Pentax High ISO Gallery - post here

Designosophy · 01-07-2012, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by Jewelltrail

Come on now Mike, you know simply being a dweller in a real city like Philly means you must have great high ISO.

Unlike my complement to Marc, my cat attacks were not for anyone in particular.

We live in the city technically, and it's quite urban, but it's townhouseland. Block after block of over a hundred houses per block.

But so I can hopefully shake the stigma of photographing my wife's cat, here's a photo I also posted to the prime portraits thread:

It's not quite wide open, but I wanted a smidge more DoF than f/1.4 would provide. So I went to f/1.6. It's ISO4000, 1/125s, Rokinon 85 f/1.4.

Jewelltrail · 01-08-2012, 07:29 PM

Originally posted by Designosophy

We live in the city technically, and it's quite urban, but it's townhouseland. Block after block of over a hundred houses per block.

But so I can hopefully shake the stigma of photographing my wife's cat, here's a photo I also posted to the prime portraits thread:

It's not quite wide open, but I wanted a smidge more DoF than f/1.4 would provide. So I went to f/1.6. It's ISO4000, 1/125s, Rokinon 85 f/1.4.

LOL--no stigma Mike--obviously my point was not well presented. I opened this thread with a cat shot--see page one, for example.

JT

JohnBee · 01-08-2012, 07:39 PM

Originally posted by VoiceOfReason

...I've also got into paranormal investigations and really need the low light capability...

And here I thought my "no flash" indoor events were pushing it!

Looking forward to seeing some pics!

Designosophy · 01-08-2012, 08:50 PM

Originally posted by Jewelltrail

LOL--no stigma Mike--obviously my point was not well presented. I opened this thread with a cat shot--see page one, for example.

JT

Hey, no worries! I'm not offended. It was just funny to me how you described my activity so closely. I apologize if my feigned indignance seemed genuine.

theunartist · 01-09-2012, 05:48 PM

Kx + Pentax M 135/3.5

ISO 3200

rob1234 · 01-10-2012, 01:38 PM - **1 Like**

Still saving for a K5, but I get more and more used to the K10D at ISO 1600...

K10D, F50/1.7 at f/2.4, ISO 1600

and a 100% crop:

Very little PP, from RAW

theunartist · 01-12-2012, 09:48 AM

Nice Work rob1234!!! I've only taken a handful of shots with my K10 at 1250, and I thought that was pushing it, impressive! (the 100% crop is awesome)

Originally posted by rob1234

Still saving for a K5, but I get more and more used to the K10D at ISO 1600...

K10D, F50/1.7 at f/2.4, ISO 1600

and a 100% crop:

Very little PP, from RAW

Kx + Tamron AF 28-80/3.5-5.6 JPEG @ ISO 6400

rob1234 · 01-13-2012, 07:29 AM

Thanks - I think the trick is to err on the side of over-exposure, as puling detail up from under-exposed areas (or entire shots) increases noise dramatically.

I appreciate that the light conditions many shots at high-ISO are taken in mean any lengthening of shutter speed may not be ideal!

john5100 · 01-15-2012, 12:45 AM

KX @ ISO 8000

amayers3 · 01-15-2012, 03:26 PM

These were taken at a dance event called Battle of the Dance Lines on my K-R with my 55-200 kit lens. Most of these were taken with an ISO of 1600-6400 with F4 and a shutter speed of 1/125 in manual mode. Only some minor editing was done because I really wanted to have some good high contrast and make the colors pop.

john5100 · 01-15-2012, 08:13 PM - **1 Like**

For those who think that the K200D can't be used for high ISO - K200D @ 1600. There is a little more noise in this photo because of the effect used in Paintshop Pro X4.

VisualDarkness · 01-16-2012, 04:33 AM

Originally posted by amayers3

These were taken at a dance event called Battle of the Dance Lines on my K-R with my 55-200 kit lens. Most of these were taken with an ISO of 1600-6400 with F4 and a shutter speed of 1/125 in manual mode. Only some minor editing was done because I really wanted to have some good high contrast and make the colors pop.

The striped girls looks like the perfect AF-test.

Great shots! Especially the more blurry ones that got more "feeling to them".

KennyV · 01-17-2012, 07:39 PM

Name: 17jan1202 (Large).jpg
Views: 551
Size: 129.3 KB

Pentax K-5, ISO 1600, 1/4 sec, 10-17 mm FE @ 10 mm, f/4.5

VisualDarkness · 01-20-2012, 02:55 PM

Are you kidding? I upgraded from a (shared with my brother) K-7 to a K-5 for some better ISO performance but I never thought it was this good! I tried out ISO51200 and thought it would me unusable but this is what I got basically unprocessed, amazing. (K-5 with Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 HSM II)

RAW, only slight sharpening and re-size in Lightroom:

Jpeg, B&W from camera and only slight sharpening after re-size.

Marc Sabatella · 01-27-2012, 12:22 PM

You know, I really enjoy this thread, but not necessarily for the reasons one might expect. Or maybe just a different way of looking at it. I've expressed thoughts along these lines before, but I have been pondering this more lately and figure I might as well post again.

I get the sense there is a competitive element to a lot of the posts here - "look how good *my* camera is*, or perhaps sometimes "look how good my PP software is", or perhaps even "look how good my skills at operating this equipment are". That actually doesn't bother me as such - I'm as much as a show off as much as the next guy. My reservation would be if people who own camera X were getting the idea that because a shot from camera Y looks better than their own shots, that they must upgrade just to keep up with Joneses. There's an obsession with high ISO shooting ability, and as someone who shoots high ISO a lot, I do understand this. But my own obsession has a fortunate outcome - I've long ago come to realize that virtually *all* DSLR's do *well enough* at high ISO that I just don't care about the differences that much. I care ("obsessively" so) that the results are "good enough", but luckily, they are virtually *always* good enough these days.

I see this thread as a celebration of this. We, as 21st century photographers, can relish in the fact that we now all have access to equipment that can make acceptable images in situations our forebears could have only dreamed of. Or at least, would have shot in but obtained results that pale in comparison to what the least of our DSLR's can do. At posted sizes, pretty much every image here looks great - better than any image every taken at the same ISO or even 1 or 2 stops slower a decade ago. Some look better than others if compared at 100%, but I just don't care. As far as I am concerned, the ISO wars are over, and we photographers won.

With that in mind, here's a random illustration. This happens to be the highest ISO picture I've taken lately - the push-processed equivalent of around ISO 4000. Aside from being the highest ISO image I've shot lately, it's not special or unusual in any way, really, but maybe that's remarkable in itself - these days, you can take an image at ISO 4000 with any DSLR and not worry too much about it. This is taken with with the K200D, which is known to be not among the top performers at high ISO, but I can't complain about the results. And as this thread so aptly demonstrates, pretty much anyone can expect results at least as good with any DSLR:

01-17-2012, 07:39 PM	#1108
KennyV New Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Victoria, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 19	Snowy Victoria Evening Pentax K-5, ISO 1600, 1/4 sec, 10-17 mm FE @ 10 mm, f/4.5

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

01-07-2012, 03:49 PM	#1096
Designosophy Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Northeast Philadelphia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,137	Originally posted by Jewelltrail Come on now Mike, you know simply being a dweller in a real city like Philly means you must have great high ISO. Unlike my complement to Marc, my cat attacks were not for anyone in particular. We live in the city technically, and it's quite urban, but it's townhouseland. Block after block of over a hundred houses per block. But so I can hopefully shake the stigma of photographing my wife's cat, here's a photo I also posted to the prime portraits thread: It's not quite wide open, but I wanted a smidge more DoF than f/1.4 would provide. So I went to f/1.6. It's ISO4000, 1/125s, Rokinon 85 f/1.4.

01-08-2012, 07:29 PM	#1097
Jewelltrail Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Rhode Island Photos: Albums Posts: 4,180 Original Poster	Originally posted by Designosophy We live in the city technically, and it's quite urban, but it's townhouseland. Block after block of over a hundred houses per block. But so I can hopefully shake the stigma of photographing my wife's cat, here's a photo I also posted to the prime portraits thread: It's not quite wide open, but I wanted a smidge more DoF than f/1.4 would provide. So I went to f/1.6. It's ISO4000, 1/125s, Rokinon 85 f/1.4. LOL--no stigma Mike--obviously my point was not well presented. I opened this thread with a cat shot--see page one, for example. JT

01-08-2012, 07:39 PM	#1098
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by VoiceOfReason ...I've also got into paranormal investigations and really need the low light capability... And here I thought my "no flash" indoor events were pushing it! Looking forward to seeing some pics!

01-08-2012, 08:50 PM	#1099
Designosophy Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Northeast Philadelphia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,137	Originally posted by Jewelltrail LOL--no stigma Mike--obviously my point was not well presented. I opened this thread with a cat shot--see page one, for example. JT Hey, no worries! I'm not offended. It was just funny to me how you described my activity so closely. I apologize if my feigned indignance seemed genuine.

01-09-2012, 05:48 PM	#1100
theunartist Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Baltimore Posts: 2,542	Kx + Pentax M 135/3.5 ISO 3200

01-10-2012, 01:38 PM - 1 Like	#1101
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	Still saving for a K5, but I get more and more used to the K10D at ISO 1600... K10D, F50/1.7 at f/2.4, ISO 1600 and a 100% crop: Very little PP, from RAW

01-12-2012, 09:48 AM	#1102
theunartist Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Baltimore Posts: 2,542	Nice Work rob1234!!! I've only taken a handful of shots with my K10 at 1250, and I thought that was pushing it, impressive! (the 100% crop is awesome) Originally posted by rob1234 Still saving for a K5, but I get more and more used to the K10D at ISO 1600... K10D, F50/1.7 at f/2.4, ISO 1600 and a 100% crop: Very little PP, from RAW Kx + Tamron AF 28-80/3.5-5.6 JPEG @ ISO 6400

01-13-2012, 07:29 AM	#1103
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	Thanks - I think the trick is to err on the side of over-exposure, as puling detail up from under-exposed areas (or entire shots) increases noise dramatically. I appreciate that the light conditions many shots at high-ISO are taken in mean any lengthening of shutter speed may not be ideal!

01-15-2012, 12:45 AM	#1104
john5100 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,725	KX @ ISO 8000

01-15-2012, 03:26 PM	#1105
amayers3 New Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Atlanta, GA Posts: 22	These were taken at a dance event called Battle of the Dance Lines on my K-R with my 55-200 kit lens. Most of these were taken with an ISO of 1600-6400 with F4 and a shutter speed of 1/125 in manual mode. Only some minor editing was done because I really wanted to have some good high contrast and make the colors pop.

01-15-2012, 08:13 PM - 1 Like	#1106
john5100 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 1,725	For those who think that the K200D can't be used for high ISO - K200D @ 1600. There is a little more noise in this photo because of the effect used in Paintshop Pro X4.

01-16-2012, 04:33 AM	#1107
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by amayers3 These were taken at a dance event called Battle of the Dance Lines on my K-R with my 55-200 kit lens. Most of these were taken with an ISO of 1600-6400 with F4 and a shutter speed of 1/125 in manual mode. Only some minor editing was done because I really wanted to have some good high contrast and make the colors pop. The striped girls looks like the perfect AF-test. Great shots! Especially the more blurry ones that got more "feeling to them".

01-20-2012, 02:55 PM	#1109
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Are you kidding? I upgraded from a (shared with my brother) K-7 to a K-5 for some better ISO performance but I never thought it was this good! I tried out ISO51200 and thought it would me unusable but this is what I got basically unprocessed, amazing. (K-5 with Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 HSM II) RAW, only slight sharpening and re-size in Lightroom: Jpeg, B&W from camera and only slight sharpening after re-size.

01-27-2012, 12:22 PM	#1110
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	You know, I really enjoy this thread, but not necessarily for the reasons one might expect. Or maybe just a different way of looking at it. I've expressed thoughts along these lines before, but I have been pondering this more lately and figure I might as well post again. I get the sense there is a competitive element to a lot of the posts here - "look how good my camera is, or perhaps sometimes "look how good my PP software is", or perhaps even "look how good my skills at operating this equipment are". That actually doesn't bother me as such - I'm as much as a show off as much as the next guy. My reservation would be if people who own camera X were getting the idea that because a shot from camera Y looks better than their own shots, that they must upgrade just to keep up with Joneses. There's an obsession with high ISO shooting ability, and as someone who shoots high ISO a lot, I do understand this. But my own obsession has a fortunate outcome - I've long ago come to realize that virtually all* DSLR's do well enough at high ISO that I just don't care about the differences that much. I care ("obsessively" so) that the results are "good enough", but luckily, they are virtually always good enough these days. I see this thread as a celebration of this. We, as 21st century photographers, can relish in the fact that we now all have access to equipment that can make acceptable images in situations our forebears could have only dreamed of. Or at least, would have shot in but obtained results that pale in comparison to what the least of our DSLR's can do. At posted sizes, pretty much every image here looks great - better than any image every taken at the same ISO or even 1 or 2 stops slower a decade ago. Some look better than others if compared at 100%, but I just don't care. As far as I am concerned, the ISO wars are over, and we photographers won. With that in mind, here's a random illustration. This happens to be the highest ISO picture I've taken lately - the push-processed equivalent of around ISO 4000. Aside from being the highest ISO image I've shot lately, it's not special or unusual in any way, really, but maybe that's remarkable in itself - these days, you can take an image at ISO 4000 with any DSLR and not worry too much about it. This is taken with with the K200D, which is known to be not among the top performers at high ISO, but I can't complain about the results. And as this thread so aptly demonstrates, pretty much anyone can expect results at least as good with any DSLR: