Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-28-2009, 09:21 PM   #46
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QUENSION: Is the OP not capable of speaking for him/herself? Your language makes it clear you know everything the OP thinks and means to say. However, I am not convinced: your inability to listen to others is only outdone by your presumptuousness.

There is nothing more I can do for you. I must move on. Best of luck to you--hopefully, someday, I'll see you posting some great ISO 3200 shots with the K20 here at the forum.

I'll leave you with why I came, because it has not yet sunk in for you. Please do not waste any more board space here on my account--I assure you, I will not read it.

kristoffon: - First off, I was a bit disappointed by high iso noise. After all the praise for the K20D's sensor and since it has iso 3200 I expected cleaner high iso but it appears to be about the same as the K200D - max useable is 800,.......

04-28-2009, 11:11 PM   #47
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 503
QuoteOriginally posted by random Quote
Not necessarily.

Suppose the camera gives the following exposure readings:

at iso3200: f1.4, 1/100
at iso6400: f1.4, 1/200

Cameras often underexpose and so lets assume that in this case the camera is underexposing by a stop. Underexposed images typically have a lot of noise at high-iso, so both of above shots would have more noise then they should. One option is to give +1EV to iso 6400 shot thus bringing it to a 1/100 exposure, giving it a proper exposure and reducing noise.

This would not be the same as shooting at ISO3200 + 0EV, because the ISO3200 shot at 1/100 would be an underexposed shot, with noise due to underexposure.

A well-exposed higher iso shot is typically cleaner than an under-exposed lower iso shot. Otherwise why would you ever use the higher iso mode.

So yes it is important to expose to the right and give a proper exposure to the image instead of under-exposing it since that induces noise.
Thats so true yet a concept that slips by me when shooting with the K20D. I try to see how low of noise I can get at high ISO in dim lighting. But I am not fully exposing to the right, and if need be raise ISO, so ISO3200 becomes cleaner than ISO1600, a simple yet easy to forget concept. Always expose to the right, if not enough shutter speed hand holding than increase the ISO, better than under exposing at a lower ISO (less noise) thanks
04-29-2009, 04:01 PM   #48
Veteran Member
kristoffon's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Brazil
Posts: 532
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
QUENSION: Is the OP not capable of speaking for him/herself? Your language makes it clear you know everything the OP thinks and means to say. However, I am not convinced: your inability to listen to others is only outdone by your presumptuousness.

There is nothing more I can do for you. I must move on. Best of luck to you--hopefully, someday, I'll see you posting some great ISO 3200 shots with the K20 here at the forum.

I'll leave you with why I came, because it has not yet sunk in for you. Please do not waste any more board space here on my account--I assure you, I will not read it.

kristoffon: - First off, I was a bit disappointed by high iso noise. After all the praise for the K20D's sensor and since it has iso 3200 I expected cleaner high iso but it appears to be about the same as the K200D - max useable is 800,.......
My dear, the one wasting board space here is YOU, not me.

If I took pictures to look at them in 800x600 I would use my camera phone, not a 14mp dslr. I can judge for myself if a given ISO is acceptable or not FOR MY VERY OWN PERSONAL PIXEL PEEPER TASTE , thank you very much.

F**k off.
04-29-2009, 07:45 PM   #49
Site Supporter
LeoTaylor's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Connecticut
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 679
QuoteOriginally posted by kristoffon Quote
Are you guys referring to JPEG or RAW? AFAIK, RAW is not supposed to have ANY noise reduction done by the camera, even if I set it to. I only shoot RAW on both cameras. ... .
I just came in from an evening of astrophotos with my K110D. I always use RAW and I choose between Noise Reduction and no NR depending on circumstances. Tonight I used both methods.

At least in a K1x0D the NR setting DOES affect long exposure RAW and I'm glad it does. I rather decide, not have the camera decide. The camera takes as long to capture the NR frame as the light frame. The NR subtracts the dark frame before storing the result to the memory card.

I know the K20D does weird things with NR so my experience may not apply.

05-01-2009, 12:57 AM   #50
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QuoteQuote:
Kristoffon: My dear, the one wasting board space here is YOU, not me.

If I took pictures to look at them in 800x600 I would use my camera phone, not a 14mp dslr. I can judge for myself if a given ISO is acceptable or not FOR MY VERY OWN PERSONAL PIXEL PEEPER TASTE , thank you very much.

F**k off.
Your introduction to me with "My Dear" strikes me that you have misinterpreted something. Let me explain.

When I wrote "Is the OP not capable of speaking for him/herself?" I did so because I had no idea if you were a male or female. Your name here "Kristoffon," is not gender specific. I have learned, in situations where the sex of whom I am writing about is unknown to me, to use pronouns in a gender-neutral way, so as not to offend anyone.

Next, the post in which you quote me above is entirely addressed to one person--that person is Quension--not you. If you re-read, carefully, you will see I opened my post with Quension's name, followed by the use of a colon. This means my comments are specifically reserved for Quension. So your reply "My dear, the one wasting board space here is YOU, not me." is without any substance whatsoever because my comment had nothing to do with you.

Also, you did make a claim and your opinion counts in that claim. But so do other opinions. You were asked to post a shot, supporting your claim, which you said you would do here:

QuoteQuote:
kristoffon: I'll definitely post an example shot later when I get back from work.
But you never did post a shot. My only point throughout this whole thread is, clearly, both the K200 & K20 have usable ISO over 800. My only effort in this thread, other than to support my opinion with others who felt the same way, was to give you information which would enable you to get more out of your high ISO shooting.

Finally, before you pull out your guns and fire manically, you need to get all the facts. I suggest you take an anger management class, coupled with an English composition course, then you will not barbarically address people with school-yard name calling and expletives. Frustration can be dealt with in functional ways--Best of luck to you.

BTW, my ISO 1250 shot above, looks great @ full resolution if you ever want to pixel peep it.
05-02-2009, 07:00 AM   #51
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: west coast USA
Posts: 206
QuoteOriginally posted by random Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by Quension Quote
if you're adjusting shutter speed or aperture to overexpose at a given ISO, you could just as well reduce ISO instead.
Cameras often underexpose and so lets assume that in this case the camera is underexposing by a stop. Underexposed images typically have a lot of noise at high-iso, so both of above shots would have more noise then they should. One option is to give +1EV to iso 6400 shot thus bringing it to a 1/100 exposure, giving it a proper exposure and reducing noise.
Right; I was talking about the idea of overexposing, then pulling back to the correct one in post, which is what the original ETTR technique and the referenced test did.

QuoteQuote:
A well-exposed higher iso shot is typically cleaner than an under-exposed lower iso shot. Otherwise why would you ever use the higher iso mode.

So yes it is important to expose to the right and give a proper exposure to the image instead of under-exposing it since that induces noise.
I'm in agreement here; that was the point of PentaxPoke's test and I said as much in my first response in the thread. Sorry that got lost in the ensuing .. er .. noise.
05-02-2009, 08:54 AM   #52
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: west coast USA
Posts: 206
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
QUENSION: Is the OP not capable of speaking for him/herself? Your language makes it clear you know everything the OP thinks and means to say. However, I am not convinced: your inability to listen to others is only outdone by your presumptuousness.
Good grief. I have no idea what he thought or meant to say, but I do most definitely presume to be able to understand what he wrote. Something in your responses makes me think you have a cultural background that involves something other than American English, but you'll have to improve your reading comprehension skills if you're going to accuse me of lacking there.

You and I start here:
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by Quension Quote
if you say the noise performance is about the same, it's kind of hard to argue that!
It is easy to argue that because that is NOT what he is saying.
The response itself is illogical: "it's easy to provide a counterpoint because the point doesn't exist"? What is that, some kind of Zen "there is no spoon" thing? But moving on from that, you act as though the OP didn't literally say:
QuoteOriginally posted by kristoffon Quote
I expected cleaner high iso but it appears to be about the same as the K200D
I initially figured it was just a misunderstanding and replied as such.

You continue with:
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
The OP is not only discrediting the high ISO performance of the K20, but also of the K200 as well
as if you're taking this as a personal affront to your beloved K20D, and having (presumably) seen that I own a K200D, think that I should be offended too. So now I figure it's a combination of a misunderstanding and a defensive reaction.

You continue to insist the OP is claiming an upper limit on ISO performance for everyone everywhere, despite it being obvious to everyone else that he's only commenting within the context of his own experience, but after a couple more replies you finally say
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
there is no need to continue
and the thread stays dead for 9 days.

And then you start in again for no apparent reason, while your apparent inability to understand what was written continues:
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
the OP, instead of acknowledging anything positive in the thread, goes on to argue and hairsplit the definitions of shooting ISO 3200 and 6400. No gratitude whatsoever, never a word that he/she could actually be wrong about their claim, just another argument and digressing discussion of meaningless philosophizing.
Yet the OP had merely posted questions:
QuoteOriginally posted by kristoffon Quote
Also, isn't exposing to the right the equivalent of using lower iso? I.e., shooting with EV = +1 @ ISO 1600 isn't the same as shooting with EV = 0 @ ISO 800? That's what I experienced so far.
QuoteOriginally posted by kristoffon Quote
Maybe I'm being ignorant here but please someone explain to me how is shooting at +1 EV @ ISO 6400 any different than +0 EV @ ISO 3200? Isn't increasing exposure in this manner the very same thing as selecting a lower ISO? Wouldn't he get the very same results as if shooting +0 EV @ ISO 3200?

I perceive it as a contrived method of selecting lower ISO and as much as I try to figure out a different explanation that fails me. Maybe it made a difference with film and the myth lasts?
Non-argumentative questions; requests for clarification.

If that wasn't enough, you even manage to twist the OP's words:
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
the OP said "max usable ISO on Pentax cameras is 800
I must have missed the part of his post where he made a statement like that with no other context, and mentioned any cameras other than the K20D and K200D...

I honestly don't know how to explain to you that you are reading plain text incorrectly, because your interpretation is so alien to me that I have no idea what thought process would lead a rational person to that conclusion. If I hadn't actually seen you be helpful in other threads, I'd have labeled you a troll and been done with it.


As for why you posted at all, you say:
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
My reason for visiting this thread is to try and enable all those who are unhappy with K20 high ISO, to discover a way to maximize its performance, thus becoming happy with the camera. That has been my goal throughout my visit here--I am not here to crusade or argue.
But instead of answering his questions, you chose to make other responses:
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
It is easy to argue that
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
The OP is not only discrediting the high ISO performance
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
just because you can not take good shots at high ISO
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
Rather than defend the claim, the OP digresses into a discussion
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
I did & still do believe the OP was/is wrong
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
if you are going to make a claim like the OP did. you better be prepared to defend it
Those are the words of someone who is here for the sole purpose of arguing. You've even been trying to convince everyone else that the OP said something he didn't, just so they will join the argument. Sure looks like a crusade to me...
06-11-2009, 03:59 AM   #53
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Dawesville,Western Australia.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 129
Gday all...I just take photos with my K200d ..some are great..some are rubbish. That was a very interesting read...the best camera for lack of noise was the *ist DL.....I think.....???? :-) But that was 6MP. You get less noise with 6MP...I think???? :-)

06-11-2009, 04:03 AM   #54
Veteran Member
netuser's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Azores Islands, Portugal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,241
QuoteOriginally posted by Daveinozbikes Quote
..... You get less noise with 6MP...I think???? :-)
You are right
06-11-2009, 04:31 AM   #55
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
But if you have a 14.6MP image downsized to 6MP, there would be less noise to appreciate also, I think.
06-11-2009, 04:52 AM   #56
Veteran Member
Duck Dodgers's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the 24½th Century!
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 439
Yes. All else being constant, the higher the density (pixels per area), the greater the noise generated by adjacent cells.
06-11-2009, 08:31 AM   #57
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
But if you have a 14.6MP image downsized to 6MP, there would be less noise to appreciate also, I think.
Also true when comparing 10MP to 6MP. Compare at 100%, and you're blowing up the K200D image bigger, so of course the noise is more prominent. Compare at the same size, and the difference is negligible, and can actually work in favor of the higher resolution camera because it gives you more lattitude for applying NR. More detail to start with means you can be more aggressive with NR and still retain the same amount of detail the 6MP camera gives.
06-11-2009, 10:54 AM   #58
Senior Member
Mister Guy's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 244
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Also true when comparing 10MP to 6MP. Compare at 100%, and you're blowing up the K200D image bigger, so of course the noise is more prominent. Compare at the same size, and the difference is negligible, and can actually work in favor of the higher resolution camera because it gives you more lattitude for applying NR. More detail to start with means you can be more aggressive with NR and still retain the same amount of detail the 6MP camera gives.
Just please compare with something that does a halfway decent job resizing, or you're comparing resizing artifacts and not image quality!
06-11-2009, 08:56 PM   #59
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
That could well be. But my feeling on matters like this is, if the difference is noise levels is small enough to be potentially masked by a difference in resampling algorithms, that pretty much makes my case for me: the difference in noise levels is pretty small in practice.
06-14-2009, 09:50 AM   #60
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
imho, most of these arguments are driven by pixel peeping.

But it also depends on your aesthetic. In general, I like noise, especially in certain circumstances.

Trying to make sweeping statements like "3200 is unusable" or "6400 is OK" is useless unless you qualify with adding "to me" or "for my applications" (which may include pixel peeping...and that's...OK).

The descent into name-calling is just silly. Although my dad clearly can beat up all your dads...
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!
auto, buffer, camera, convenience, dslr, exposure, fa, focus, iso, k200d, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
k200d or a k20, need help arace Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 9 11-12-2009 11:33 AM
Initial impressions of the K200D dugrant153 Pentax DSLR Discussion 0 01-11-2009 02:24 AM
K200D--first impressions heatherslightbox Pentax DSLR Discussion 33 10-05-2008 05:45 PM
K200d First Impressions and Snaps riotsquad Pentax DSLR Discussion 1 05-19-2008 01:47 PM
K200D First Impressions RiceHigh Pentax DSLR Discussion 72 03-29-2008 12:56 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:46 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