[Mr.Turnip]

Please do not think because I am going on about how much I like the sensor on the K-x that I am putting down your K10 or pcarfan's K7.

I agree - let's not turn this thread into what other cameras can or cannot do, and just focus (pun intended) on the Kx


So - with regards to the original topic:

What is (would be) everyones "ISO pain limit" for daily use?
Would you also 'trade off' motion blur for the noise at - let's say - ISO6400 - or would that shot still go in your trash bin?

---

Last edited by Mr.Turnip; 01-11-2010 at 04:41 AM.

[distudio]

What is (would be) everyones "ISO pain limit" for daily use?
Would you also 'trade off' motion blur for the noise at - let's say - ISO6400 - or would that shot still go in your trash bin?

Depends on what I'm shooting and how critical noise needs to be in that context, for instance sharp available light shots at ISO12800 would be far more acceptable than noiseless blurred images ;-)

[pcarfan]

I agree - let's not turn this thread into what other cameras can or cannot do, and just focus (pun intended) on the Kx

I agree completely, and thus my reasons for not responding to several things, and only included the full res images to show banding in the K-7, which is totally relevant to this topic as it is one of the things that the K-x does better and to show what banding will look like, if present.

[er1kksen]

I'd say my pain threshold for everyday shooting is ISO 1600. With the K20D it was 400 (or 800 if there weren't shadows that needed pushing) and with the Canon 40D it was 200 (that sensor is ludicrously overhyped). When I really have to, 3200 generally turns out nice results (just not a lot of processing leeway, which is my favorite thing about the K-x at lower ISOs) and 6400 will do in a pinch if I process in-camera (I haven't figured out a good RAW NR workflow yet).

[asdf]

No kidding. 1600 is the max ISO for K10D. Here's a 100% crop from a shot in low light - I picked an area where the noise is most visible - I don't see any banding.

Huh? That's like standing down in the depths of the Grand Canyon, looking down at your feet and saying, "I don't see no canyon."

Pentax Photography: K10D Vertical Banding
Horrible K10D banding iso 400+: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

...etc. Just do a google search.

Huh? That's like standing down in the depths of the Grand Canyon, looking down at your feet and saying, "I don't see no canyon."

Pentax Photography: K10D Vertical Banding
Horrible K10D banding iso 400+: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

...etc. Just do a google search.

Oh my goodness... thanks for that link. I forgot just how horrible people were treated when they tried to discuss the banding issues with the K10... Goodness, We will eat each other alive to defend our own cameras.

Please disregard anything I have said about K20 or K7 banding issues... It is my monitor and I had been drinking heavy!

I just want a place to post pictures and get an atta boy now and then... I promise to stay outta technical discussions. Please, I beg of you all, let me live!

As my step father used to say...

"Don't let that Alligator mouth overload that Hummingbird ass of yours"

I am guilty of that... often

[UnknownVT]

What is (would be) everyones "ISO pain limit" for daily use?
Would you also 'trade off' motion blur for the noise at - let's say - ISO6400 - or would that shot still go in your trash bin?

I use 10Mp to save space and gain just a tiny in further noise reduction.

I found for my use ISO12,800 just too noisy/ugly - but I have used it in an emergency producing barely presentable shots.....

But for my normal usage I set my K-x AutoISO to max at ISO5000 - again barely better than ISO6400 - but just noticeable to me......

I just posted in the thread - Pentax High ISO Gallery--POST HERE

I'll paste it here:

......under pretty trying conditions. Had K-x set to AutoISO with max at ISO5000 - basically all 230 shots were at ISO5000 average exposure was f/4 @ 1/30...


K-x ISO5000 f/4 @ 1/30
(EXIF re-attached - but PhotoBucket can mysteriously lose the metadata - it is still attached at this time)

I was really pleased with this set of photos - they were all in focus (I use center focus only, comment because my thread: K-x Mis-Focus?) the AWB seemed miraculous - there is noise/grain - but acceptable, and virtually gone once I shrink the photo.

This is the first of a set of 30 I posted (link to 1st photo (navigate forwards to view the rest or use the play in the slideshow) - showing how well the K-x worked last night.

The rest of the album actually in perhaps even worse available light conditions all are on the Canon G10 compact

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

By other, I did not mean "all"!

No problem, I got it now. It's just that you used the plural - cams = cameras, so I thought you referred to more cameras. I think K20D and K-7 are pretty much the same camera, from the point of view of noise, because the sensor is not significantly different.

For the record: what I posted earlier is a crop of a JPG generated from a RAW file using Pentax's Silkypix software with the default camera settings (I think I have NR turned on for ISO higher than 800, so the RAW processing will apply that). It's a crop to show the noise at 100% without the effect of scaling down the image. It is indeed extracted from the upper left corner of a portrait shot taken in the evening under bulb light - the entire area is out of focus, but banding noise shouldn't care about focus.

...etc. Just do a google search.

Why should I do that when I have a K10D that I can just use and examine the results. I don't see any banding - I cannot get such banding even when I am intentionally underexposing the image. I'm pretty sure that if someone has a problem with their K10D sensor they'll be more likely to write about it - but this doesn't mean that everyone actually has a problem with their K10D sensor. Maybe there's a certain recipe for getting banding to show up - pm me if you have it and I'll try it out.

What is (would be) everyones "ISO pain limit" for daily use?
Would you also 'trade off' motion blur for the noise at - let's say - ISO6400 - or would that shot still go in your trash bin?

For me, 800 is the limit if I want to keep fine detail like eye detail in portraits. Your test corresponds to my experience, because from 1600, the stitch detail mostly goes away on that bag - look under the red paracord and to the right at the second stitch - it's pretty much gone. For the test shots, at the size posted, I'm fine with the noise up to and including 3200 - after that I start noticing it even in the scaled down shots. I'd probably be happy even with 6400&12800 if the subject would be more interesting, but I probably wouldn't ever use that when shooting people's faces.

1600 is currently the top ISO at which I shoot and still keep photos. Burst mode shooting helps prevent motion blur while keeping the ISO lower. I'm sure I'll get to use 6400 eventually, but I'm not there yet.

Here's a recent shot where burst mode and image stabilization have helped me keep the iso at 1600 (500mm f/8 mirror, handheld, at 1/25):
Chickadee: Photo by Photographer Laurentiu Cristofor - photo.net

[pcarfan]

Gordon who frequents DPR just did an analysis of RAW iso6400 data for both the K-x and the K-7 and found K-x to apply even less RAW noise filtering than the K-7 at iso6400.

He concludes

"Thus it is truly a lower noise level that gives about a stop better high ISO performance for the K-x as compared to the K20D/K-7 and not just noise filtering, although certainly images of ISO 6400 and above would barely be usable without additional JPEG NR. "

And we know the k-x has a powerful jpeg engine to do that additional NR, making it a formidable ios performer.

[distudio]

And we know the k-x has a powerful jpeg engine to do that additional NR, making it a formidable ios performer.

I sort of forgot the fact that it didn't have two control wheels and sealing after I saw what it can do in low light. I most often pick it up before the K20D these days.

[Jonson PL]

When I get a new camera (owned K100D and Km before) I always take a couple of hours to adjust the settings to "my preferred" - aiming for minimal PP afterwards (if any).

During this process, I took a range of identical shots at different ISO's to figure out my "ISO pain limit" during daily circumstances. I thought I might as well post them here to share.

It was my last test, so they are taken with the settings I intend to use as "my default". As mentioned they are set for minimal PP, and I have aimed for a good compromise between filesize and quality.

These are (apart from default): JPEG Quality [**], 'Bright' (with 'Contrast +3' & 'Fine Sharpening'), Auto ISO, Center Point AF, and Multi Metering Exposure.


Shots were taken with a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, set @ f4.

In CS3 I only did "Auto Tone", the crop, and resizing.

For what it's worth I'm very impressed with the overall performance with these settings. I will leave the ISO for Auto [200=>1600], but I have no problem upping for 3200 or even 6400 when it's necessary...I will gladly accept the small amount of noise (speckles) to avoid/reduce blur from my shaky hands

These are extremely good looking shots. And well carried out, tests.
Do you shoot JPEG ?
Good seeing another Dane on the forum

the k10d has a ccd maybe its immune to banding?

there is certainly banding on the k20d's cmos.

banding does suck. makes the noise far worse imo.

The K10 had VPN problems, vertical Patterned Noise.

The later K10 models did higher Iso okay. Like the K200.
My K10 cannot be used beyond Iso 1250, (which so far is fine with me). I just need some more fast glass

The banding problem in the K10 was solved in firmware.

Gordon who frequents DPR just did an analysis of RAW iso6400 data for both the K-x and the K-7 and found K-x to apply even less RAW noise filtering than the K-7 at iso6400.

He concludes

"Thus it is truly a lower noise level that gives about a stop better high ISO performance for the K-x as compared to the K20D/K-7 and not just noise filtering, although certainly images of ISO 6400 and above would barely be usable without additional JPEG NR. "

And we know the k-x has a powerful jpeg engine to do that additional NR, making it a formidable ios performer.

Thanks, good hearing Gordons view on it.
I don't frequent DPr that much any more, so fine to be able to keep tap on things

[Mr.Turnip]

These are extremely good looking shots. And well carried out, tests.
Do you shoot JPEG ?
Good seeing another Dane on the forum

Thanks...Yes...90% JPEG. Probably even more with the fantastic JPEG engine on my new Kx