Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-07-2011, 08:10 AM   #76
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote

Thing is: Do you really want to spend $800 on a camera that only performs well when the sun is shining?
In my case and speaking for me only, the answer could be big yes, but that depends on image quality at base iso. For far I have not seen enough images to make my mind. The crop i posted is not enough to make much out of. The images from raw would decide for me.

Now about when the sun is shining part. I usually need a small camera when i go out and it is usually in day time. For me most of my low light photography is inside house where my trusty k-x is good enough and i do not have to worry about carrying it.

For example i would not mind taking this with Q.



08-07-2011, 08:20 AM   #77
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,609
Judging by my SX130 the Q should easily do that. Maybe a bit of Lightroom 3 magic, but that's ok. Dynamic range might be an issue (clouds vs. the dark areas...), if it's really bad do a HDR perhaps. But then again a cheaper camera can probably do the same...
08-07-2011, 08:26 AM   #78
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
Judging by my SX130 the Q should easily do that. Maybe a bit of Lightroom 3 magic, but that's ok. Dynamic range might be an issue (clouds vs. the dark areas...), if it's really bad do a HDR perhaps. But then again a cheaper camera can probably do the same...
most of the cameras are just fine at base isos. I personally have problems with smudgeness you see in images but for most of practicall purposes that works out.
08-07-2011, 09:04 AM   #79
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
Point 4 means that at the base isos, I expect pentax Q to produce very good image quality. Off course Q is little bit more expensive too.
If you are this picky, why are you considering a small sensor at all? Sorry, but you cannot beat physics. Get a larger sensor and get better images.

08-07-2011, 10:38 AM   #80
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
If you are this picky, why are you considering a small sensor at all? Sorry, but you cannot beat physics. Get a larger sensor and get better images.
And let's not forget about a larger pocket or bag. Unless someone has figured out how to beat physics by fitting a large camera in a small pocket.
08-07-2011, 03:12 PM   #81
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
And let's not forget about a larger pocket or bag. Unless someone has figured out how to beat physics by fitting a large camera in a small pocket.
exactly.

I already mentioned that I use k-x mostly and the thing that i did not mention is that i also use sony R1, which is also apc and has very good image quality.

I already mentioned that i wish to buy a cam for my wife that i can also use. These two things means small and good IQ. This is the reason I might not mind 800$. I paid 1000$ for R1 and today i do not think i regret a penny of it.
08-07-2011, 03:19 PM   #82
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
If you are this picky, why are you considering a small sensor at all? Sorry, but you cannot beat physics. Get a larger sensor and get better images.
We have beaten physics, today Q can beat yesterday's DSLRs with large sensors. .

One more thing which i did not mention, i really do not think Q as an 12MP camera, for most of my purposes 6-7MP is good enough, this means I would downscale it. I am sure , at 6MP , this sensor size is good enough to produce good images with today's technology.

It seems pentax has given away AA filter too with this cam. Which would also help in producing sharp images.
08-07-2011, 05:46 PM   #83
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
We have beaten physics, today Q can beat yesterday's DSLRs with large sensors.
You believe marketing companies over optical reality. I do not.

Obviously technology improves, within constraints. But all that means is that the next APS-C sensor will be better again than the current ones and leave smaller sensors in the dust. I do not advocate buying every new sensor that makes some incremental improvements in image quality. That is wasteful and unethical. Far larger improvements in the end result can be made through learning how to be a better photographer, no matter what the tool (APS-C, FF, PnS).

QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
One more thing which i did not mention, i really do not think Q as an 12MP camera, for most of my purposes 6-7MP is good enough, this means I would downscale it.
What you are saying is that you will use an even smaller part of the sensor for your images. The only conclusion I can draw is that your image quality needs do not equal mine -- fair enough. Either that or you fundamentally misunderstand how sensor size and pixel pitch affect image quality. Read my Pentax Q preview, which links to further discussions of these issues.

No, you cannot beat physics.

QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
It seems pentax has given away AA filter too with this cam. Which would also help in producing sharp images.
I await proof. But if this is true then most users will be disadvantaged, since the AA filter is there for a reason. Moire is going to bother the casual user a lot more than some exacting standard of sharpness that is better achieved by a larger camera.

QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
I already mentioned that i wish to buy a cam for my wife that i can also use. These two things means small and good IQ. This is the reason I might not mind 800$. I paid 1000$ for R1 and today i do not think i regret a penny of it.
I have said already that if you have money to burn, go wild with the Pentax Q. But such is not my world nor any world I hope to encourage.

I believe I am becoming redundant and so bid you adieu.

08-07-2011, 06:26 PM - 1 Like   #84
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote

No, you cannot beat physics.
Really :-D

Kidding



PS: when people write that you can not beat physics, they usually meant about low light where larger sensor gathers more light and thus has advantage. We are talking about situation when light is good and i could shoot landscape that require deep DOF.
08-07-2011, 06:34 PM   #85
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 149
I'm going to buy one. Just because.

When are they going to release them?
08-07-2011, 06:44 PM   #86
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Y

Obviously technology improves, within constraints. But all that means is that the next APS-C sensor will be better again than the current ones and leave smaller sensors in the dust.
Obviously APC/m43/FF/Medium format cameras would also improve given the same technology. But here is the crux of all things - as a layman photographer how much of that would be useful to you.

At the moment, these are the things going on:

1. Low light performance is improving. (this part i already took out so not really relevant to discussion).
2. DR would improve.
3. More megapixels are coming eg sony 24mp etc

Now about (2) and (3) one has to decide. DR would certainly help and with smaller sensors this might have to be compromised a bit.
More megapixels, ummm, this part is big issue. For 90% of things i do, 6mp is more than enough. I would need even less if I have to resize to 900xH pixels for web viewing and sharing.
About the point #2 (ie DR) our monitors and printers can only support limited DR so, even if APC/FF sensors improve it too much for all practical purposes one could be able to live with DR of smaller sensors. (someone's need might be different though).
08-07-2011, 06:45 PM   #87
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by napawino Quote
I'm going to buy one. Just because.

When are they going to release them?
In japan, 31st Aug. I would be able to handle one then and that time would decide on buying it.

Last edited by zxaar; 08-07-2011 at 06:53 PM.
08-08-2011, 02:26 AM   #88
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,609
QuoteOriginally posted by zxaar Quote
We have beaten physics, today Q can beat yesterday's DSLRs with large sensors. .

One more thing which i did not mention, i really do not think Q as an 12MP camera, for most of my purposes 6-7MP is good enough, this means I would downscale it. I am sure , at 6MP , this sensor size is good enough to produce good images with today's technology.

It seems pentax has given away AA filter too with this cam. Which would also help in producing sharp images.
They may have improved, but at 6 MP (downscaled on the computer) my SX130 still easily gets beaten by my ancient Pentax *istDs. JPEGs it is absolutely no competition at all, even at ISO 80 there is quite some noise filtering going on. ISO 1600 (maximum) is more of a painting, and not exactly a very detailed one. Shooting RAW is a bit different, you still have to (colour) denoise to get a shot at ISO 80, which IMHO is comparable to ISO 400 on the *istDs, but it's usable. (I don't think the Pentax needs denoising at all at base ISO.) ISO 800 is maybe like 3200 on the Pentax.

@zxaar: The dynamic range is a big problem IMHO. Usually mobile phones and video cameras blow out immediately when there is any contrast... they have the smallest sensors. P&S are better, but in a contrasty scene they give up. My Pentax *istDs again performs better... when I shoot with the SX130 during daylight I have to be careful, contrasty scenes are problematic to impossible. And if you shoot film you have even higher DR.

@Laurentiu: You need a Tardis camera bag. I could need one too.

If there is interest I could take a shot at 80 and 1600 with the SX130, and upload the RAW file.
08-08-2011, 04:16 AM   #89
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,198
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
If there is interest I could take a shot at 80 and 1600 with the SX130, and upload the RAW file
That's like sharing K20D raw file to give someone an idea about K-5 image quality. Very pointless..
08-08-2011, 05:35 AM   #90
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,609
Not too pointless. The sensors in these cameras are usually pretty much the same. Unless the Q uses CMOS... can't remember.
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!
digital camera, employees, pentax cameras, point and shoot
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
At Last My Love Has Come Along! Rupert Post Your Photos! 10 03-08-2010 10:47 AM
Streets Really this in love? K-9 Post Your Photos! 11 10-18-2009 05:39 AM
Love my K7:) dandog Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 09-03-2009 04:19 PM
Would LOVE some help..... lightchaser Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 08-19-2009 09:13 AM
K7 and why I love it celetron Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 08-04-2009 09:10 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:26 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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