So horrible at ISO800

tokyoso · 04-15-2010, 03:36 AM

is it heavily cropped? looks a bit too grainy for iso 800. how about a pic of the k7 with the fa 31

opiedog · 04-15-2010, 05:30 AM

the picture's noise is not bad IMHO. K7 is very usable straight jpgs upto about iso2000.
check the histogram. make sure your image is not underexposed.

YMMV

Wheatfield · 04-15-2010, 06:27 AM

You have some minus exposure bias according to your exif, which isn't going to help the noise situation, especially in the black parts, which are effectively several stops under exposed.
You are making the K7 look a lot worse than it really is with poor technique.

Nubi · 04-15-2010, 06:49 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

You have some minus exposure bias according to your exif, which isn't going to help the noise situation, especially in the black parts, which are effectively several stops under exposed.
You are making the K7 look a lot worse than it really is with poor technique.

Precisely my thought.

Parallax · 04-15-2010, 08:26 AM

Looks a little over sharpened, to me. That would enhance the noise.

Wheatfield · 04-15-2010, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

Looks a little over sharpened, to me. That would enhance the noise.

That too.
He's done about as much as he can to bring up the noise, all things considered.

Anyone who thinks these cameras are noisy, here's a challenge.
Take the noisiest image that you have and make a picture from it.
See how much of the noise goes away.

**Rondec** · 04-15-2010, 09:15 AM

Maybe it is because I started in the film era, but I don't mind the noise on the K7 at all. Looks a lot like film grain to me. Particularly on a black and white photo, it can actually enhance the photo.

reeftool · 04-15-2010, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Maybe it is because I started in the film era, but I don't mind the noise on the K7 at all. Looks a lot like film grain to me. Particularly on a black and white photo, it can actually enhance the photo.

I feel much the same way. I shoot at 800 and 1600 quite a bit with my K10D, which everyone says has unacceptable noise, and and happy with the results. There are programs like Noisware which do a pretty good job of removing it but I rarely use it. It could be my aging vision

or maybe I'm not just not fussy enough.

deadwolfbones · 04-15-2010, 10:31 AM

ISO 1000 w/ my K-7:

Nass · 04-15-2010, 10:34 AM

Seems to me that possibly henryjing has only had his K-7 a few days and perhaps needs to spend a little more time with it in order to know how to get the best out of it. Took me quite a long time myself.

Wheatfield · 04-15-2010, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by Nass

Seems to me that possibly henryjing has only had his K-7 a few days and perhaps needs to spend a little more time with it in order to know how to get the best out of it. Took me quite a long time myself.

♠Rule #1: Don't under expose. Ever.
If any camera needs to be exposed to the right, it's the K7.

Marc Sabatella · 04-15-2010, 01:02 PM

I'm wondering how you guys are seeing much noise at all at the posted size. I can't for the life of me see anything I'd call "horrible" here.

JeffJS · 04-15-2010, 01:04 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

I'm wondering how you guys are seeing much noise at all at the posted size. I can't for the life of me see anything I'd call "horrible" here.

Me neither. I think Jeweltrail was right. Sarcasm..

Tuner571 · 04-15-2010, 03:00 PM

Yea, I have a hard time believing that the above photo was made at ISO 800. As jct said it looks like a JPEG that has had a little too much done to it. I have seen RAW files from the K7 that look much better then this, so I think something is a miss.

jct us101 · 04-15-2010, 04:05 PM

That's definitely a JPEG that they thought they could do some RAW style work on. I've seen this happen before on my old photos before I really knew what RAW was.

04-15-2010, 05:30 AM	#17
opiedog Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: NC Posts: 787	the picture's noise is not bad IMHO. K7 is very usable straight jpgs upto about iso2000. check the histogram. make sure your image is not underexposed. YMMV Last edited by opiedog; 04-15-2010 at 06:46 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Horrible IQ, is it my lens or camera?	Crepusculum	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	62	11-07-2009 12:43 PM
K7 Noise at ISO800	CX15	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	19	11-03-2009 06:49 AM
Detroit's Beautiful, Horrible Decline	deadwolfbones	General Talk	37	09-26-2009 07:54 AM
K200D vs *ist DS at ISO800	ogl	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7	04-26-2008 09:13 AM
My horrible LBA...	Vulpix	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	03-07-2007 07:53 AM

04-15-2010, 03:36 AM	#16
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	is it heavily cropped? looks a bit too grainy for iso 800. how about a pic of the k7 with the fa 31

04-15-2010, 06:27 AM	#18
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	You have some minus exposure bias according to your exif, which isn't going to help the noise situation, especially in the black parts, which are effectively several stops under exposed. You are making the K7 look a lot worse than it really is with poor technique.

04-15-2010, 06:49 AM	#19
Nubi Guest	Originally posted by Wheatfield You have some minus exposure bias according to your exif, which isn't going to help the noise situation, especially in the black parts, which are effectively several stops under exposed. You are making the K7 look a lot worse than it really is with poor technique. Precisely my thought.

04-15-2010, 08:26 AM	#20
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Looks a little over sharpened, to me. That would enhance the noise.

04-15-2010, 08:39 AM	#21
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by Parallax Looks a little over sharpened, to me. That would enhance the noise. That too. He's done about as much as he can to bring up the noise, all things considered. Anyone who thinks these cameras are noisy, here's a challenge. Take the noisiest image that you have and make a picture from it. See how much of the noise goes away.

04-15-2010, 09:15 AM	#22
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Maybe it is because I started in the film era, but I don't mind the noise on the K7 at all. Looks a lot like film grain to me. Particularly on a black and white photo, it can actually enhance the photo.

04-15-2010, 09:40 AM	#23
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,554	Originally posted by Rondec Maybe it is because I started in the film era, but I don't mind the noise on the K7 at all. Looks a lot like film grain to me. Particularly on a black and white photo, it can actually enhance the photo. I feel much the same way. I shoot at 800 and 1600 quite a bit with my K10D, which everyone says has unacceptable noise, and and happy with the results. There are programs like Noisware which do a pretty good job of removing it but I rarely use it. It could be my aging vision or maybe I'm not just not fussy enough.

04-15-2010, 10:31 AM	#24
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	ISO 1000 w/ my K-7:

04-15-2010, 10:34 AM	#25
Nass Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: The British Isles Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,402	Seems to me that possibly henryjing has only had his K-7 a few days and perhaps needs to spend a little more time with it in order to know how to get the best out of it. Took me quite a long time myself.

04-15-2010, 12:56 PM	#26
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by Nass Seems to me that possibly henryjing has only had his K-7 a few days and perhaps needs to spend a little more time with it in order to know how to get the best out of it. Took me quite a long time myself. ♠Rule #1: Don't under expose. Ever. If any camera needs to be exposed to the right, it's the K7.

04-15-2010, 01:02 PM	#27
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	I'm wondering how you guys are seeing much noise at all at the posted size. I can't for the life of me see anything I'd call "horrible" here.

04-15-2010, 01:04 PM	#28
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella I'm wondering how you guys are seeing much noise at all at the posted size. I can't for the life of me see anything I'd call "horrible" here. Me neither. I think Jeweltrail was right. Sarcasm..

04-15-2010, 03:00 PM	#29
Tuner571 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,549	Yea, I have a hard time believing that the above photo was made at ISO 800. As jct said it looks like a JPEG that has had a little too much done to it. I have seen RAW files from the K7 that look much better then this, so I think something is a miss.

04-15-2010, 04:05 PM	#30
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	That's definitely a JPEG that they thought they could do some RAW style work on. I've seen this happen before on my old photos before I really knew what RAW was.