Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-04-2010, 11:13 PM   #46
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
I know some people don't like dxomark, but I was looking over it today for the low light ISO mark:

K10D: 522
K20D: 639
K-7: 536
K-x: 811
GX20: 714

These scores represent the highest ISO at which a fixed IQ can still be maintained. The difference between these cameras according to this criteria is less than one stop. I find it interesting though that the GX20 sensor is better than its siblings used in Pentax cameras.

Best camera is Nikon D3s, whose score is 3253 - 2 stops difference over the K-x.

This doesn't give the whole picture, as the IQ may degrade faster for some cameras than for others past the tipping point measured by dxomark, but it's still interesting that the tipping points are not that far apart.

05-05-2010, 05:10 AM   #47
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,720
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
I find it interesting though that the GX20 sensor is better than its siblings used in Pentax cameras.
From anything I've heard, the GX20 is a K20D with Samsung software, so how can there be this kind of difference? Are there hardware differences between Samsung and Pentax? Some say DXO measured a bad K20D. Some say DXOMark's methods are flawed and this result is proof.
05-05-2010, 05:17 AM   #48
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,188
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
I don't consider the K7 to be an upgrade over my K20 since its provides no ISO performance improvement.
Quite an amazing statement to make, considering that every single parameter other than high ISO performance is an improvement over the K20, and comparing the high ISO noise levels on both cameras is just trying to determine which one sucks more.
05-05-2010, 06:13 AM   #49
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,630
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
I concur, the LR3 is really a big revelation. and it is way much better than what the Pentax dslr's camera NR feature could ever achieve in achieving both clean and detailed images, including the k-x. warning: this is not for in-camera jpeg enthusiasts or non-pp individuals.

Same here...

I was very happy to find the same noise engine bundled in CS5 ACR also. Adobe has really pushed the envelope with NR this round and of course, were are all glad to have it!

It makes me wonder how much room there is left for improvements in areas such as these. I mean... just as I was beginning to accept that there was no magic involved in recovering data that wasn't there, something like this comes along and changes everything.

Now... I'm wondering how far things can go.
Maybe one day, sensor's won't matter as much as we think? as processing will be so effective, we'll be seeing cell phone camera's taking clean 128K images.

05-05-2010, 07:24 AM   #50
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,720
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
Now... I'm wondering how far things can go.
That program that cleans up focus is amazing.

QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
Maybe one day, sensor's won't matter as much as we think? as processing will be so effective, we'll be seeing cell phone camera's taking clean 128K images.
With in-camera lens correction, cell phone cameras will soon do ISO 128K through a crappy plastic lens with no CA, vignetting or distortion.
05-05-2010, 07:27 AM   #51
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,720
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
comparing the high ISO noise levels on both cameras is just trying to determine which one sucks more.
That's a bit overboard don't you think? The low light performance of dslr's is pretty impressive to me considering I wouldn't go above ISO 400 on my old Minolta film camera.
05-05-2010, 08:19 AM   #52
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Quite an amazing statement to make, considering that every single parameter other than high ISO performance is an improvement over the K20, and comparing the high ISO noise levels on both cameras is just trying to determine which one sucks more.
Well I do appreciate the polite way you phrased your statement :-)

To me its not so amazing and not so different from what many other folks have previously said. I'm not saying that there aren't improvements in the K7, there certainly are. But i don't intend to buy each new camera as it comes along.

I just went through a great experience for an amateur, having theatre photos published in 3 newspapers and great compliments for decorating the local theatre lobby with 16 photos. Several of those photos I selected from 3 other photographers which helped broaden my perspective. During low light scenes (flash prohibited), those photos that stood out from the 1100 i reviewed, were the ones that used 3200 or 4000 ISO to improve aperture/DOF or shutter speed to freeze action.

Many of you experienced photographers encourage new people to establish their equipment priorities for their type of photography. And thats what i've done. I've narrowed my priority down to just 3: high ISO, high ISO, high ISO :-) Everything else I need for my photography is doable with the K20.

The Kx has been very remarkable in bringing new owners to the Pentax brand. My conclusion on what's driving its popularity and its reviews is high ISO performance - at least for the experienced buyers.

Last edited by philbaum; 05-05-2010 at 08:43 AM.
05-05-2010, 09:22 AM   #53
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote

The Kx has been very remarkable in bringing new owners to the Pentax brand. My conclusion on what's driving its popularity and its reviews is high ISO performance - at least for the experienced buyers.
that's the power of marketing.

05-05-2010, 09:22 AM   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
That program that cleans up focus is amazing.

Care to tell us the name of said program? Is it Focus Magic or Smart Sharpen (inside Photoshop)? Both of these use deconvolution sharpening.

Rob
05-05-2010, 11:56 AM   #55
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,720
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
Care to tell us the name of said program? Is it Focus Magic or Smart Sharpen (inside Photoshop)? Both of these use deconvolution sharpening.

Rob
I couldn't think of the name (don't use it), but Focus Magic is the one I've seen demonstrated. Does Smart Sharpen produce comparable results?
05-06-2010, 08:30 AM   #56
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Forestville, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,690
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
that's the power of marketing.
...and also the power of a sensor that delivers a visible improvement in high ISO quality...
05-06-2010, 03:31 PM   #57
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
...and also the power of a sensor that delivers a visible improvement in high ISO quality...
k-x's sensor really surprised me when it was released. I did not expect pentax to improve this part so much. While people were chanting for high iso buy canon or nikon , suddenly you see pentax on top of that chart.

it seems to me that pentax worked very hard on kx. They marketed it well and came up with a strategy (100 colors etc). Pricing was good. And then in the end camera delivered when it comes to image quality too.
05-06-2010, 07:13 PM   #58
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I couldn't think of the name (don't use it), but Focus Magic is the one I've seen demonstrated. Does Smart Sharpen produce comparable results?
Both Focus Magic and Smart Sharpen use a process known as deconvolution, which is different from unsharp mask. DxO Optics Pro also uses it for deblurring of certain lenses. I personally suspect, but have no proof, that Capture One's Clarity tool utilizes deconvolution as well. I love it. C1 merely states that their Clarity works differently from that of other programs (e.g. Lightroom/ACR), and I can vouch for that.

Rob
05-06-2010, 07:44 PM   #59
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Forestville, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,690
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
Both Focus Magic and Smart Sharpen use a process known as deconvolution, which is different from unsharp mask. DxO Optics Pro also uses it for deblurring of certain lenses. I personally suspect, but have no proof, that Capture One's Clarity tool utilizes deconvolution as well. I love it. C1 merely states that their Clarity works differently from that of other programs (e.g. Lightroom/ACR), and I can vouch for that.

Rob
Lightroom (and therefore probably ACR) work primarily with local contrast for their clarity slider. I'd be curious to find out what Capture One's clarity slider uses, though I must admit that in my own foray with the 30-day trial I didn't like C1's clarity slider at all (it led to a visible degradation in the tonality of files and some detail was destroyed... really not sure why). Maybe I was doing it wrong, who knows.

Interestingly, the free program RAWTherapee also offers a deconvolution sharpening tool, and I've heard that it can do great things when used properly (which takes some learning). There's also a local contrast slider, but it's not as refined as the clarity tool in lightroom, causing significant halos around areas of sharp light/dark transition to a degree you just don't see in lightroom.
05-06-2010, 10:27 PM   #60
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
thanks for the info guys. our options are just getting much bigger and better.
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!
camera, da*50-135mm, dslr, iso, k-7, k20d, k7, photo, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
m4/3 high ISO better than K20d ?? arbib Photographic Technique 12 09-10-2010 06:30 PM
Kx / K20D comparison on high ISO kasv Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 12-02-2009 03:26 PM
K20D High ISO Performance joelovotti Pentax DSLR Discussion 22 03-17-2009 06:47 PM
Km vs K20D High ISO tarsus Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 01-07-2009 03:53 PM
K20D rediculous high ISO pictures codiac2600 Post Your Photos! 42 03-17-2008 12:11 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:24 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