Pentax High ISO Gallery - post here

wildman · 07-25-2011, 02:57 PM

K20, ISO 3200, FA35 at f2
Available light only. Handheld shots. Run through ACR and DeNoise
Apart from the ISO stuff it helps to have glass that does not fall apart wide open.

Last edited by wildman; 08-01-2011 at 01:57 AM.

theunartist · 07-25-2011, 07:33 PM

Originally posted by wildman

K20, ISO 3200, FA35 at f2
Available light only. Handheld shots. Run through ACR and DeNoise
Apart from the ISO stuff it helps to have glass that does not fall apart wide open.

Quite impressive...

UnknownVT · 07-26-2011, 03:37 PM

ISO800 is hardly high these days but on the earlier models this was considered borderline high -
this was from my K100D - back in 2008 -

ISO800, f/5.6, 1/100; 55mm (on 18-55mm kit zoom)
This is a full page in "Atlanta's Finest" (paper) magazine Jul/Aug/2011 issue - (pdf of the magazine)

Of course these days I shoot a K-x and that allows me to use almost ridiculously high ISO - like:

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp
NOTE: I've replaced this image - which hopefully does not show the processing so obviously.
Thanks to johnmflores for pointing this out to me (and to jstevewhite for the confirmation)

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/25; 35mm; -1/3 stop comp

ISO4000, f/4.5, 1/200, 125mm

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/125, 88mm

ISO5000, f/3.5, 1/25; 18mm

noaslplease · 07-26-2011, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

ISO800 is hardly high these days but on the earlier models this was considered borderline high -
this was from my K100D - back in 2008 -

ISO800, f/5.6, 1/100; 55mm (on 18-55mm kit zoom)
This is a full page in "Atlanta's Finest" (paper) magazine Jul/Aug/2011 issue - (pdf of the magazine)

Of course these days I shoot a K-x and that allows me to use almost ridiculously high ISO - like:

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/25; 35mm; -1/3 stop comp

ISO4000, f/4.5, 1/200, 125mm

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/125, 88mm

ISO5000, f/3.5, 1/25; 18mm

These are very impressive, congrats on getting your snaps published!

john5100 · 07-26-2011, 09:50 PM

KX DA 12-24mm F4
ISO5000

johnmflores · 07-27-2011, 10:36 AM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

ISO800 is hardly high these days but on the earlier models this was considered borderline high -
this was from my K100D - back in 2008 -

ISO800, f/5.6, 1/100; 55mm (on 18-55mm kit zoom)
This is a full page in "Atlanta's Finest" (paper) magazine Jul/Aug/2011 issue - (pdf of the magazine)

Congrats! Looks great!

Originally posted by UnknownVT

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp

There's an odd shaded band on this one?

Originally posted by UnknownVT

ISO4000, f/4.5, 1/200, 125mm

Susan Tedeschi?

UnknownVT · 07-27-2011, 10:48 AM

Originally posted by johnmflores

There's an odd shaded band on this one?

where please? - could be the difference between our monitors - I often see things on a friend's top of the line Mac LCD monitor - so I may be missing something you can see, and I can't on my olde CRT monitor - appreciate any help. Thanks

Originally posted by johnmflores

Susan Tedeschi?

yep -
and that's her husband - in the next shot

johnmflores · 07-27-2011, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

where please? - could be the difference between our monitors - I often see things on a friend's top of the line Mac LCD monitor - so I may be missing something you can see, and I can't on my olde CRT monitor - appreciate any help. Thanks

yep -
and that's her husband - in the next shot

What I'm seeing is what looks like a semi-transparent mask across the face from the cheeks up to the bottom of the hat and extending back towards the back of the head. It looks to be about 80-100 pixels tall, about the size of a blindfold. At first I thought it was some odd artifact from a mask that you created in Photoshop or LR.

And I'm going to listen to some Susan Tedeschi now...I first saw her back in '93 when she looked like a sorority girl possessed by the blues! Don't know Derek Trucks that well - all I know is that I'm jealous!

UnknownVT · 07-27-2011, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

What I'm seeing is what looks like a semi-transparent mask across the face from the cheeks up to the bottom of the hat and extending back towards the back of the head. It looks to be about 80-100 pixels tall, about the size of a blindfold. At first I thought it was some odd artifact from a mask that you created in Photoshop or LR.

Got you thanks - that the select area and bring up the brightness/contrast that I did - cannot see the separation that you can on my monitor - but I had seen that kind of thing before on my friend's Mac monitor -

This makes it difficult to do my processing - the face was in extreme shadow basically looked black with very little visible feature - but bringing up the brightness makes the shot for me - didn't realize that it would look the way you described -

I wonder how many others see it that way and how many do not, please?

This may decide what direction I may have to take - like get another monitor, modify my processing and previewing on my friend's monitor before posting etc.

Would appreciate input from others on this one please?

Originally posted by johnmflores

And I'm going to listen to some Susan Tedeschi now...I first saw her back in '93 when she looked like a sorority girl possessed by the blues! Don't know Derek Trucks that well - all I know is that I'm jealous!

That's a really good description - I met her about the same time at a private party she talks quiet and almost demure, BUT when she sang I went holy-sh*t - unbelievable! where did she get that voice!?

You really should checkout their latest album Revelator.

They are playing the major venue this Saturday -
but I get only the first 3 songs from 100ft away.....
anyone wanna lend me a 500mm zoom lens?

johnmflores · 07-27-2011, 01:14 PM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

Got you thanks - that the select area and bring up the brightness/contrast that I did - cannot see the separation that you can on my monitor - but I had seen that kind of thing before on my friend's Mac monitor -

This makes it difficult to do my processing - the face was in extreme shadow basically looked black with very little visible feature - but bringing up the brightness makes the shot for me - didn't realize that it would look the way you described -

I wonder how many others see it that way and how many do not, please?

This may decide what direction I may have to take - like get another monitor, modify my processing and previewing on my friend's monitor before posting etc.

Would appreciate input from others on this one please?

1. A good monitor is absolutely necessary, especially if your work gets published
2. I'd suggest a softer (feathered) brush for a softer transition between edited and unedited portions of the photo.

jstevewhite · 07-27-2011, 01:58 PM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

Got you thanks - that the select area and bring up the brightness/contrast that I did - cannot see the separation that you can on my monitor - but I had seen that kind of thing before on my friend's Mac monitor -

This makes it difficult to do my processing - the face was in extreme shadow basically looked black with very little visible feature - but bringing up the brightness makes the shot for me - didn't realize that it would look the way you described -

I wonder how many others see it that way and how many do not, please?

This may decide what direction I may have to take - like get another monitor, modify my processing and previewing on my friend's monitor before posting etc.

Would appreciate input from others on this one please?

I see it quite clearly as well, on my Macbook Pro and my Cinema Display.

UnknownVT · 07-27-2011, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

1. A good monitor is absolutely necessary, especially if your work gets published
2. I'd suggest a softer (feathered) brush for a softer transition between edited and unedited portions of the photo.

Thanks for the advice - feathered sounds theoretically better but from my experience with defined shadows like that photo, does not work - then even I can see it on my monitor - like I said I have an "olde fashioned" CRT monitor - those are hard to beat - more modest/cheaper LCD monitors can cause problems, it's not the resolution that everyone looks at - but the gamut display and contrast - often what suits text does not suit photos - I know my friend's Mac monitor is premium - but it is way out of whack - however it is useful for me to check for problems like that photo -

Like I asked are there others that see what you saw? -
if it's the majority then I'd switch monitors -

This photo is a good case as the adjustment was quite extreme - like I said I cannot see it on my monitor.

Thanks for the input - very grateful for it.

EDIT to ADD - just saw this:

Originally posted by jstevewhite

I see it quite clearly as well, on my Macbook Pro and my Cinema Display.

Thank you - that does it - I'll reprocess the photo and replace the photo posted -
would really appreciate if you can please comment on it to see if the processing is obvious.

Thanks.

darrenleow · 07-27-2011, 02:23 PM

Pentax K-5 at ISO 9000

ISO 4500

The bottleneck with the K-5 is the focusing system which hunts and front-focuses in low light situations. The sensor leaves little to be desired

UnknownVT · 07-27-2011, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

What I'm seeing is what looks like a semi-transparent mask across the face from the cheeks up to the bottom of the hat and extending back towards the back of the head. It looks to be about 80-100 pixels tall, about the size of a blindfold. At first I thought it was some odd artifact from a mask that you created in Photoshop or LR.

Originally posted by jstevewhite

I see it quite clearly as well, on my Macbook Pro and my Cinema Display.

Thank you very much guys - I went back a reprocessed the photo -
which hopefully does not show that problem -
I've replaced the previous posted one with a note to that effect -
here is the latest - comments please?

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp
NOTE: I've replaced this image - which hopefully does not show the processing so obviously.
Thanks to johnmflores for pointing this out to me (and to jstevewhite for the confirmation)

johnmflores · 07-27-2011, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

Thank you very much guys - I went back a reprocessed the photo -
which hopefully does not show that problem -
I've replaced the previous posted one with a note to that effect -
here is the latest - comments please?

ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp
NOTE: I've replaced this image - which hopefully does not show the processing so obviously.
Thanks to johnmflores for pointing this out to me (and to jstevewhite for the confirmation)

Much better. Just one problem remains - his trumpet's too small!

07-26-2011, 03:37 PM	#963
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	ISO800 is hardly high these days but on the earlier models this was considered borderline high - this was from my K100D - back in 2008 - ISO800, f/5.6, 1/100; 55mm (on 18-55mm kit zoom) This is a full page in "Atlanta's Finest" (paper) magazine Jul/Aug/2011 issue - (pdf of the magazine) Of course these days I shoot a K-x and that allows me to use almost ridiculously high ISO - like: ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp NOTE: I've replaced this image - which hopefully does not show the processing so obviously. Thanks to johnmflores for pointing this out to me (and to jstevewhite for the confirmation) ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/25; 35mm; -1/3 stop comp ISO4000, f/4.5, 1/200, 125mm ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/125, 88mm ISO5000, f/3.5, 1/25; 18mm Last edited by UnknownVT; 07-27-2011 at 02:59 PM.

07-27-2011, 02:05 PM	#972
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by johnmflores 1. A good monitor is absolutely necessary, especially if your work gets published 2. I'd suggest a softer (feathered) brush for a softer transition between edited and unedited portions of the photo. Thanks for the advice - feathered sounds theoretically better but from my experience with defined shadows like that photo, does not work - then even I can see it on my monitor - like I said I have an "olde fashioned" CRT monitor - those are hard to beat - more modest/cheaper LCD monitors can cause problems, it's not the resolution that everyone looks at - but the gamut display and contrast - often what suits text does not suit photos - I know my friend's Mac monitor is premium - but it is way out of whack - however it is useful for me to check for problems like that photo - Like I asked are there others that see what you saw? - if it's the majority then I'd switch monitors - This photo is a good case as the adjustment was quite extreme - like I said I cannot see it on my monitor. Thanks for the input - very grateful for it. EDIT to ADD - just saw this: Originally posted by jstevewhite I see it quite clearly as well, on my Macbook Pro and my Cinema Display. Thank you - that does it - I'll reprocess the photo and replace the photo posted - would really appreciate if you can please comment on it to see if the processing is obvious. Thanks. Last edited by UnknownVT; 07-27-2011 at 02:48 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How to post high resolution photo here?	Underbridge	Pentax Medium Format	5	12-25-2012 08:56 PM
People K-5 high ISO... how high can we really go...	igor	Post Your Photos!	2	03-24-2012 01:10 AM
Is there a high iso gallery for K-7?	justtakingpics	Pentax DSLR Discussion	13	05-31-2010 05:32 PM
K-7 high ISO vs K20D high ISO	supa007	Pentax DSLR Discussion	72	05-10-2010 04:24 PM
Pentax k20d High ISO Photo Gallery	PentaxPoke	Pentax DSLR Discussion	68	02-18-2009 05:19 AM

07-25-2011, 02:57 PM	#961
wildman Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Flyover America Posts: 4,469	K20, ISO 3200, FA35 at f2 Available light only. Handheld shots. Run through ACR and DeNoise Apart from the ISO stuff it helps to have glass that does not fall apart wide open. Last edited by wildman; 08-01-2011 at 01:57 AM.

07-25-2011, 07:33 PM	#962
theunartist Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Baltimore Posts: 2,542	Originally posted by wildman K20, ISO 3200, FA35 at f2 Available light only. Handheld shots. Run through ACR and DeNoise Apart from the ISO stuff it helps to have glass that does not fall apart wide open. Quite impressive...

07-26-2011, 08:14 PM	#964
noaslplease Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: San Jose, California Photos: Albums Posts: 80	Originally posted by UnknownVT ISO800 is hardly high these days but on the earlier models this was considered borderline high - this was from my K100D - back in 2008 - ISO800, f/5.6, 1/100; 55mm (on 18-55mm kit zoom) This is a full page in "Atlanta's Finest" (paper) magazine Jul/Aug/2011 issue - (pdf of the magazine) Of course these days I shoot a K-x and that allows me to use almost ridiculously high ISO - like: ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/25; 35mm; -1/3 stop comp ISO4000, f/4.5, 1/200, 125mm ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/125, 88mm ISO5000, f/3.5, 1/25; 18mm These are very impressive, congrats on getting your snaps published!

07-26-2011, 09:50 PM	#965
john5100 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,725	KX DA 12-24mm F4 ISO5000

07-27-2011, 10:36 AM	#966
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by UnknownVT ISO800 is hardly high these days but on the earlier models this was considered borderline high - this was from my K100D - back in 2008 - ISO800, f/5.6, 1/100; 55mm (on 18-55mm kit zoom) This is a full page in "Atlanta's Finest" (paper) magazine Jul/Aug/2011 issue - (pdf of the magazine) Congrats! Looks great! Originally posted by UnknownVT ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp There's an odd shaded band on this one? Originally posted by UnknownVT ISO4000, f/4.5, 1/200, 125mm Susan Tedeschi?

07-27-2011, 10:48 AM	#967
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by johnmflores There's an odd shaded band on this one? where please? - could be the difference between our monitors - I often see things on a friend's top of the line Mac LCD monitor - so I may be missing something you can see, and I can't on my olde CRT monitor - appreciate any help. Thanks Originally posted by johnmflores Susan Tedeschi? yep - and that's her husband - in the next shot

07-27-2011, 11:12 AM	#968
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by UnknownVT where please? - could be the difference between our monitors - I often see things on a friend's top of the line Mac LCD monitor - so I may be missing something you can see, and I can't on my olde CRT monitor - appreciate any help. Thanks yep - and that's her husband - in the next shot What I'm seeing is what looks like a semi-transparent mask across the face from the cheeks up to the bottom of the hat and extending back towards the back of the head. It looks to be about 80-100 pixels tall, about the size of a blindfold. At first I thought it was some odd artifact from a mask that you created in Photoshop or LR. And I'm going to listen to some Susan Tedeschi now...I first saw her back in '93 when she looked like a sorority girl possessed by the blues! Don't know Derek Trucks that well - all I know is that I'm jealous!

07-27-2011, 01:07 PM	#969
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by johnmflores What I'm seeing is what looks like a semi-transparent mask across the face from the cheeks up to the bottom of the hat and extending back towards the back of the head. It looks to be about 80-100 pixels tall, about the size of a blindfold. At first I thought it was some odd artifact from a mask that you created in Photoshop or LR. Got you thanks - that the select area and bring up the brightness/contrast that I did - cannot see the separation that you can on my monitor - but I had seen that kind of thing before on my friend's Mac monitor - This makes it difficult to do my processing - the face was in extreme shadow basically looked black with very little visible feature - but bringing up the brightness makes the shot for me - didn't realize that it would look the way you described - I wonder how many others see it that way and how many do not, please? This may decide what direction I may have to take - like get another monitor, modify my processing and previewing on my friend's monitor before posting etc. Would appreciate input from others on this one please? Originally posted by johnmflores And I'm going to listen to some Susan Tedeschi now...I first saw her back in '93 when she looked like a sorority girl possessed by the blues! Don't know Derek Trucks that well - all I know is that I'm jealous! That's a really good description - I met her about the same time at a private party she talks quiet and almost demure, BUT when she sang I went holy-sh*t - unbelievable! where did she get that voice!? You really should checkout their latest album Revelator. They are playing the major venue this Saturday - but I get only the first 3 songs from 100ft away..... anyone wanna lend me a 500mm zoom lens?

07-27-2011, 01:14 PM	#970
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by UnknownVT Got you thanks - that the select area and bring up the brightness/contrast that I did - cannot see the separation that you can on my monitor - but I had seen that kind of thing before on my friend's Mac monitor - This makes it difficult to do my processing - the face was in extreme shadow basically looked black with very little visible feature - but bringing up the brightness makes the shot for me - didn't realize that it would look the way you described - I wonder how many others see it that way and how many do not, please? This may decide what direction I may have to take - like get another monitor, modify my processing and previewing on my friend's monitor before posting etc. Would appreciate input from others on this one please? 1. A good monitor is absolutely necessary, especially if your work gets published 2. I'd suggest a softer (feathered) brush for a softer transition between edited and unedited portions of the photo.

07-27-2011, 01:58 PM	#971
jstevewhite Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,407	Originally posted by UnknownVT Got you thanks - that the select area and bring up the brightness/contrast that I did - cannot see the separation that you can on my monitor - but I had seen that kind of thing before on my friend's Mac monitor - This makes it difficult to do my processing - the face was in extreme shadow basically looked black with very little visible feature - but bringing up the brightness makes the shot for me - didn't realize that it would look the way you described - I wonder how many others see it that way and how many do not, please? This may decide what direction I may have to take - like get another monitor, modify my processing and previewing on my friend's monitor before posting etc. Would appreciate input from others on this one please? I see it quite clearly as well, on my Macbook Pro and my Cinema Display.

07-27-2011, 02:23 PM	#973
darrenleow Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery Posts: 541	Pentax K-5 at ISO 9000 ISO 4500 The bottleneck with the K-5 is the focusing system which hunts and front-focuses in low light situations. The sensor leaves little to be desired

07-27-2011, 02:58 PM	#974
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by johnmflores What I'm seeing is what looks like a semi-transparent mask across the face from the cheeks up to the bottom of the hat and extending back towards the back of the head. It looks to be about 80-100 pixels tall, about the size of a blindfold. At first I thought it was some odd artifact from a mask that you created in Photoshop or LR. Originally posted by jstevewhite I see it quite clearly as well, on my Macbook Pro and my Cinema Display. Thank you very much guys - I went back a reprocessed the photo - which hopefully does not show that problem - I've replaced the previous posted one with a note to that effect - here is the latest - comments please? ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp NOTE: I've replaced this image - which hopefully does not show the processing so obviously. Thanks to johnmflores for pointing this out to me (and to jstevewhite for the confirmation)

07-27-2011, 05:03 PM	#975
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by UnknownVT Thank you very much guys - I went back a reprocessed the photo - which hopefully does not show that problem - I've replaced the previous posted one with a note to that effect - here is the latest - comments please? ISO5000, f/4.5, 1/15; 38mm; -2/3 stop comp NOTE: I've replaced this image - which hopefully does not show the processing so obviously. Thanks to johnmflores for pointing this out to me (and to jstevewhite for the confirmation) Much better. Just one problem remains - his trumpet's too small!