[Laurentiu Cristofor]

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.

[audiobomber]

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.

[Wheatfield]

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.

[JohnBee]

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.

[audiobomber]

Now... I'm wondering how far things can go.

That program that cleans up focus is amazing.

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.

[audiobomber]

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.

[philbaum]

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.

[Pentaxor]

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.

[robgo2]

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

[audiobomber]

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?

[er1kksen]

that's the power of marketing.

...and also the power of a sensor that delivers a visible improvement in high ISO quality...

[zxaar]

...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.

[robgo2]

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

[er1kksen]

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.

[Pentaxor]

thanks for the info guys. our options are just getting much bigger and better.