More comparisons.

normhead · 11-03-2012, 07:21 AM

Same methodology as before, I used the D800e as my baseline and model for comparison.. I'd have used a 645D but, IMHO, the difference between the current 645D and the D800, the 645D produces a better image, but you have to squint to see it. The 645D really needs to go to 70MP, to be worth more than the D800e.

SO I cropped an Image Resources 100 ISO image from a D800e, then did the same crop on a Canon 1D x, A Nikon D600, and a K-5 IIs. Then I expanded the other smaller MP count images to be the same size as the D800e image. The D800 is so much the winner, it really is in a class all it's own, predictable and unsurprising. What is surprising is the other 3 are very close, and you could make a case that the K5IIs is the best image of the other 3. So comparing a $7,000 camera and a $2,000, the $1,300 camara gives you arguably the best image, at least in these test conditions on this one small portion of a frame. Still the best apart from the D800. Also confirming my suspicion, that as an upgrade path, it's D800 or nothing. Even if you argue that the others are marginally better in IQ, it's not enough difference to be worth money.

The surprise for me, is the D600. I had hopes for that camera. Theoretically a 16MP APS-c shouldn't be in the same ball park as a 24 MP FF. Both images are enlarged not reduced, so the K-5 is actually expanded by a larger amount and by theories expressed many times on this board, should suffer as an image, from being enlarged more. I'm not seeing it. The theory says one thing, the images say another.

Last edited by normhead; 11-03-2012 at 07:40 AM.

sb in ak · 11-03-2012, 05:09 PM

I am not arguing that D800/E is the ultimate upgrade path for FF at this moment if you are purely after IQ, but there are other factors involved. Personally, I'd still go D600 over the D800 for my outdoor work as it is a lighter camera and 24MP is still wonderful. Sports? 1DX in a heartbeat over the others..that is what that camera is made for, not crazy high MP counts. And if you need the nice weathersealing, compact body and IQ combo, K5IIs is the way to go. They're all great cameras, and the choice is more about what your shooting needs are IMO.

jdn · 12-20-2012, 05:44 PM

I'm a newbie at this and find this very interesting. I'm adding comment, but please feel free to educate me or disagree.

I have been looking at this a long time comparing the IIs and d600. There seems to be an overall crisper/sharper look to the picture as a whole with the IIs. When I look at detail the most telling difference is comparing views of the chair back. Again the IIs seems sharper when a look at irregularities in the wood. Looking at the Purplish fabric in front it is more confusing. Contrasty areas are generally sharper on the IIs, but the crossweave pattern is usually sharper with d600. That is to say the lineations of the weave are straighter, more regular and easier to see. In IIs they often aren't as obvious, but they are there if you look awhile, but not as geometrically perfect. I find the d800 interesting with respect to this latter observation. Although its image is clearly superior the weave is not as regular and straight as with the d600. I'm wondering if the weave pattern in these photos is influenced by different ways the cameras process their data. Is the fact the d800 and IIs lack the AA an influencing factor?

Both the IIs and d600 look very good, but to me the IIs is the clear winner in this test.

**LaurenOE** · 12-20-2012, 06:50 PM

Wow, if these are acurate - the D600 is not better than the K5IIs!!!!
I guess the folks at Pentax did their homework by dragging their feet on a Pentax FF!
I agree - the D800 or nothing!
Maybe it's *not* time for a Pentax FF yet.

sb in ak · 12-20-2012, 08:03 PM

Removing an AA filter certainly seems to have some merits. Still, at least to my eyes (currently owning a K5 and D600) the D600 has less pixel noise on ISO 100 files. And maybe it's just me but the K5IIs files here have sort of an oversharpened look to them, while the D800 looks much more naturally sharp. And just comparing crops like this is only so helpful. Each one of these cameras has it's merits and they are all quite good in the areas they are built for. What these shots tell me is that the D800E is a spectacular choice (and even a great "budget" choice when comaring to MF) for landscape photography or perhaps weddings. Comparing a 1DX just isn't helpful as that camera is made for its speed, not massively large files.

11-03-2012, 07:21 AM	#1
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	More comparisons. Same methodology as before, I used the D800e as my baseline and model for comparison.. I'd have used a 645D but, IMHO, the difference between the current 645D and the D800, the 645D produces a better image, but you have to squint to see it. The 645D really needs to go to 70MP, to be worth more than the D800e. SO I cropped an Image Resources 100 ISO image from a D800e, then did the same crop on a Canon 1D x, A Nikon D600, and a K-5 IIs. Then I expanded the other smaller MP count images to be the same size as the D800e image. The D800 is so much the winner, it really is in a class all it's own, predictable and unsurprising. What is surprising is the other 3 are very close, and you could make a case that the K5IIs is the best image of the other 3. So comparing a $7,000 camera and a $2,000, the $1,300 camara gives you arguably the best image, at least in these test conditions on this one small portion of a frame. Still the best apart from the D800. Also confirming my suspicion, that as an upgrade path, it's D800 or nothing. Even if you argue that the others are marginally better in IQ, it's not enough difference to be worth money. The surprise for me, is the D600. I had hopes for that camera. Theoretically a 16MP APS-c shouldn't be in the same ball park as a 24 MP FF. Both images are enlarged not reduced, so the K-5 is actually expanded by a larger amount and by theories expressed many times on this board, should suffer as an image, from being enlarged more. I'm not seeing it. The theory says one thing, the images say another. Last edited by normhead; 11-03-2012 at 07:40 AM.

12-20-2012, 05:44 PM	#3
jdn New Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 10	Very interesting I'm a newbie at this and find this very interesting. I'm adding comment, but please feel free to educate me or disagree. I have been looking at this a long time comparing the IIs and d600. There seems to be an overall crisper/sharper look to the picture as a whole with the IIs. When I look at detail the most telling difference is comparing views of the chair back. Again the IIs seems sharper when a look at irregularities in the wood. Looking at the Purplish fabric in front it is more confusing. Contrasty areas are generally sharper on the IIs, but the crossweave pattern is usually sharper with d600. That is to say the lineations of the weave are straighter, more regular and easier to see. In IIs they often aren't as obvious, but they are there if you look awhile, but not as geometrically perfect. I find the d800 interesting with respect to this latter observation. Although its image is clearly superior the weave is not as regular and straight as with the d600. I'm wondering if the weave pattern in these photos is influenced by different ways the cameras process their data. Is the fact the d800 and IIs lack the AA an influencing factor? Both the IIs and d600 look very good, but to me the IIs is the clear winner in this test. Last edited by jdn; 12-20-2012 at 05:53 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Picture Comparisons	littledrawe	Pentax Q	7	08-09-2012 01:05 PM
Pentax Regional Marketing - Website Comparisons	monochrome	Pentax K-01	9	02-05-2012 09:30 AM
50mm Comparisons	userage	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	12-22-2011 04:28 PM
macro setup comparisons	yeatzee	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	37	03-21-2011 10:22 PM
Lens comparisons	normhead	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	01-01-2011 04:39 PM

11-03-2012, 05:09 PM	#2
sb in ak Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Omaha, NE Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 612	I am not arguing that D800/E is the ultimate upgrade path for FF at this moment if you are purely after IQ, but there are other factors involved. Personally, I'd still go D600 over the D800 for my outdoor work as it is a lighter camera and 24MP is still wonderful. Sports? 1DX in a heartbeat over the others..that is what that camera is made for, not crazy high MP counts. And if you need the nice weathersealing, compact body and IQ combo, K5IIs is the way to go. They're all great cameras, and the choice is more about what your shooting needs are IMO.

12-20-2012, 06:50 PM	#4
LaurenOE Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Back in Florida, but worldwide gigs! Photos: Albums Posts: 3,690	Wow, if these are acurate - the D600 is not better than the K5IIs!!!! I guess the folks at Pentax did their homework by dragging their feet on a Pentax FF! I agree - the D800 or nothing! Maybe it's not time for a Pentax FF yet.

12-20-2012, 08:03 PM	#5
sb in ak Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Omaha, NE Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 612	Removing an AA filter certainly seems to have some merits. Still, at least to my eyes (currently owning a K5 and D600) the D600 has less pixel noise on ISO 100 files. And maybe it's just me but the K5IIs files here have sort of an oversharpened look to them, while the D800 looks much more naturally sharp. And just comparing crops like this is only so helpful. Each one of these cameras has it's merits and they are all quite good in the areas they are built for. What these shots tell me is that the D800E is a spectacular choice (and even a great "budget" choice when comaring to MF) for landscape photography or perhaps weddings. Comparing a 1DX just isn't helpful as that camera is made for its speed, not massively large files.