A higher high-end from Pentax? Please?

MikePerham · 11-04-2009, 08:30 AM

Originally posted by RMabo

Sony uses very heavy noise processing for both JPEG's and RAW for the 550, just as they did with the 350. Sure Pentax could do the same, they dit it - to some level - with the K20D. But with the K-7, Pentax deiced to not NR process the RAW-files, leaving the RAW to be more, well, RAWish.

Yeah! I can always work on the noise in PP but I can not recover detail that has been obliterated in the RAW file. I recently saw someone show some comparisons that really highlighted the higher detail in the K-7 image over it's competitors and the excellent quality obtainable with some noise reduction software.

**Lowell Goudge** · 11-04-2009, 08:31 AM

what every body forgets is that while there are some specific needs (or perhaps wants is better) beyond the K7 for some pro photographers, what I see as a shortfall is lenses.

I think the last really complete lineup of lenses, covering the full range of needs for both pro's and amatures was the KA range. From there the options progressively reduced in the F, FA, FA-J and DA lenses.

AdrianN · 11-04-2009, 08:36 AM

Originally posted by smc

No brainer... the 67d

This would be digital first, right? I don't think anyone has done a "full frame" 6x7 yet. Would catapult Pentax right to the top of the truly pro camera scene!

SteveM · 11-04-2009, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by AdrianN

This would be digital first, right? I don't think anyone has done a "full frame" 6x7 yet. Would catapult Pentax right to the top of the truly pro camera scene!

Yes....not sure if Kodak or anyone else makes a 160 MP sensor. Actually, I'm not sure how many MP 67 would equate to...80MP?

res3567 · 11-04-2009, 12:57 PM

How bout this for the bodies:

Kx
K200Ds(it now shoots video)
K7s
K1(FF)

And lenses for the K1

24-105 f2.8 S-M-C
70-250mm f2.8(is that possible?) S-M-C

er1kksen · 11-04-2009, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by RMabo

Sony uses very heavy noise processing for both JPEG's and RAW for the 550, just as they did with the 350. Sure Pentax could do the same, they dit it - to some level - with the K20D. But with the K-7, Pentax deiced to not NR process the RAW-files, leaving the RAW to be more, well, RAWish.

Sure Pentax could do the same heavy image processing for the top model as Sony is doing, but why would they? I believe that Pentax made the assumption that professional photographers wants untouched RAW-files, that professional photographers makes their own post processing.
Judging from this forum, many photographers wants the RAW to be heavy image processed. But then, why shoot RAW at all if it is processed? Processing the Sony-style to RAW files kills the RAW file, it is no longer a true RAW-file. It is a processed RAW-file, and then you process it even more in the RAW-converter. This means you loose control and you also loose image data.

And you talk about sensors here and there, and forgets the importance of image processing and the image pipeline.

A K-7 with the K-x sensor, but still with the subtle Pentax approach to RAW processing in the K-7, would mean K-7 image quality, not K-x. A K-7 with the K-x processing, but still with the Samsung sensor, would mean a result closer to the K-x.

The sensor is just one of the issues here, the major thing is the processing. Here Pentax and Sony thinks very differently for the top end models. Just look as the top model Sony A900, very heavy processing going on in there. To the RAW-files. Yes.

Pentax has showned that they don't believe in heavy processing of RAW-files, for their top model. So that is why the K-7 has a different approach to this than all other Pentax DSLR's.
(Pentax did believe in processing to RAW-files in the K20D and K10D, but the K-7 aims higher...).

This is true to some degree, regarding the fact that Sony does a lot of processing, but the new chip in the K-x has lower native noise levels as well due to improved chip design. Incidentally, the photosites of the K20D and K-7 sensor are very low-noise as well, but the chip circuitry adds a fair bit more noise (hence the notion that the Samsung sensors run "hot"). What I'd like to see is another Samsung 14.6 or so mp sensor but with the improved ADCs and etc limiting sensor noise to allow the efficiency of the individual photosites to shine through.

The 14mp chip seen in previous Sony upper-entry-level cameras, on the other hand, has not impressed me at all. I'd have to rate the samples as some of the worst I've seen from an APS-C sensor. Maybe the new one in the A550 is better, maybe not. I think I'd still prefer the character of the Samsung sensors in top-of-the-line pentaxes for the time being.

schmik · 11-04-2009, 08:24 PM

Originally posted by dylansalt

The new 7D is the same price as the K7 - has incredible resolution,lowlight performance-phenominal af and video.

What is going on in SA? here in Aus the k7 is approx $1500 and the 7d is approx $2500

mike

Miserere · 11-05-2009, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by RMabo

A K-7 with the K-x sensor, but still with the subtle Pentax approach to RAW processing in the K-7, would mean K-7 image quality, not K-x. A K-7 with the K-x processing, but still with the Samsung sensor, would mean a result closer to the K-x.

Two cameras from different brands using the same sensor will have different outputs. Pentax has done great with Sony sensors before (K100D, K10D, K200D, etc), and it has done it again with the K-x. I've seen comparison images of the K-x and K-7 at ISO 1600, 3200 and 6400, and the K-x shows much better control of both chroma and luminance noise. Yes, the K-x's images were less noisy and exhibited higher detail—a win-win situation if there ever was one.

Now that Samsung appears to be moving away from DSLRs, I wouldn't be surprised if the K-7 were the last of the Pentax DSLRs to use one of their chips. For my part, I hope the K-7's successor uses a Sony sensor.

.

knoxploration · 11-05-2009, 01:11 PM

Originally posted by dylansalt

The new 7D is the same price as the K7 - has incredible resolution,lowlight performance-phenominal af and video.

Those two cameras aren't even close to the same price, at least in North America and many other markets. The K-7 can be had new body-only in the USA for less than $1,050 while the 7D is at least US$1,700 (both prices are the cheapest I'm currently aware of from reputable retailers).

You're comparing the K-7 to a camera that's not that far off double its price - of course the more expensive camera is going to win that comparison.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which higher end flash would/have you purchased?	Clinton	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	31	06-09-2010 11:59 AM
PENTAX ANNOUNCES AFFORDABLE GAMESEEKER II RIFLE SCOPES WITH HIGH-END OPTICS	Adam	Homepage & Official Pentax News	0	01-04-2010 03:10 PM
PENTAX ANNOUNCES AFFORDABLE, NEW PENTAX K-x WITH HIGH-END FEATURES INCLUDING HD VIDEO	Adam	Homepage & Official Pentax News	22	09-19-2009 08:37 AM
anyone notice Best Buy carries the higher end models now?	kenyee	Pentax News and Rumors	5	11-17-2008 07:36 AM
high end raw converters	Gooshin	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	5	03-01-2008 08:59 AM

11-04-2009, 08:30 AM	#16
MikePerham Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Prince George, BC Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 642	Originally posted by RMabo Sony uses very heavy noise processing for both JPEG's and RAW for the 550, just as they did with the 350. Sure Pentax could do the same, they dit it - to some level - with the K20D. But with the K-7, Pentax deiced to not NR process the RAW-files, leaving the RAW to be more, well, RAWish. Yeah! I can always work on the noise in PP but I can not recover detail that has been obliterated in the RAW file. I recently saw someone show some comparisons that really highlighted the higher detail in the K-7 image over it's competitors and the excellent quality obtainable with some noise reduction software.

11-04-2009, 08:31 AM	#17
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	what every body forgets is that while there are some specific needs (or perhaps wants is better) beyond the K7 for some pro photographers, what I see as a shortfall is lenses. I think the last really complete lineup of lenses, covering the full range of needs for both pro's and amatures was the KA range. From there the options progressively reduced in the F, FA, FA-J and DA lenses.

11-04-2009, 08:36 AM	#18
AdrianN Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Sydney Posts: 66	Originally posted by smc No brainer... the 67d This would be digital first, right? I don't think anyone has done a "full frame" 6x7 yet. Would catapult Pentax right to the top of the truly pro camera scene!

11-04-2009, 11:00 AM	#19
SteveM Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,294	Originally posted by AdrianN This would be digital first, right? I don't think anyone has done a "full frame" 6x7 yet. Would catapult Pentax right to the top of the truly pro camera scene! Yes....not sure if Kodak or anyone else makes a 160 MP sensor. Actually, I'm not sure how many MP 67 would equate to...80MP?

11-04-2009, 12:57 PM	#20
res3567 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Houston Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,876	How bout this for the bodies: Kx K200Ds(it now shoots video) K7s K1(FF) And lenses for the K1 24-105 f2.8 S-M-C 70-250mm f2.8(is that possible?) S-M-C

11-04-2009, 02:26 PM	#21
er1kksen Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Forestville, NY Photos: Albums Posts: 1,801	Originally posted by RMabo Sony uses very heavy noise processing for both JPEG's and RAW for the 550, just as they did with the 350. Sure Pentax could do the same, they dit it - to some level - with the K20D. But with the K-7, Pentax deiced to not NR process the RAW-files, leaving the RAW to be more, well, RAWish. Sure Pentax could do the same heavy image processing for the top model as Sony is doing, but why would they? I believe that Pentax made the assumption that professional photographers wants untouched RAW-files, that professional photographers makes their own post processing. Judging from this forum, many photographers wants the RAW to be heavy image processed. But then, why shoot RAW at all if it is processed? Processing the Sony-style to RAW files kills the RAW file, it is no longer a true RAW-file. It is a processed RAW-file, and then you process it even more in the RAW-converter. This means you loose control and you also loose image data. And you talk about sensors here and there, and forgets the importance of image processing and the image pipeline. A K-7 with the K-x sensor, but still with the subtle Pentax approach to RAW processing in the K-7, would mean K-7 image quality, not K-x. A K-7 with the K-x processing, but still with the Samsung sensor, would mean a result closer to the K-x. The sensor is just one of the issues here, the major thing is the processing. Here Pentax and Sony thinks very differently for the top end models. Just look as the top model Sony A900, very heavy processing going on in there. To the RAW-files. Yes. Pentax has showned that they don't believe in heavy processing of RAW-files, for their top model. So that is why the K-7 has a different approach to this than all other Pentax DSLR's. (Pentax did believe in processing to RAW-files in the K20D and K10D, but the K-7 aims higher...). This is true to some degree, regarding the fact that Sony does a lot of processing, but the new chip in the K-x has lower native noise levels as well due to improved chip design. Incidentally, the photosites of the K20D and K-7 sensor are very low-noise as well, but the chip circuitry adds a fair bit more noise (hence the notion that the Samsung sensors run "hot"). What I'd like to see is another Samsung 14.6 or so mp sensor but with the improved ADCs and etc limiting sensor noise to allow the efficiency of the individual photosites to shine through. The 14mp chip seen in previous Sony upper-entry-level cameras, on the other hand, has not impressed me at all. I'd have to rate the samples as some of the worst I've seen from an APS-C sensor. Maybe the new one in the A550 is better, maybe not. I think I'd still prefer the character of the Samsung sensors in top-of-the-line pentaxes for the time being.

11-04-2009, 08:24 PM	#22
schmik Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sydney Aus Photos: Gallery Posts: 527	Originally posted by dylansalt The new 7D is the same price as the K7 - has incredible resolution,lowlight performance-phenominal af and video. What is going on in SA? here in Aus the k7 is approx $1500 and the 7d is approx $2500 mike

11-05-2009, 12:56 PM	#23
Miserere Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Boston Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,993	Originally posted by RMabo A K-7 with the K-x sensor, but still with the subtle Pentax approach to RAW processing in the K-7, would mean K-7 image quality, not K-x. A K-7 with the K-x processing, but still with the Samsung sensor, would mean a result closer to the K-x. Two cameras from different brands using the same sensor will have different outputs. Pentax has done great with Sony sensors before (K100D, K10D, K200D, etc), and it has done it again with the K-x. I've seen comparison images of the K-x and K-7 at ISO 1600, 3200 and 6400, and the K-x shows much better control of both chroma and luminance noise. Yes, the K-x's images were less noisy and exhibited higher detail—a win-win situation if there ever was one. Now that Samsung appears to be moving away from DSLRs, I wouldn't be surprised if the K-7 were the last of the Pentax DSLRs to use one of their chips. For my part, I hope the K-7's successor uses a Sony sensor. .

11-05-2009, 01:11 PM	#24
knoxploration Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 846	Originally posted by dylansalt The new 7D is the same price as the K7 - has incredible resolution,lowlight performance-phenominal af and video. Those two cameras aren't even close to the same price, at least in North America and many other markets. The K-7 can be had new body-only in the USA for less than $1,050 while the 7D is at least US$1,700 (both prices are the cheapest I'm currently aware of from reputable retailers). You're comparing the K-7 to a camera that's not that far off double its price - of course the more expensive camera is going to win that comparison.