Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-20-2009, 11:11 PM   #31
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
I suppose the much faster and more responsive autofocus is indeed pretty much inconsequential, except for the keeping you from missing shots, even when it's just a person walking out of view.

The faster frame rate, as well, is obviously of no importance.
Those were indeed the main two other improvements I was thinking of. They wouldn't change one thing about my shooting - I don't tend to lose shots due to slow AF even with my K200D, and I've never lost one due to too slow a frame rate. I imagine the same is true of most people, although no doubt they do make some difference sometimes to some people. But we're still talking about a smaller dimmer viewfinder, fewer controls, no weather sealing, etc. Technology has advanced in certain ways, but it hasn't made the K-x a better camera in all ways - just in a few. If those happen to be the ways that are important to you, great. And obviously I was exaggerating slightly to make a point - these things are not really "inconsequential". But it is important, I think, to put them into perspective. It's equally inaccurate to say the K-x "kills" the K20D.

11-21-2009, 11:25 AM   #32
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,673
QuoteOriginally posted by fearview Quote
im really interest with what you said here sir.. can u give me link to whoever has done some test?

--
Apparently Lumolabs has done some interesting testing on the subject, if you want to look them up.

However, my statements have nothing to do with any sort of camera tests or comparisons done on the internet. I'm talking about what I see in the images I bring home after I go out and take pictures, which is what really matters to me. Graphs and charts get boring after a while.

Marc, I agree that the differences in speed are less consequential for some than others, while the differences in controls and sealing are also factors on a similar level, depending on the user. What I was particularly replying to (in an admittedly roundabout way) was the statement that the K-x was only better, IQ-wise, at high ISO. While the high-ISO results are exciting, they're leading everyone to overlook the fact that the K-x is absolutely phenomenal at base ISO; the files are "robust" in a sense that they never have been before. The Shadow DR is actually relevant and usable. The resolution is remarkably close to the K20D as well. I would honestly say that unless you absolutely need those extra pixels, or you prefer the subjective "look" of the Samsung sensor (it is a little different), the K-x is in fact a superior low-ISO imager as well.
11-21-2009, 12:03 PM   #33
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,644
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
I would honestly say that unless you absolutely need those extra pixels, or you prefer the subjective "look" of the Samsung sensor (it is a little different), the K-x is in fact a superior low-ISO imager as well.
It appears I may be one who prefer the subjective look of K20D photos. And K100D Super photos too. I just looked at pages of photos of all three on Flikr and I have to agree with what I've heard elsewhere. The K-x colours in the photos I saw this morning are dull and uninteresting to me, not Pentax-like at all.
11-21-2009, 12:19 PM   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,720
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
...The K-x colours in the photos I saw this morning are dull and uninteresting to me, not Pentax-like at all.
Oh God, here we go again Full circle.

I've always thought there are two things to dispute here: 'K-x colours' and 'Pentax like'. Neither exists. This is an argument over a phantom. A degree of reflection over the technical basis for either term would stop any such arguments before they began.

11-21-2009, 12:30 PM   #35
wll
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Mission Hills, CA
Posts: 773
Just did some test shots: K-7 vs K-x

No I won't post them as there are people in the shots, but .....

Shot a K-7 and a K-x at Fry's, shot the K-7 at 3200 and the K-x at 6400 and 12800.

To my eyes the K-x high iso is about a stop and a half better than the K-7. The K-7's grain is very tight but still grainy. Shots were in Jpeg.

The K-7 is quite a machine, I loved the sound of the shutter and it feels great in my hands.

Come on Pentax, how about a K-7 using the K-x sensor.


wll
11-21-2009, 12:49 PM   #36
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,644
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Oh God, here we go again Full circle.

I've always thought there are two things to dispute here: 'K-x colours' and 'Pentax like'. Neither exists. This is an argument over a phantom. A degree of reflection over the technical basis for either term would stop any such arguments before they began.
Pleasing colours are subjective. I love the colour rendition of my cameras. I don't see it in the K-x. The photos look like they were made with some other brand. I'm not going to argue about it. It was mentioned and I looked at the pics and I agree. Muted colours don't interest me. I'm not closing the door on the K-x, but I'm going to wait and see if the low ISO IQ is a step down from the K100DS it would replace.
11-21-2009, 01:43 PM   #37
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,673
I have to agree that the K-x tends to need a little more on the saturation sliders. This does not in any way prevent me from getting the colors I like out of it, though.
11-21-2009, 02:07 PM   #38
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,720
QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
I have to agree that the K-x tends to need a little more on the saturation sliders. This does not in any way prevent me from getting the colors I like out of it, though.
Yes, that's partly my point. Users can tune any modern DSLR to adjust it's output pretty much however they like, in camera or PP. It's like people saying they prefer 'Ford speed' compared to 'Toyota speed'.

11-21-2009, 03:00 PM   #39
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,644
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Yes, that's partly my point. Users can tune any modern DSLR to adjust it's output pretty much however they like, in camera or PP. It's like people saying they prefer 'Ford speed' compared to 'Toyota speed'.
To a point, except that boosting saturation often results in blowing the yellow and/or red out completely. I have seen blown reds with the K-x.

I would consider Ford speed and Toyota speed to be different due to different torque response of larger vs smaller engines. ;~)
11-21-2009, 11:51 PM   #40
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
Original Poster
I used LR 3.0 beta, LR 2.6 RC and UFRAW for K-x and D300s.
I can say the colour depends on RAW converter. For jpegs - depends on settings.
I've got the identical colour from UFRAW for K-x and D300s.
11-22-2009, 12:36 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
As i said color is pure myth, you can change to whatever you like.

Here are two from last weekend, place shodoshima (japan).

Camera is K-x.

colors adjusted to my taste.

lense 28mm M f2.8.




lense 135mm M F2.5.



Camera is just a tool.
11-22-2009, 01:44 AM   #42
Veteran Member
Zebooka's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Russia, Siberia, Novosibirsk
Posts: 323
Very nice color rendering....
Superb!
11-22-2009, 02:03 AM   #43
Pentaxian
fearview's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Jakarta
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,067
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Oh God, here we go again Full circle.

I've always thought there are two things to dispute here: 'K-x colours' and 'Pentax like'. Neither exists. This is an argument over a phantom. A degree of reflection over the technical basis for either term would stop any such arguments before they began.


never ending argument..

@zxaar

you know that second pic is fantastic.
11-22-2009, 10:42 AM   #44
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
Pleasing colours are subjective. I love the colour rendition of my cameras. I don't see it in the K-x. The photos look like they were made with some other brand. I'm not going to argue about it.
OK, but then, you must admit you are actually talking about the JPEG engine and nothing else - because the actual sensor data is identical between the K100DS and lots of other cameras. And once you accept that what you are actually talking about isd the JPEG engine, then you must consider the possibility that simply shooting RAW with your own customized presets - or even custom tweaking the camera JPEG settings (there are more controls than just saturation) could probably make the color look exactly as you like it.

You should also consider, BTW, that the K-x is an entry level camera and is probably being shot disproportionately by beginning photographers using the kit lens and all default settings. So I wouldn't read too much into it if you're not seeing a lot of really professional-quality results.
11-22-2009, 11:06 AM   #45
Pentaxian
ryan s's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,370
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
My conclusion:

K-x offers the same level of resolution as D300s and has a bit lower noise at ISO from 200-1600, and approx. 2/3 f-stops better from ISO3200.
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Not me. It's Sigma 70/2.8 macro.
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
I used LR 3.0 beta, LR 2.6 RC and UFRAW for K-x and D300s.
I can say the colour depends on RAW converter. For jpegs - depends on settings.
I've got the identical colour from UFRAW for K-x and D300s.
So what I'm reading into this is that you actually haven't used the camera, correct?

If you're just downloading Raw files taken by others, I really hope no one bases their opinion on your opinion.
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, dslr, k-x, lr, nr, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DA15 - where is good resolution? ogl Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 82 05-10-2009 06:46 AM
k20d \ k200d have a good noise reduction? platinum Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 04-20-2008 01:47 PM
ISO noise - pentax K10D is good? platinum Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 04-18-2008 03:24 PM
good low light zooms? goldfishin Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 06-14-2007 10:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:43 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