[frank]

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

[raz]

thanks for the last test, the 800 and 1600 are very good in my opinion.

[falconeye]

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?

[frank]

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.

[falconeye]

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

[soccerjoe5]

Quite honestly, I'm blown away with the high ISO results. I'll be VERY happy with such performance.

[rawr]

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.

[wll]

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

[RBellavance]

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).

[Duck Dodgers]

I remember what 3200 looked like on film; I'll take the K-7's output any day. I cannot realistically criticize its noise.

[Sleepy]

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 ^_^.

[Yohan Pamudji]

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.

[Andrew Faires]

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

[maleek]

I'll just chip in and thank you for the information you made available.

[Chyn]

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!