Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-15-2009, 07:11 AM   #1
Veteran Member
pcarfan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,960
K-7 Full test at Imaging-resources.

I don't think this is posted in this forum yet. (If it is, please delete this thread....I saw it at Dpreview, and thought I'll post it here)



http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K7/K7A7.HTM

I think they had figured out all the fine requirements to get excellent images out of this K-7. There is a tremendous steep learning curve to get excellent results out of high iso K-7 images.

Just to get you all interested. The FF Nikon D700 to the left and the APS-C K-7 to the right at iso 1600.



Edited to show the whole crop.

No, the K-7 is NOT better than the D700 ...as one has to after all, look at the whole image ....but, it is a fine performer. IMO, easily better than the D300.


Last edited by pcarfan; 08-15-2009 at 09:01 AM.
08-15-2009, 07:28 AM   #2
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,695
Although the WB is slightly different (I favour the D700 image), the actual sharpness and clarity of the K-7 image appears somewhat clearer than the D700's - I'm not sure this is indicative, though, given the difference in DOF and slight variations in perspective.

Either way, this is probably peeping beyond necessary - both are fine tools.
08-15-2009, 07:56 AM   #3
Veteran Member
pcarfan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,960
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
Although the WB is slightly different (I favour the D700 image), the actual sharpness and clarity of the K-7 image appears somewhat clearer than the D700's - I'm not sure this is indicative, though, given the difference in DOF and slight variations in perspective.

Either way, this is probably peeping beyond necessary - both are fine tools.
No, the k-7 is in no way comparable to the D700 FF...NO. NO, NO.

I was just posting it to show, how the eye can deceive one by pixel peeping. Both are fine tools, but the D700 is clearly the better tool, irrespective of what this tiny part of one image at the pixel level may show. That is my point.

But, K-7 is a stellar performer but I am not a cray fan to say that is better than the D700 for high iso...no way.
08-15-2009, 08:01 AM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 239
Yeah as with Ash, K-7 seems more details in the jacket - look at the button/button hole area and beads.

I like the right side one hehe

08-15-2009, 08:13 AM   #5
Veteran Member
pcarfan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,960
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by eva2000 Quote
Yeah as with Ash, K-7 seems more details in the jacket - look at the button/button hole area and beads.

I like the right side one hehe
Oh! oh!..I think it is slipping out of my hands. It is true the k-7 image appears to be better, this is the problem with pixel peeping. I have the k-7, it is an amazing tool...much better iso performer than what some are saying here. But, it is no way comparable to the D700 for high iso.

You have to check the whole image and look at several images. The K-7 appears to show more detail here, but the noise level of the whole image is much noisier for the K-7 and the detail is probably due to a weak AA filter.

I am trying to show how pixel peeping can be misleading. I thought it was obvious that the d700 is in a different league in high iso performance to every APS-C camera including the k-7 and to some FF cameras, irrelevant of what this tiny part may show. I guess it is not all that obvious, hah!
08-15-2009, 08:31 AM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 239
I downloaded the full size versions to look and differences aren't that much (untrained eye here hehe)

looking at EXIF info, K-7 1600 ISO was with contrast and sharpness set to HARD (which is K-7 default out of the box IIRC) - sharpness at high ISO probably added more noise as folks have reported from tests too. D700 had contrast, sharpness set to NORMAL.

QuoteQuote:
Make - PENTAX
Model - PENTAX K-7
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - K-7 Ver 1.00
DateTime - 2009:07:24 12:54:37
Artist -
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
Copyright -
ExifOffset - 694
ExposureTime - 1/40 seconds
FNumber - 4.00
ExposureProgram - Aperture priority
ISOSpeedRatings - 1600
ExifVersion - 0221
DateTimeOriginal - 2009:07:24 12:54:37
DateTimeDigitized - 2009:07:24 12:54:37
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
ExposureBiasValue - 0.70
MeteringMode - Multi-segment
Flash - Flash not fired, compulsory flash mode
FocalLength - 70.00 mm
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 4672
ExifImageHeight - 3104
InteroperabilityOffset - 54456
SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
FileSource - Other
SceneType - Other
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Manual
White Balance - Manual
FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 105 mm
SceneCaptureType - Standard
Contrast - Hard
Saturation - Normal
Sharpness - Hard

SubjectDistanceRange - Distant view

Maker Note (Vendor): -
Mode - Auto
Quality - 5
ISO - 1600
White Balance - Manual
Lens Type - Sigma

Thumbnail: -
Compression - 6 (JPG)
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
JpegIFOffset - 54580
JpegIFByteCount - 8135
QuoteQuote:
Make - NIKON CORPORATION
Model - NIKON D700
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 300
YResolution - 300
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - Ver.1.00
DateTime - 2008:07:17 11:02:40
Artist -
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
Copyright -
ExifOffset - 348
ExposureTime - 1/50 seconds
FNumber - 4.00
ExposureProgram - Aperture priority
ISOSpeedRatings - 1600
ExifVersion - 0221
DateTimeOriginal - 2008:07:17 11:02:40
DateTimeDigitized - 2008:07:17 11:02:40
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel - 4 (bits/pixel)
ExposureBiasValue - -0.33
MaxApertureValue - F 2.83
MeteringMode - Multi-segment
LightSource - Auto
Flash - Not fired
FocalLength - 70.00 mm
UserComment -
SubsecTime - 33
SubsecTimeOriginal - 33
SubsecTimeDigitized - 33
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 4256
ExifImageHeight - 2832
InteroperabilityOffset - 34010
SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
FileSource - Other
SceneType - Other
CustomRendered - Normal process
ExposureMode - Auto
White Balance - Manual
DigitalZoomRatio - 1 x
FocalLengthIn35mmFilm - 70 mm
SceneCaptureType - Standard
GainControl - High gain up
Contrast - Normal
Saturation - Normal
Sharpness - Normal

SubjectDistanceRange - Unknown

GPS information: -
GPSVersionID - 2.2.0.0

Maker Note (Vendor): -
Data version - 0210 (808595760)
ISO Setting - 1600
Image Quality - FINE
White Balance - PRESET0
Focus Mode - AF-S
Flash Setting - NORMAL
Flash Mode -
White Balance Adjustment - 0
White Balance RB - 682
Exposure Adjustment - 68608
Thumbnail IFD offset - 8030
Flash Compensation - 67072
ISO 2 - 1600
Lens type - AF-D G
Lens - 838
Flash Used - Not fired
Bracketing - 131072
Noise Reduction - OFF
Total pictures - 903

Thumbnail: -
Compression - 6 (JPG)
XResolution - 300
YResolution - 300
ResolutionUnit - Inch
JpegIFOffset - 34168
JpegIFByteCount - 9020
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
But yeah i know D700 High ISO > K-7 especially if in low light scenes. Just not much of an issue for me as I don't have $$$ for D700 and even if I did, size of K-7 is right for me. Now if D700 came in K-7 form/size and price - yes please hehe

Last edited by eva2000; 08-15-2009 at 08:37 AM.
08-15-2009, 08:32 AM   #7
Pentaxian
hinman's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fremont, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,427
QuoteOriginally posted by pcarfan Quote
Oh! oh!..I think it is slipping out of my hands. It is true the k-7 image appears to be better, this is the problem with pixel peeping. I have the k-7, it is an amazing tool...much better iso performer than what some are saying here. But, it is no way comparable to the D700 for high iso.

You have to check the whole image and look at several images. The K-7 appears to show more detail here, but the noise level of the whole image is much noisier for the K-7 and the detail is probably due to a weak AA filter.

I am trying to show how pixel peeping can be misleading. I thought it was obvious that the d700 is in a different league in high iso performance to every APS-C camera including the k-7 and to some FF cameras, irrelevant of what this tiny part may show. I guess it is not all that obvious, hah!
Don't worry pcarfan, I am with you on your assessment. I wonder if you can bring in the same comparison between k-7 and D300, which I think will draw better comparisons. Thanks!

Hin
08-15-2009, 08:49 AM   #8
Veteran Member
pcarfan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,960
Original Poster
D300 on the left and K-7 on the right.

The same crop with the D300 and K-7. But, overall looking at images at various settings, the k-7 always preserve more detail than the D300. At times the k-7 has a bit more noise, but mostly better detail and better noise. the reds are not so good in K-7, so the d300 is better with the reds.




Last edited by pcarfan; 08-15-2009 at 09:08 AM.
08-15-2009, 08:59 AM   #9
Veteran Member
pcarfan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,960
Original Poster
Here is how the K-7 reds compared to the d300. This is the 'still life', where the k-7 and D300 are a tie IMO, except with the reds where the D300 is better.

D300 left, K-7 right. K-7 loses out here. The overall K-7 image is also noisier but preserves more detail.


Last edited by pcarfan; 08-15-2009 at 09:04 AM.
08-15-2009, 09:35 AM   #10
Senior Member
SpartanWarrior's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sparta, Greece.
Posts: 104
K-7 looks great and i myself like the K-7 ones better than the D700 sure the D700 is better at high ISO but it's a FF but i would much rather have the K-7 just look at that detail, and i bet that the K-7 high ISO is not that far off from the D300
08-15-2009, 12:18 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by pcarfan Quote
Here is how the K-7 reds compared to the d300. This is the 'still life', where the k-7 and D300 are a tie IMO, except with the reds where the D300 is better.

D300 left, K-7 right. K-7 loses out here. The overall K-7 image is also noisier but preserves more detail.
I have looked at these two images many times over at IR, and I am puzzled by them. The K-7 seems to show less detail in the red fabrics but more in the pink one. Any explanation?

Rob
08-15-2009, 12:21 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by pcarfan Quote
Pentax K-7 Digital Camera Samples - Initial Test - The Imaging Resource!

I think they had figured out all the fine requirements to get excellent images out of this K-7. There is a tremendous steep learning curve to get excellent results out of high iso K-7 images.

Just to get you all interested. The FF Nikon D700 to the left and the APS-C K-7 to the right at iso 1600.

Edited to show the whole crop.

No, the K-7 is NOT better than the D700 ...as one has to after all, look at the whole image ....but, it is a fine performer. IMO, easily better than the D300.
I think it is quite possible that the K-7 can match or beat the D700 at low ISO. It is at high ISOs that a FF camera will be superior.

Rob
08-15-2009, 12:46 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 581
In terms of overall day to day shots, I'd say the D300 and K-7 were pretty much equally brilliant in terms of IQ based on the Imaging Resources test shots.

However, bump the ISO comparisons up and the K-7 is much more noisy at ISO 800 (with no more detail) and at ISO 3200 forget it. The D300 excels there.

That said, since the noise looks the same on the K-7 and the K20D, I know that real world shots with my K20D at ISO 1600 are absolutely fine provided you don't under expose. So unless you're pixel peeping, it won't matter.

The D3X, Sony A900 and 1DS MK3 samples are truly superb .
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, d700, dslr, images, iso, k-7, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Imaging Resource reviews K-x - in full rawr Pentax News and Rumors 4 03-17-2010 01:55 PM
Imaging-Resource full review of K-x UnknownVT Pentax DSLR Discussion 1 03-12-2010 12:35 PM
Imaging resources review... jeffkrol Pentax News and Rumors 18 08-29-2009 09:58 PM
Full K-7 review up at Imaging Resource gazonk Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 08-23-2009 08:11 AM
Imaging Resources K10D review *isteve Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 04-06-2007 06:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:13 PM. | 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