Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-19-2009, 01:25 AM   #166
Veteran Member
frank's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,202
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Steelski Quote
The 3200 could have been better, but I saw you were using very low shutter speeds.
Thank you. But I think you are very satisfied with yourself anyway.

BTW. Your sensor has a defect, a small streak going from top to bottom of the sensor , around the middle.

EDIT:::


I re-read my post, It does not sound gratifying enough

Thank you again and may you get the K-8 when it comes out .
Yeah, I saw that streak too. It's just a beta test camera, so I'm not so concerned Hopefully I'd get my own K-7 in two weeks time.

K-8? I thought the next one would be K-1

06-19-2009, 01:28 AM   #167
raz
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Timisoara, Romania
Posts: 249
thanks for the last test, the 800 and 1600 are very good in my opinion.
06-19-2009, 01:59 AM   #168
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
Frank, this s a nice series of real-world examples. Now, I don't have to do it. Thank You

I posted a noise comparison with the K20D in "my test report and blog" thread and basically found that K-7 and K20D have no significant difference in noise. Also, being used to a K20D, I can say that K-7' 1600 "feels" to me like 1600.

What is your impression? Did you notice a difference compared to experience with a K20D?
06-19-2009, 02:19 AM   #169
Veteran Member
frank's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,202
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Frank, this s a nice series of real-world examples. Now, I don't have to do it. Thank You

I posted a noise comparison with the K20D in "my test report and blog" thread and basically found that K-7 and K20D have no significant difference in noise. Also, being used to a K20D, I can say that K-7' 1600 "feels" to me like 1600.

What is your impression? Did you notice a difference compared to experience with a K20D?
Actually I seldom use ISO higher than 800 even on K20D. To me I'd rather take photos under good light If the light is too bad, I either don't take photos or use a tripod. But to be honest, I'm pretty happy w/ K-7 at ISO 800 to 1600. Don't think I'd use ISO3200 unless I have to.

I have the same feeling that the high ISO noise level is about the same as K20D. But one thing is different, the color (auto white balance?) from K-7 under low light (thus high ISO) is pretty good, probably better than those from K20D. I kinda don't like the color produced by K20D under low light.

06-19-2009, 02:37 AM   #170
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by frank Quote
But one thing is different, the color (auto white balance?) from K-7 under low light (thus high ISO) is pretty good
Yes, white balance in tungsten seems to work as advertized. A good thing!

I am in the same camp, I shoot w/o hesitation up to ISO 1600. I consider ISO 1600 to be sort of sweet spot for the K20D (and K-7 as well, probably). I like the noise I get at ISO 1600 and even if visible on very large scale prints, it does not deteriorate the artistic value of the photo. The other sweet spot is 1/15s for the K20D SR mechanism
06-19-2009, 02:55 AM   #171
Veteran Member
soccerjoe5's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
Quite honestly, I'm blown away with the high ISO results. I'll be VERY happy with such performance.
06-19-2009, 02:59 AM   #172
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,828
Wow Frank, thanks for these!

Handheld, walk about, low-light, high-ISO - exactly what I was looking for.

I am now feeling a lot more comfortable about the K7 after seeing this series of photos, particularly images like K7FW0041 and K7FW0073.

The results at 1600 still retain a good dynamic range 'pop' and look great, and even 3200 (under good light) looks very usable.

Once again thanks for this sequence.
06-19-2009, 03:25 AM   #173
wll
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mission Hills, CA
Posts: 773
Frank, those look great.

The high iso shots look very promising. I think this camera will work out great for concert stuff.

I think the 3200 iso looks pretty good and from the other shots at 6400iso I think maybe 4500 iso in a pinch would be OK, especially if you make it B&W, :-)

wll

06-19-2009, 05:51 AM   #174
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
Thanks for taking the time to do this, Frank. Very informative. It looks like I'll gain a bit more than a stop of usable ISO over my K10D (I find ISO 800 on the latter perfectly usable with a little wavelet NR in UFRaw).
06-19-2009, 06:04 AM   #175
Veteran Member
Duck Dodgers's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: in the 24½th Century!
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 439
I remember what 3200 looked like on film; I'll take the K-7's output any day. I cannot realistically criticize its noise.
06-19-2009, 08:49 AM   #176
Senior Member
Sleepy's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Miami
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 133
Thanks for your real-world iso examples with 1.0 firmware.
I wish the NR in camera could've done better.

However, I think I could live with that and would get K-7 eventually, since these high iso photos after NR software (I use Neatimage) are pretty acceptable to me ^_^.
06-19-2009, 11:52 AM   #177
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 184
frank, thanks for the new kitchen test shots. Progression from 800->1600->3200 looks right now. I wonder what was wrong with v0.3 where it seemingly turned on noise reduction at ISO 1600 but not others? Weird.
06-19-2009, 04:23 PM   #178
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 750
Frank,

Thank you very much for posting all of these samples.

I generally avoid anything higher than ISO 400 on the k10, but am quite impressed with what I've seen at ISO 800, 1600 and even 3200 that you've posted from this camera.

Cheers,

Andrew
06-19-2009, 04:31 PM   #179
Senior Member
maleek's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Karlstad, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 216
I'll just chip in and thank you for the information you made available.
06-19-2009, 04:36 PM   #180
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 7
Thank you, Frank, for putting up those high-iso samples. I have to say, I'm impressed by the performance all the way up to 1600, with iso800 being the sweet spot (for my eyes). The K7 is looking great!
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!
af, awb, battery, camera, dslr, fa77, k-7, lens, light, photography, photos, tungsten
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Carry-on camera gear for US bound flights - any experiences? SF1 Travel, Events, and Groups 4 03-05-2010 07:03 PM
Beach Camera experiences? Good or Bad? rdrum76 Photographic Technique 12 01-10-2008 11:06 AM
My London experiences(lots of pics) vdubbin099 Post Your Photos! 8 10-09-2007 11:25 AM
Unusual camera bags (+11 imgs) hinman Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 3 09-07-2007 06:10 PM
Henrys Camera Show (Lots of Pics) FotoPete Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 05-06-2007 08:09 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:29 AM. | 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