[asdf]

iso6400 with almost all noise removed (chroma noise still evident)

And banding is still evident--it can't be removed with noise reduction software, as far as I know.

[pcarfan]

And banding is still evident--it can't be removed with noise reduction software, as far as I know.

Yes it is, and somewhat with the iso3200 image as well.....Hey! do you know whether 'dark frame substarctions' work for this ?

I didn't see this banding before, and I need to investigate further on why the banding is suddenly showing up.....

[asdf]

Yes it is, and somewhat with the iso3200 image as well.....Hey! do you know whether 'dark frame substarctions' work for this ?

I have no idea. I only know it works for "fixed pattern noise."

I didn't see this banding before, and I need to investigate further on why the banding is suddenly showing up.....

Maybe, because you started looking for it.

[pcarfan]

I considered that option, but I think it is highly unlikely as I critically evaluated those images, but it is possible

I am at work and can't see any noise in this computer, do you see any banding in the three images posted later which were taken at iso3200?

[asdf]

I am at work and can't see any noise in this computer, do you see any banding in the three images posted later which were taken at iso3200?

Yes, I can see the horizontal pattern clearly when looking at the dark TV and its shadow:

In bad light (iso3200, f2, 1/8) with dark background to show nosie easily and handheld, but no NR.

BTW, I have an Apple cinema display.

[JohnBee]

I considered that option, but I think it is highly unlikely as I critically evaluated those images, but it is possible

I am at work and can't see any noise in this computer, do you see any banding in the three images posted later which were taken at iso3200?

Yes it's apparent on all shots.
Banding really does get easier to spot once you get used to spotting it
I also found that it was much more visible on some monitors(LCD's) than others.
It also varies from scene to scene, and most often spotted in shadow regions.

On the issue of PP, it can be be very challenging to get rid of banding.

We have two K20's and one of them can shoot up to 3200 with fairly good handle on banding. However the other tops out around ISO2200. So it really does seem to vary from camera to camera.


Oh and I almost forgot the good news...
Banding does lessen(and in many cases disappears) in prints.

[Jonson PL]

You’re right, detail is retained well. Thanks for taking the time.
Very interesting seeing the image with high NR, compared to the one you did yourself.

I am glad a couple of people found it useful, I also did this for my own use. I am tempted to upgrade to the K-x for it's 1 to possibly 1.5 stop high iso noise advantage, but kept going towards getting more lenses instead. I got the 35/f2 and will soon be getting the DA15 and sigma 30/1.4, wanted to make sure I am making the right choice in choosing more and more lenses instead of the k-x, as I really do think the K-7's approach to iso 3200 is impressive and I don't need anything higher at the expense of losing some major features.

Good point

Hopefully this shows detail is everything and leaving detail and noise is always better than removing noise at the expense of detail. Evaluating noise level has to be tightly tied to it's effects on detail like Mr.Turnip has shown. This loss of detail is not even apparent unless viewed close to 100%, check these full images at iso 3200 and iso 6400 with NR to eliminate almost all noise and it is sort of difficult to see loss of detail.

iso3200 with almost all noise removed

iso6400 with almost all noise removed (chroma noise still evident)

Btw, are these two shots from the K-x and made by Mr.Turnip. Or are they your shots from the K7 ?
Edit : I figured it out

I got some help regarding banding by Bart Hickman, on a K10 shot that I had pushed a lot.
It was via some degrunge technique plug-in :
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=21864106

Not having shot with a k20d, I'd like to see just how much of a "lag" there really is between the two. I doubt there's a lot of difference at all.

ETA: Pentax K-7 Review: 29. Compared to (Higher ISO): Digital Photography Review

"When looking at the K-7's high ISO output it is obvious that Pentax, despite deploying an updated version of the K20D sensor in the new model, hasn't made a huge step forward in terms of noise reduction processing. In the samples below the K20D shows more chroma noise than the K-7 but at its default settings noise reduction is switched off while on the K-7 it is set to 'Medium'. Activating it on the K20D will get you very similar results to the K-7."
Pentax K-7 Review, October 2009
by Lars Rehm, Don Wan and Richard Butler

Thanks, hadn't read it that closely.

[jgredline]

By how many stops do you think the K-7 iso 3200 image lags behind the K20D image ? I think any difference is not field relevant.

K-x is indeed the king of high iso. I wish the K-7 is better by 1 to 1.5 stops than it is, but it is not, and it's not a major impediment for me.

It is my opinion that the K20D is a min of 1/2 stop better than the K-7...I really could care less what DPR or any other website says about the noise levels. I care what ''you'' say and other members say. I only know what I see. I still have the K-7 and grip along with my 2 K20D's. I can't get myself to sell the K-7 because it is so good in so many ways. It only stinks in the High ISO dept. I have already sold most of my long K mount lenses as I did end up buying a D300S that is on par with the K20D as far as High ISO goes, so I am happy...

I don't know if I will ever spend any more money with Pentax even though I will keep my K20D's until they die from being worn out. Buying a K-X is an embarrassing step back wards for me, so that won't go...

Long glass still available for Pentax K mount is
Bigma, used less than 5 times $800.00 like new.
Sigma 100-300F/4 with matching TC. Perfect copy $900.00 both like new...
Sigma 500F/4.5 used less that 5 times, like new $4000.00
if anybody is interested, PM me.
Thanks javier

I am glad a couple of people found it useful, I also did this for my own use. I am tempted to upgrade to the K-x for it's 1 to possibly 1.5 stop high iso noise advantage, but kept going towards getting more lenses instead. I got the 35/f2 and will soon be getting the DA15 and sigma 30/1.4, wanted to make sure I am making the right choice in choosing more and more lenses instead of the k-x, as I really do think the K-7's approach to iso 3200 is impressive and I don't need anything higher at the expense of losing some major features.

I think you speak the absolute truth here. You have shown with these test that the K7 raw and with a little NR does well at ISO 3200... You don't need more. (few would)
I think you did the right thing getting glass. If I could have afforded the K7, I would have done exactly the same thing. That DA 15 is the bomb.

For me, I would also not be able to afford the next K7s or K8 whatever it is called. So a two cam option with the K20 / K-x is gonna have to work for me.

Look forward to seeing your Sigma 30 shots when you get that one!

Ps, I found it useful and a well done set of examples. It should put some confidence in the new K7 owners that Pentax did not sell them out with the cheap entry level.
The many great features on the K7 and your showing how usable it is at 3200 should put some of the hype to bed.

[pcarfan]

@javier,...Did you put those lenses for sale here?, I think the Sigma 100-300 and the bigma should sell quickly, but not too many can afford the Sigma 500/4.5, but that is one stellar lens though....

@Gus, are you being sarcastic there

These are the images taken with the original firmware and all at iso 3200 just opened in LR and resized and saved. I don't even see a hint of banding, do you ? (This is directed at everyone who is willing to participate )







None of this were PP in anyway...why is there no banding here ?

[pcarfan]

Yes it's apparent on all shots.
.....................

Do you see in any of the images posted above?

[Rondec]

The issue that Javier has is that he is unwilling to shoot RAW. It is not unreasonable to expect to shoot JPEGs, but the reality is that when shooting high iso on Pentax (other than the kx), RAW and noise reduction software make a big difference.

At the same time, I would have to disagree with Javier. I could not get better results with my K20 than this, certainly not anything that would be visibly different at printing size. In fact, most of my K20 iso 3200 photos look lousy -- in decent or not in decent light. I pretty much keep iso 1600 as the upper limit, unless I desperately need a photo and can't use flash.

[JohnBee]

@javier,...Did you put those lenses for sale here?, I think the Sigma 100-300 and the bigma should sell quickly, but not too many can afford the Sigma 500/4.5, but that is one stellar lens though....

@Gus, are you being sarcastic there

These are the images taken with the original firmware and all at iso 3200 just opened in LR and resized and saved. I don't even see a hint of banding, do you ?







None of this were PP in anyway...why is there no banding here ?

I see banding in the first and magenta tinge in the last.
The second shot seems out on exposure though it might be the best of the three(otherwise).

[pcarfan]

John, is the banding on that green felt?

The last image had different types of light shining on the exhibit, it is impossible to get WB right there. Also, the magenta cast should not change noise pattern.

But, it seems like the banding has worsened from some of these first shots.....these are just sample shots at iso3200, nothing to showcase my photographic skills , I just picked one underexposed, overexposed, and one with lots of gray tone, that's all.........

[JohnBee]

At the same time, I would have to disagree with Javier. I could not get better results with my K20 than this, certainly not anything that would be visibly different at printing size. In fact, most of my K20 iso 3200 photos look lousy -- in decent or not in decent light. I pretty much keep iso 1600 as the upper limit, unless I desperately need a photo and can't use flash.

We shoot quite a bit of 3200 with our K20's
The K20 has a reputation for high ISO excellence for those who put in the work with them.
We have also published 6400 on more than occasion with them but I try my best to keep things under 4K.