(The Big shock) CANON 7D - NIKON D300S & PENTAX K-x ISO PERFORMANCE (The Big shock)

starscream · 11-20-2009, 12:30 AM

A course of the middle class to get heavy brother

Canon 7D body: 1700$ - Nikon D300s body: 1700$ - Pentax K-x body: 600$

****************

CANON EOS 7D (18mp) - ISO 1600
%100 full crop

Full Resolutions >> http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3950/e7dinbi01600.jpg

****************

NIKON D300S (12mp) - ISO 1600
%100 full crop

Full Resolutions >> http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5012/d300sinbi1600.jpg

****************

PENTAX K-x (12mp) - ISO 1600
%100 full crop

Full Resolutions >> http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/8824/kxinbi01600.jpg

****************

CANON EOS 7D (18mp) - ISO 3200
%100 full crop

Full Resolutions >> http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3517/e7dinbi03200.jpg

****************

NIKON D300S (12mp) - ISO 3200
%100 full crop

Full Resolutions>> http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/1169/d300sinbi3200.jpg

****************

PENTAX K-x (12mp) - ISO 3200
%100 full crop

Full Resolutions >> http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/2189/kxinbi03200.jpg

****************

CANON EOS 7D (18mp) - ISO 6400

%100 full crop

Full Resolutions >> http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/9727/e7dinbi06400.jpg

****************

NIKON D300S (12mp) - ISO 6400

%100 full crop

Full Resolutions >> http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/4710/d300sinbi6400.jpg

****************

PENTAX K-x (12mp) - ISO 6400

%100 full crop

Full Resolutions >> http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/5356/kxinbi06400.jpg

Imageresource Test >> Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page

Full Resolutions

Canon 50D ISO6400
http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/E50D/FULLRES/E50DINBI06400STDNR.JPG

Nikon D90 ISO6400
http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/D90/FULLRES/D90INBI6400.JPG

Canon 7D ISO12800
http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/E7D/FULLRES/E7DINBI12800.JPG

Pentax K-x ISO12800
http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/KX/FULLRES/KXINBI12800.JPG

ogl · 11-20-2009, 12:45 AM

It's NOT CORRECT to compare in-camera JPEG with different settings.

D300s and K-x in RAW are very close.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/80649-k-x-has-good...esolution.html

Ðàçíàÿ ôèãíÿ - îãë - Ó÷àñòíèêè - Ôîòîãàëåðåÿ iXBT

WerTicus · 11-20-2009, 01:29 AM

Yeah if these are out of camera jpg's then who cares.

RAW is the only way to compare.

Jadran · 11-20-2009, 01:44 AM

Not even the jpg from camera, but I guess converted with software at Imaging Resource. It's realy becoming anyoying that people make such conclusions as theese, based on IR images, not even using the photo cameras for anything serious. What does the difference in price means? Better body, pentaprism, weather seals, and much, much more. Just go and buy K-x and be satisfied that you re better photographer then guys with D300. I mean, really!

artemapei · 11-20-2009, 10:00 AM

7d and d300 is of a much higher class even higher - than k-7. still images mostly depend on CMOP than camera (body). so it's understandable that even nowday's entry level DRLR can have better images output than top-pro 5 years ago (1Ds for example). meanwhile it does not make sense to compare them direcly...

UnknownVT · 11-20-2009, 10:41 AM

This was an interesting (and valid) comparison - albeit of JPGs.

Remember many people use JPGs straight out of the camera -
so it does reflect many people's usage.

Why do I consider it valid?

Imaging-Resource uses consistent and repeatable targets/images that can be directly compared.

Both Canon and Nikon have a deserved reputation for having some of the best in-camera JPG processing.

So I consider the comparison as looking at the Kx JPG images vs. the best on offer out there - not necessarily as a comparison of the features/quality of the cameras themselves.

Another worthwhile comparison would be between the Kx and Nikon D5000 and Canon T1i - which are probably the current leaders in roughly the same price-ballpark range - with the Kx still being better priced than either of the two - but at least we're talking of similar ballpark.

However the point is (for me - YMMV) the Pentax Kx JPG engine seems very capable of extracting (very) good images -
certainly rivaling and bettering the best that Canon and Nikon can offer in an APS-C sensor dSLR - taken like this - I think it is a worthwhile educational thought/comparison.

jsherman999 · 11-20-2009, 01:43 PM

.

Yes, this is a valid comparison, if for no other reason than to show what you can expect from real-world shooting IQ with the three cameras.

Put an ISO 1600 A2 or A1 sized print up on your wall from each and see if anyone can tell the difference - if they can't, it doesn't matter quite as much how many bells & whistles the other camera has, or how much was paid for it.

.

kent · 11-20-2009, 01:57 PM

k-x doing very well.

pingflood · 11-20-2009, 02:03 PM

Originally posted by artemapei

7d and d300 is of a much higher class even higher - than k-7. still images mostly depend on CMOP than camera (body). so it's understandable that even nowday's entry level DRLR can have better images output than top-pro 5 years ago (1Ds for example). meanwhile it does not make sense to compare them direcly...

Find me an entry level camera that comes close to my 5 year old 1Ds II.

(And not just subjective, check dxomark if you want to see some objective scoring on the matter.) Even the superb high ISO performer D90 scored far lower on ISO than the 1...

artemapei · 11-21-2009, 03:33 AM

Originally posted by pingflood

Find me an entry level camera that comes close to my 5 year old 1Ds II.

(And not just subjective, check dxomark if you want to see some objective scoring on the matter.) Even the superb high ISO performer D90 scored far lower on ISO than the 1...

d90 is not an entry level DSLR and not the best high ISO performer (even d5000 is better).
seconldy, 1Ds was just an example, I'm sure your 1Ds2 will be overcame soon by crop cmop sensors (if it has not already by sony a550 or canon 7d or even Kx)

wll · 11-21-2009, 06:54 AM

I shoot a fair amount of JPEG and after all the testing I have done, the K-x is amazing.

Can you imagine a ~$600.00 camera not only keeping up with the "Top Of The Line" aps-c cameras, but in effect having better high ISO capability than them.

What a dream it would be to have that sensor in the K-7 :- )

I can't begin to tell you how impressed I am with the sensor on this baby !

wll

starscream · 12-12-2009, 04:08 AM

My new pearl K-x.. first photos

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/81826-pentax-k-x-tamron-...rformance.html

''adr photograps''

jacksonpritt · 12-12-2009, 07:20 AM

How often do people actually shoot at ISO 3200 and then crop 100%?

If you're using a flash you should be trying to get ISO 100 all the time, and for darker situations you should probably get faster glass instead of relying on high ISO.

Most people here seem to defend whatever camera they bought, and very few seem to be able to objectively look at both the K-x and the K-7 and discuss the merits of each camera without eventually just defending their own purchase. The high ISO is very nice, but I am not sure I could deal with the gimped controls on the K-x.

Has anyone here actually owned both and given a comparison review?

JohnBee · 12-12-2009, 07:25 AM

Originally posted by jacksonpritt

How often do people actually shoot at ISO 3200 and then crop 100%?

For indoor events, we shoot(almost) exclusively between ISO2000 and 4000.
Though we rarely(if ever) do 100%, I did however find that the effects of noise are most often visible without processing on full page prints.

PS. The K-x is a phenomenal sensor !

chrswggl · 12-12-2009, 09:42 AM

For all those who are saying look look! The k-x at $600 is better than the 7d at $1700! Well you're completely wrong. Price has nothing to do with IQ as long as you stay within APS-C. What you get for your money with the 7d is more external controls, a better LCD, better video, better autofocus, a better viewfinder, and better build quality. These are all things that will enhance the photography experience and will most likely result in a larger number of keepers.

11-20-2009, 12:30 AM	#1
starscream Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: BURSA / TURKEY Posts: 54	(The Big shock) CANON 7D - NIKON D300S & PENTAX K-x ISO PERFORMANCE (The Big shock) A course of the middle class to get heavy brother Canon 7D body: 1700$ - Nikon D300s body: 1700$ - Pentax K-x body: 600$ ************** CANON EOS 7D (18mp) - ISO 1600 %100 full crop Full Resolutions >> http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3950/e7dinbi01600.jpg ************ NIKON D300S (12mp) - ISO 1600 %100 full crop Full Resolutions >> http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5012/d300sinbi1600.jpg ************ PENTAX K-x (12mp) - ISO 1600 %100 full crop Full Resolutions >> http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/8824/kxinbi01600.jpg ************ CANON EOS 7D (18mp) - ISO 3200 %100 full crop Full Resolutions >> http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/3517/e7dinbi03200.jpg ************ NIKON D300S (12mp) - ISO 3200 %100 full crop Full Resolutions>> http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/1169/d300sinbi3200.jpg ************ PENTAX K-x (12mp) - ISO 3200 %100 full crop Full Resolutions >> http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/2189/kxinbi03200.jpg ************ CANON EOS 7D (18mp) - ISO 6400 %100 full crop Full Resolutions >> http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/9727/e7dinbi06400.jpg ************ NIKON D300S (12mp) - ISO 6400 %100 full crop Full Resolutions >> http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/4710/d300sinbi6400.jpg ************ PENTAX K-x (12mp) - ISO 6400 %100 full crop Full Resolutions >> http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/5356/kxinbi06400.jpg Imageresource Test >> Imaging Resource "Comparometer" ™ Digital Camera Image Comparison Page Full Resolutions Canon 50D ISO6400 http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/E50D/FULLRES/E50DINBI06400STDNR.JPG Nikon D90 ISO6400 http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/D90/FULLRES/D90INBI6400.JPG Canon 7D ISO12800 http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/E7D/FULLRES/E7DINBI12800.JPG Pentax K-x ISO12800** http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/KX/FULLRES/KXINBI12800.JPG

11-20-2009, 10:41 AM	#6
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	This was an interesting (and valid) comparison - albeit of JPGs. Remember many people use JPGs straight out of the camera - so it does reflect many people's usage. Why do I consider it valid? Imaging-Resource uses consistent and repeatable targets/images that can be directly compared. Both Canon and Nikon have a deserved reputation for having some of the best in-camera JPG processing. So I consider the comparison as looking at the Kx JPG images vs. the best on offer out there - not necessarily as a comparison of the features/quality of the cameras themselves. Another worthwhile comparison would be between the Kx and Nikon D5000 and Canon T1i - which are probably the current leaders in roughly the same price-ballpark range - with the Kx still being better priced than either of the two - but at least we're talking of similar ballpark. However the point is (for me - YMMV) the Pentax Kx JPG engine seems very capable of extracting (very) good images - certainly rivaling and bettering the best that Canon and Nikon can offer in an APS-C sensor dSLR - taken like this - I think it is a worthwhile educational thought/comparison. Last edited by UnknownVT; 11-20-2009 at 11:23 AM. Reason: typos

11-20-2009, 01:43 PM	#7
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	It's worthwhile . Yes, this is a valid comparison, if for no other reason than to show what you can expect from real-world shooting IQ with the three cameras. Put an ISO 1600 A2 or A1 sized print up on your wall from each and see if anyone can tell the difference - if they can't, it doesn't matter quite as much how many bells & whistles the other camera has, or how much was paid for it. .

11-21-2009, 06:54 AM	#11
wll Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Mission Hills, CA Posts: 773	Incredible !!! I shoot a fair amount of JPEG and after all the testing I have done, the K-x is amazing. Can you imagine a ~$600.00 camera not only keeping up with the "Top Of The Line" aps-c cameras, but in effect having better high ISO capability than them. What a dream it would be to have that sensor in the K-7 :- ) I can't begin to tell you how impressed I am with the sensor on this baby ! wll

12-12-2009, 07:20 AM	#13
jacksonpritt Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Berkeley, CA Posts: 124	How often do people actually shoot at ISO 3200 and then crop 100%? If you're using a flash you should be trying to get ISO 100 all the time, and for darker situations you should probably get faster glass instead of relying on high ISO. Most people here seem to defend whatever camera they bought, and very few seem to be able to objectively look at both the K-x and the K-7 and discuss the merits of each camera without eventually just defending their own purchase. The high ISO is very nice, but I am not sure I could deal with the gimped controls on the K-x. Has anyone here actually owned both and given a comparison review? Last edited by jacksonpritt; 12-12-2009 at 07:28 AM.

11-20-2009, 12:45 AM	#2
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	It's NOT CORRECT to compare in-camera JPEG with different settings. D300s and K-x in RAW are very close. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/80649-k-x-has-good...esolution.html Ðàçíàÿ ôèãíÿ - îãë - Ó÷àñòíèêè - Ôîòîãàëåðåÿ iXBT

11-20-2009, 01:29 AM	#3
WerTicus Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Perth Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 1,514	Yeah if these are out of camera jpg's then who cares. RAW is the only way to compare.

11-20-2009, 01:44 AM	#4
Jadran Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Zagreb Photos: Albums Posts: 105	Not even the jpg from camera, but I guess converted with software at Imaging Resource. It's realy becoming anyoying that people make such conclusions as theese, based on IR images, not even using the photo cameras for anything serious. What does the difference in price means? Better body, pentaprism, weather seals, and much, much more. Just go and buy K-x and be satisfied that you re better photographer then guys with D300. I mean, really!

11-20-2009, 10:00 AM	#5
artemapei Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Moscow-Guangzhou Posts: 71	7d and d300 is of a much higher class even higher - than k-7. still images mostly depend on CMOP than camera (body). so it's understandable that even nowday's entry level DRLR can have better images output than top-pro 5 years ago (1Ds for example). meanwhile it does not make sense to compare them direcly...

11-20-2009, 01:57 PM	#8
kent Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 344	k-x doing very well.

11-20-2009, 02:03 PM	#9
pingflood Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Borås, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,169	Originally posted by artemapei 7d and d300 is of a much higher class even higher - than k-7. still images mostly depend on CMOP than camera (body). so it's understandable that even nowday's entry level DRLR can have better images output than top-pro 5 years ago (1Ds for example). meanwhile it does not make sense to compare them direcly... Find me an entry level camera that comes close to my 5 year old 1Ds II. (And not just subjective, check dxomark if you want to see some objective scoring on the matter.) Even the superb high ISO performer D90 scored far lower on ISO than the 1...

11-21-2009, 03:33 AM	#10
artemapei Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Moscow-Guangzhou Posts: 71	Originally posted by pingflood Find me an entry level camera that comes close to my 5 year old 1Ds II. (And not just subjective, check dxomark if you want to see some objective scoring on the matter.) Even the superb high ISO performer D90 scored far lower on ISO than the 1... d90 is not an entry level DSLR and not the best high ISO performer (even d5000 is better). seconldy, 1Ds was just an example, I'm sure your 1Ds2 will be overcame soon by crop cmop sensors (if it has not already by sony a550 or canon 7d or even Kx)

12-12-2009, 04:08 AM	#12
starscream Forum Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: BURSA / TURKEY Posts: 54 Original Poster	My new pearl K-x.. first photos https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/81826-pentax-k-x-tamron-...rformance.html ''adr photograps''

12-12-2009, 07:25 AM	#14
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by jacksonpritt How often do people actually shoot at ISO 3200 and then crop 100%? For indoor events, we shoot(almost) exclusively between ISO2000 and 4000. Though we rarely(if ever) do 100%, I did however find that the effects of noise are most often visible without processing on full page prints. PS. The K-x is a phenomenal sensor !

12-12-2009, 09:42 AM	#15
chrswggl Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 6	Price has nothing to do with IQ For all those who are saying look look! The k-x at $600 is better than the 7d at $1700! Well you're completely wrong. Price has nothing to do with IQ as long as you stay within APS-C. What you get for your money with the 7d is more external controls, a better LCD, better video, better autofocus, a better viewfinder, and better build quality. These are all things that will enhance the photography experience and will most likely result in a larger number of keepers.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Misc my G-shock	YaoTW	Post Your Photos!	3	06-01-2010 08:35 PM
WOW! First DSLR shock!	Digital Dustin	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	17	02-01-2010 11:18 AM
Is the new Canon EOS 7D a Nikon D300s killer?	skamalpreet	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	46	09-12-2009 05:46 PM
Dampers or shock absorbers for tripods?	gawan	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	18	04-14-2009 11:23 AM