Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-08-2010, 11:54 PM   #61
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
I hope that Pentax releases the 645D soon, so that all this hoopla about which camera has the best IQ of them all ends. and for such picture quality and capability, it doesn't come cheap nor the present Pentax dslrs come close to matching it. if you want the best possible IQ, you can't find it on a $1000 camera or $600 camera. it's a fact and not some baloney fanatism.

03-09-2010, 12:22 AM   #62
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
I think you misunderstand me completely. I object to reducing the evaluation of a camera to a single feature, be it high ISO noise or anything else. And that is precisely what happens in so many threads such as this one. Yes, the K-7 is inferior to the K-x in that one area, but superior in many others. Yet the "high ISO is everything" crowd routinely and predictably look right past that fact. Moreover, an honest appraisal would reveal that the K-7 performs quite respectably for a sensor of that pixel density, certainly not far off from the 7D and the D300s, according to dpreview. So why do people go on incessantly about what a laggard it is and an embarrassment to Pentax? Rubbish!

Of course, we all hope and expect that the K-8 will be a better photographic instrument, but let us be realistic about how technology progresses in a stepwise fashion. Here's a prediction, the K-x II will make the K-x look pretty lame in comparison, and people will wonder why they ever thought its high ISO noise performance was so stellar. And so it will go on into the future, until we use up our planet's resources and technological progress grinds to a halt.

Rob
this part i agree with you. I was only explaining why people complain. Not much to do with what i feel.

i do shoot with kx but rarely go above iso1600. High iso was not the reason i bought this cam. I have faster glass and more or less could live with iso800 or iso1600 max.
03-09-2010, 11:43 AM   #63
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
this part i agree with you. I was only explaining why people complain. Not much to do with what i feel.

i do shoot with kx but rarely go above iso1600. High iso was not the reason i bought this cam. I have faster glass and more or less could live with iso800 or iso1600 max.
I think this is true for most photographers. Low light shooting is not the norm. When it is necessary, however, it is certainly an advantage to have a camera that can handle it, but honestly, ISO 1600 with SR and fast lenses will get you through most, though not all, such situations. For those who shoot in very low light on a regular basis, APS-C is not the right tool.

Rob
03-09-2010, 11:57 AM   #64
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
I think this is true for most photographers. Low light shooting is not the norm. When it is necessary, however, it is certainly an advantage to have a camera that can handle it, but honestly, ISO 1600 with SR and fast lenses will get you through most, though not all, such situations. For those who shoot in very low light on a regular basis, APS-C is not the right tool.

Rob
night shoots are often done with lighting equipment, be it flash, strobes, etc....

without lighting equipment, the purpose is to shoot with long exposures or bulb exposures, especially nightscapes. and definitely shooting at low ISO is the highest priority for optimal IQ.

I do concur with you that APS-C is not the right tool for regular very low light shoots. I believe it takes a very good 25,600 ISO dlsr camera for such task. and Pentax doesn't have one right now.

03-09-2010, 01:35 PM   #65
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
night shoots are often done with lighting equipment, be it flash, strobes, etc....

without lighting equipment, the purpose is to shoot with long exposures or bulb exposures, especially nightscapes. and definitely shooting at low ISO is the highest priority for optimal IQ.

I
while it is nice to have high-ISO capabilities, you are absolutely right in saying that lowest possible ISO should be used for optimal IQ!
03-09-2010, 01:38 PM   #66
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,296
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor:
without lighting equipment, the purpose is to shoot with long exposures or bulb exposures
What about normal-length exposures without lighting equipment?
brassai - Google Search
03-09-2010, 01:47 PM   #67
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 787
a good tripod or in some cases a monopod is all you need.

still, good high-iso images have their place, but given the choice and the opportunity, i would always choose the lowest possible ISO.

which i'm going to try tonight photographing M42. no, that's not the M42 lenses, but the orion nebula
03-09-2010, 01:49 PM   #68
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,296
I'd choose the lowest ISO possible as well, but a tripod won't help you get sharp street/people photos in low light...

03-09-2010, 02:08 PM   #69
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 787
ur right.

if you need to freeze the action, no choice but high-iso.
for static subjects a tripod w/ do fine.

good thing M42 would be relatively static tonight
03-09-2010, 02:10 PM   #70
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by CWyatt Quote
I'd choose the lowest ISO possible as well, but a tripod won't help you get sharp street/people photos in low light...
well you better keep them still.
03-09-2010, 03:21 PM   #71
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
dxmark has given mark to kx sensor.
So i am pasting them here as compared to k7.

(why because of a k7 fanboy posting in this thread who was arguing with me that kx has inferior sensor than k7).

(@robgo2, you are not a fanboy , in case you mistake what i just said i was not talking about you. )


overall comparison.




dynamic range



SNR




as expected dxomark also agrees that kx has better sensor overall. At high isos has better noise control at low iso better dynamic range.
03-09-2010, 03:57 PM   #72
Pentaxian
LeDave's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,904
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
dxmark has given mark to kx sensor.
So i am pasting them here as compared to k7.

(why because of a k7 fanboy posting in this thread who was arguing with me that kx has inferior sensor than k7).

(@robgo2, you are not a fanboy , in case you mistake what i just said i was not talking about you. )
Ricehigh, it's not because others are fanboys, it's because you're a K-7 hateboy. Judging from all 177 of your posts, it's the only thing you do on this forum.

Converted with ACR, ISO 3200 on both cameras. Pentax K-7 on the left with Noise Ninja applied (autoprofiled, USM ->0, Luma->6, Chroma->9) and scaled down to meet K-x. K-x on the right with no Noise Ninja applied, the details would be even more washed out if done so.


Last edited by LeDave; 03-09-2010 at 04:26 PM.
03-09-2010, 04:23 PM   #73
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by LeDave Quote
Ricehigh, it's not because others are fanboys, it's because you're a K-7 hateboy. Judging from all 177 of your posts, it's the only thing you do on this forum.
true, it's all the thing that he does in this forum. not to mention that the k-x is the best camera in the world, according to him.
03-09-2010, 04:25 PM   #74
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by LeDave Quote
Ricehigh, it's not because others are fanboys, it's because you're a K-7 hateboy. Judging from all 177 of your posts, it's the only thing you do on this forum.
you are fanboy number 2 in the list of fanboys. Could you prove me wrong by giving any tests. No you can not because these graphs are what i had been saying in my 177 posts.

and yes, i am not Ricehigh. :-)
03-09-2010, 04:26 PM   #75
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
true, it's all the thing that he does in this forum. not to mention that the k-x is the best camera in the world, according to him.
o fanboy number 1 spoke to subject.

do you think dxomark also can not afford k7 and that is why they gave it low marks.

lol.
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, d5000, d90, dslr, features, k-7, k-x, photography, resistance, size, weather
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-x over D5000. Am I wrong? asinla Pentax DSLR Discussion 102 06-17-2010 03:16 PM
K-x vs T1i (500D) vs D5000 ? winglik Pentax DSLR Discussion 37 06-01-2010 07:00 PM
Pentax K7 or Canon 500D? amphysics Pentax DSLR Discussion 137 07-30-2009 08:38 AM
DA 55-300mm with 500d? Blue Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 07-09-2008 03:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:05 PM. | 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