[mcjm78]

Found this test from another forum....

http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php?tid=773904&extra=page%3D1

according to them, with NR high, the noise is better.

I did another test myself with NR high, as I only use medium or low previously , and I'm quite happy now with the JPEG output. I use bright setting with -1 on the normal sharpness setting. FS2 still a bit too much grain for me.

I didn't use NR high in v1.01, so I can't really comment on the differences.

---

Last edited by mcjm78; 10-24-2009 at 05:13 AM. Reason: correct the link

[pcarfan]

Found this test from another forum....

http://www.dchome.net/viewthread.php...extra=page%3D1

according to them, with NR high, the noise is better.

I did another test myself with NR high, as I only use medium or low previously , and I'm quite happy now with the JPEG output. I use bright setting with -1 on the normal sharpness setting. FS2 still a bit too much grain for me.

I didn't use NR high in v1.01, so I can't really comment on the differences.

Your link is not working. There was some color blotching in High NR with 6400, and even 3200. If they fixed that, then it would be fabulous. So, would love to get the proper link here........

[mcjm78]

opps.. Just fixed it. Bad copy and paste job.

Should be working now.

[pcarfan]

It's working. I guess the top images are with the new firmware, but then the resolution is different between the two sets, so it is rather confusing.

[kittykat46]

It's working. I guess the top images are with the new firmware, but then the resolution is different between the two sets, so it is rather confusing.

All the images are with the new firmware, at High Noise Reduction.
The first set are downsized images, then he posted the 2nd set of identical shots at full resolution - so you can judge better.

Seems the High NR algorithm has been improved - I hardly ever shoot JPEG at High NR because the previous implementation was almost unusable. Will test it out at night.

[jgredline]

One of the local pro shops here does have a K-7 and a good return policy, So I will pick one up this morning to compare it with mine and see if I indeed do have a lemon. I am thinking that I do have a lemon. I did try the firmware upgrade again and again even at ISO400 was pretty bad. I went back to the 1.01 and it was fine again...
Some images from yesterday with the old firmware.
K-7 with the Sigma 24mm f/2.8 prime.

[kittykat46]

Certainly nothing wrong with your camera output in V1.01

But why the inferior results from V1.02 ? Hard to believe individual camera variation can be so great in what seems to be a normal functioning camera in V1.01

Have you tried a fresh download from the website for the V1.02 firmware to update ?
Download data through the Internet isn't always 100% perfect. Usually a defective .EXE file will not execute at all, but sometimes it still can, with totally unpredicatble results.

[jan rinze]

Javier,

Any update on your K-7 adventure? I have tested my K-7 with ISO 800 and either firmware yields the same noise. If you expect a completely smooth ISO 800 you must have an exceptionally good K-7!!
please keep us updated!

[jgredline]

Javier,

Any update on your K-7 adventure? I have tested my K-7 with ISO 800 and either firmware yields the same noise. If you expect a completely smooth ISO 800 you must have an exceptionally good K-7!!
please keep us updated!

I did end up buying a second K-7 and after a day or so of shooting with it, the noise was the same as my original K-7, So I was able to return it. I have conceded that the K-7 atleast for me when shooting Jpegs is to be held at between ISO100 and 640. I did shoot some RAW images and it does clean up to IS01600 but it is not as good as the K20D. So When I know I am going to be using ISO's higher than 640, I grab the K20D. Infact, I have the ISO set to auto 500-2500 in my K20D's and am quite comfortable with that. I am thinking of the K-X now, but the lack of a second wheel and LCD display are a real turn off to me.

For me the real killer is that I don't like to spend a whole lot of time PP pictures so I shoot Jpegs.

[heliphoto]

I did end up buying a second K-7 and after a day or so of shooting with it, the noise was the same as my original K-7, So I was able to return it. I have conceded that the K-7 atleast for me when shooting Jpegs is to be held at between ISO100 and 640. I did shoot some RAW images and it does clean up to IS01600 but it is not as good as the K20D. So When I know I am going to be using ISO's higher than 640, I grab the K20D. Infact, I have the ISO set to auto 500-2500 in my K20D's and am quite comfortable with that. I am thinking of the K-X now, but the lack of a second wheel and LCD display are a real turn off to me.

For me the real killer is that I don't like to spend a whole lot of time PP pictures so I shoot Jpegs.

Javier - this has been my exact experience except I always shoot RAW - however, I often shoot at or above 1600 ISO, and the K20D is what I use for these conditions too (for now)...

[jan rinze]

I did end up buying a second K-7 and after a day or so of shooting with it, the noise was the same as my original K-7, So I was able to return it. I have conceded that the K-7 atleast for me when shooting Jpegs is to be held at between ISO100 and 640. I did shoot some RAW images and it does clean up to IS01600 but it is not as good as the K20D. So When I know I am going to be using ISO's higher than 640, I grab the K20D. Infact, I have the ISO set to auto 500-2500 in my K20D's and am quite comfortable with that. I am thinking of the K-X now, but the lack of a second wheel and LCD display are a real turn off to me.

For me the real killer is that I don't like to spend a whole lot of time PP pictures so I shoot Jpegs.

Javier, have you tried using NR set to high and to make it start above ISO 400?
I did some testing and it looks quite good on my K-7 for OOC Jpegs.
What about the differences in noise for FW 1.01 and FW 1.02? i have tested it extensively and there is no measurable difference on my K-7.
For what it's worth, i use a K200D when i need better high ISO performance. Its 10Mpix sensor yields cleaner results (which is to be expected with bigger pixels)

Best regards,
Jan Rinze.

[jgredline]

Javier, have you tried using NR set to high and to make it start above ISO 400?
I did some testing and it looks quite good on my K-7 for OOC Jpegs.
What about the differences in noise for FW 1.01 and FW 1.02? i have tested it extensively and there is no measurable difference on my K-7.
For what it's worth, i use a K200D when i need better high ISO performance. Its 10Mpix sensor yields cleaner results (which is to be expected with bigger pixels)

Best regards,
Jan Rinze.

I did, but did not like the way it killed the detail.

[jacksonpritt]

Holy blown highlights, Batman!

Is that a problem with the K-7, or is that a personal style choice?

[heliphoto]

Holy blown highlights, Batman!

Is that a problem with the K-7, or is that a personal style choice?

Assuming you're reffering to Javier's work, I don't see many blown highlights in those photos - I do see white whites, but they don't look overexposed on my screen... besides, have you been to LA lately?.. it really looks like that .

I do believe that many people habitually underexpose to protect highlight's that are actually blown in real life - If you have to squint (or put on your sunglasses) at the brightness, consider it blown .

[jgredline]

Assuming you're reffering to Javier's work, I don't see many blown highlights in those photos - I do see white whites, but they don't look overexposed on my screen... besides, have you been to LA lately?.. it really looks like that .

I do believe that many people habitually underexpose to protect highlight's that are actually blown in real life - If you have to squint (or put on your sunglasses) at the brightness, consider it blown .

Thanks Josh. I could not see the blown highlights either and my monitor is calibrated. I will say this though. Since I tend to use high ISO settings, I do expose to the right and when I do get blown highlights, they really don't bother me...Now L.A. really does look like that. It is very hard at times to get it right...Thanks again.