 01:43 PM	#10
filorp Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Aberdeen Scotland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 398 Original Poster	Thanx guys - your responds has opened my eyes to some aspects of exposure and noises i didnt realised...

01-14-2009, 01:46 PM	#11
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	photographing a scene with no contrast or light is going to produce shit pictures no matter which camera you use.

01-14-2009, 02:02 PM	#12
steve500 Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Salt Lake City Posts: 86	Originally posted by Gooshin photographing a scene with no contrast or light is going to produce shit pictures no matter which camera you use. word........

01-14-2009, 02:46 PM	#13
rfortson Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Houston TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,129	Originally posted by Gooshin photographing a scene with no contrast or light is going to produce shit pictures no matter which camera you use. Yes, but Canon's shit doesn't stink. At least, that's what everyone says.

k10 vs k20 reg noises

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!