Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-16-2010, 07:58 AM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Owego, NY
Posts: 976
QuoteOriginally posted by Shahmatt Quote
@rawr

Thanks for the information. I've looked at the site.

I find it interesting that the K20D actually has a lower DR compared with the K10D. The K7 is only 10.6 which is way lower than the immediate competition (do real world comments reflect this?). The K-x at 12.6 is pretty darn astonishing actually.
I'm not entirely surprised that the K20D ranks lower - same physical sensor size, but more pixels.

The K-x performance is just more evidence of the fact that the megapixel wars are over. The K-x sensor has a more modern sensor (improved DR given equal pixel areas), but has fewer pixels, leading to larger pixel area than the K20D/K-7.

04-16-2010, 08:09 AM   #17
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 68
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Something the measurebeators won't tell you is how absolutely meaningless dynamic range is once you get past 7 or so stops.
Very few scenes will take more than 6 or 7 stops of DR, so any camera that hits more than about 9 stops (I'm pretty sure that is all of them), has ample DR, and any additional headroom, while it looks good on the spec sheet, is wasted.
Still, I'm pretty sure folks who do wedding photography would take an interest. Groom in black + Bride in white would require a challenging level of detail from a camera.
04-16-2010, 10:44 AM   #18
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,671
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Something the measurebeators won't tell you is how absolutely meaningless dynamic range is once you get past 7 or so stops.
Very few scenes will take more than 6 or 7 stops of DR, so any camera that hits more than about 9 stops (I'm pretty sure that is all of them), has ample DR, and any additional headroom, while it looks good on the spec sheet, is wasted.
I often find the most interesting light shooting into the sun, and my "work" photography occurs in situations where half of a performer's face is decently lit and the other half in deep shadow. A couple extra stops of clean shadows is far from merely academic for me, and I suspect I'm not the only one. All my previous DSLRs required me to either give up or resort to HDR attempts for a lot of interesting shots. With the K-x I just expose for the highlights and know that the shadows will take care of themselves.
04-16-2010, 05:15 PM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Gold Coast, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 167
it is very at dark, but not very good at highlight, very easily to clipped.

04-16-2010, 10:10 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,511
The extra DR on the Kx means you can bring detail and colour out of what would be just clipped off black from a photo taken with the k7.

Its very useful. Its like shooting a HDR without the bracketed shots.

I'm sure there are plenty of situations where more than 7 stops are not needed but Id bet there a LOT more situations in real life that have far far more DR than any camera can capture so why wouldn't you want the capability to capture more of it?
04-16-2010, 10:18 PM   #21
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,671
QuoteOriginally posted by phzy2003 Quote
it is very at dark, but not very good at highlight, very easily to clipped.
There was a similar post not too long ago saying similar things about the K-x's DR... it's all about how you expose it. Expose to preserve the highlights because you've got the room in the shadows, and it's the same as exposing further to the right on a camera that has more room in the highlights. That's not about the sensor's DR. The K-x and D90 have the same sensor and thus the same DR at ISO 200, but the K-x tests better in the shadows, while the D90 tests better in the highlights. This is because the K-x metering is biased towards the left and the D90 metering biased towards the right and the tones are plotted appropriately. The actual dynamic range is the same, and "shadows and highlights" are not a factor. That's all about where the camera meters and plots the exposure values.
04-17-2010, 08:32 AM   #22
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by Shahmatt Quote
Still, I'm pretty sure folks who do wedding photography would take an interest. Groom in black + Bride in white would require a challenging level of detail from a camera.
Actually, if they are both in the same light, this isn't so bad. But if the bride is in the light and the groom in a shadow, forget it.
04-17-2010, 10:34 AM   #23
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 68
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Actually, if they are both in the same light, this isn't so bad. But if the bride is in the light and the groom in a shadow, forget it.
Anyway, I think the rule is focus on the bride's dress and don't worry about the groom. Everyone wants to see the bride's dress i guess. :-p

04-17-2010, 08:27 PM   #24
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,671
QuoteOriginally posted by Shahmatt Quote
Anyway, I think the rule is focus on the bride's dress and don't worry about the groom. Everyone wants to see the bride's dress i guess. :-p
That is the traditional rule, and of course it originates from the days when you were guaranteed to either blow the highlights (dress) or block up the shadows (suit). But isn't it nice to have the technology now to be able to meter for the bride's dress and be able to trust that the groom's suit will take care of itself?
04-17-2010, 10:09 PM   #25
Veteran Member
distudio's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney
Photos: Albums
Posts: 445
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Something the measurebeators won't tell you is how absolutely meaningless dynamic range is once you get past 7 or so stops.
Very few scenes will take more than 6 or 7 stops of DR, so any camera that hits more than about 9 stops (I'm pretty sure that is all of them), has ample DR, and any additional headroom, while it looks good on the spec sheet, is wasted.
It's not wasted on me Bill, but then again I don't often shoot the K-x in controlled lighting. My *ist D on the light table has about 4 stops too much DR ;-)
04-17-2010, 10:59 PM   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dallas / Yucatan
Posts: 994
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Something the measurebeators won't tell you is how absolutely meaningless dynamic range is once you get past 7 or so stops.
Very few scenes will take more than 6 or 7 stops of DR, so any camera that hits more than about 9 stops (I'm pretty sure that is all of them), has ample DR, and any additional headroom, while it looks good on the spec sheet, is wasted.
I wonder if that is more true at the temperate zones than in the tropical zones? I find that photography closer to the equator in the bright sun is more difficult - harder to properly expose for the highlights and keep the shadows with any detail at all. The light much harsher it seems to me, rather than the light at the same time of year in ... mid-America, for example.

Since I've only got a K200D as my best digital camera at the moment, it is more than an academic question for me. I'm wondering if a K-x will help with this situation or if it's just "tough luck in the bright sun in the tropics"....
04-20-2010, 02:02 AM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Something the measurebeators won't tell you is how absolutely meaningless dynamic range is once you get past 7 or so stops.
Very few scenes will take more than 6 or 7 stops of DR, so any camera that hits more than about 9 stops (I'm pretty sure that is all of them), has ample DR, and any additional headroom, while it looks good on the spec sheet, is wasted.
yet these fools in these big companies try to improve it on every camera they put into market.

DR of more than 7 stops in complete useless , on the same token usable iso more than 400 is useless for more than 99% of photographers.

others can complete the list of fool's priorities when it comes to cameras.

/// for dim witted , my post is sarcasm.
04-20-2010, 10:17 AM   #28
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,056
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
yet these fools in these big companies try to improve it on every camera they put into market.

DR of more than 7 stops in complete useless , on the same token usable iso more than 400 is useless for more than 99% of photographers.

others can complete the list of fool's priorities when it comes to cameras.

/// for dim witted , my post is sarcasm.
For the dim witted, I would suggest you take a spot meter out and meter some scenes to see how much DR they encompass.
And perhaps while they are at it. learn how to parse the English language in such a way that they can understand that not everything is presented as an either/or scenario.
04-20-2010, 04:23 PM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
For the dim witted, I would suggest you take a spot meter out and meter some scenes to see how much DR they encompass.

thank you for your input.

How about sending the same request to some of the key companies those make cameras. And see if they agree with you on importance of DR. And enlighten them how this area of sensor design needs no more improvement.






Edited to add:

For those who are interested in trivia.

This is from wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_range

"A human can see objects in starlight (although colour differentiation is reduced at low light levels) or in bright sunlight, even though on a moonless night objects receive 1/1,000,000,000 of the illumination they would on a bright sunny day: that is a dynamic range of 90 dB."

If we think that one stop as multiple of two then

1,000,000,000 1
500,000,000 2
250,000,000 3
125,000,000 4
62,500,000 5
31,250,000 6
15,625,000 7
7,812,500 8
3,906,250 9
1,953,125 10
976,563 11
488,281 12
244,141 13
122,070 14
61,035 15
30,518 16
15,259 17
7,629 18
3,815 19
1,907 20
954 21
477 22
238 23
119 24
60 25
30 26
15 27
7 28
4 29
2 30
1 31


That is roughly 30 stops of DR is the range in which humans can discern things.

We humans are amazing thing.

Last edited by zxaar; 04-20-2010 at 05:03 PM.
04-21-2010, 09:44 AM   #30
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
"A human can see objects in starlight (although colour differentiation is reduced at low light levels) or in bright sunlight, even though on a moonless night objects receive 1/1,000,000,000 of the illumination they would on a bright sunny day: that is a dynamic range of 90 dB."
While this is true, it's also not really relevant to the discussion - there are few scenes that encompass this whole range *at once*. Our eyes handle this range essentially the same way our cameras do - by opening up the aperture (pupil) to let more light in when dealing with lower light levels, and also by doing the equivalent of raising the ISO (both in which receptors get used, and also in our processing of the signal).

I agree that the emphasis on DR is overstated. I'm not saying it has *no* relevance, just that it isn't that important that often. Sure, manufacturers strive to get this as high as they reasonably can, to handle the situations where it *does* matter. In a sense, it's much like the megapixel race.
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, dslr, k-x, photography, range
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
dynamic range K20D dafiryde Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 01-08-2009 10:51 AM
Dynamic Range Rene` Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 09-25-2008 07:46 AM
better dynamic range (?) needed FHPhotographer Photo Critique 12 09-11-2008 01:52 PM
Dynamic Range Vlad Photographic Technique 5 06-01-2008 10:40 PM
High Dynamic Range - How do you do it? MShawn63 Photographic Technique 32 01-11-2008 05:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:00 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