Search Results

The Latest

Forum

Cameras

Page 1 of 3

⟶

Showing results 1 to 25 of 56 Search:

Forum: Lens Clubs 08-02-2015, 01:26 AM

the Samyang Lens Club
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 927
Views: 223,064

As stated here: http://neilvn.com/tangents/post-processing-workflow-deal-color-banding-photographs/

Quote:

It is caused by the 8-bit JPG not having enough data to give you a smooth gradient when large blocks of color slowly change. You’ll often see it in the blue sky in landscapes, or as in this case, with large areas of color in the background.

Another similar answer and tips here: Quick tip: Getting rid of image “banding” in Lightroom | Gordon Mackay

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-27-2015, 02:02 AM

Confusion and doubts
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 71
Views: 6,783

Very thorough answer, thank you ahead for that.
You interpretation sounds pretty correct. Worry-some are last 2 points. I used to be 70-90 % accurate with K-30 (my previous main camera). Now with k-3 i am barely at 25-30% accuracy. (I try to avoid K-3 s¤%& words)

How big is this - aftermarket screen? What is it, some 8-10" tablet? How you carry or connect it? while it can be OK for macro shooting and maybe even for tripod-landscape - waiting for moment - this style is absolutely nonsense for guy like me bicycling to places and walking 5-15 km in rampant or bog area. How can one use such thing for birding? My point is - decent on-camera focus system alone should be sufficient to make picture, without any aids.

Sometimes this phenomenon happens to me too - but what camera advice here?? I shoot almost all pictures via optical viewfinder. Not using live view -because this one was more inaccurate for me as focus confirm. Focus confirm method did work very well with K-30 and K-50. Simple caught focus sound and red dot on focus point were reliably sufficient with them. Didn't matter which focus point you used.

This one really confuses me. let's say, i am taking landscape in park, and there is close object in left lower area of frame and i want to keep focus lock on that object By reading you statement, that means while i set focus via appropriate lower left point on focus area, - focus confirmation is still done via central 3 points only? Sounds mad.
In reality, in situation above i often get what i want - meaning that point is in focus and sharpest. This is when usually K-3 does not fail.
But it fails very often, if there is no such strong object in focus area and you do not want to move angle so much to have one. Lets say, hayfield with forest far on horizon. Hay-field in evening fog. Or bird sitting on hay, reed-beds and etc. Here you miss often. Or shooting over plants level under the trees - with F6,3 -11 it may fail. or it misses when focus point is far away.
Problem is actually focus locking. I use manual regime with shutter releases anytime - is locked or not setting. That because hayfield tend not to stand still. Nature is not still most time at all.
and yes, shots may be quite long - i can handheld 1/13 1/15 with ease and it was enough with K-30. With K-3 even tripod with remote shutter does not help and it's better to shoot near 1/30-1/60 at least. If you ask why so slow times, then - forest bog and such areas before and after dawn. You do not want to have High ISO here, and even with 640-1000 you still fall quickly to this time frame - if not using tripod.
But i am not complaining inability to hold, but failure to focus outdoors: against bright light, in good light, on meadow barely moving and etc.
(while i can make very good results at night-time)

As much i understand - to have anything meaningful on frame after - focus MUST lock before/at shot moment. If you press shutter without camera "caught focus", there is just muted or blur image, no focus anywhere. And here is point of K-3 failure. It says it is focused, but is not. And it happens in good conditions too. (And i am not speaking pre- or back focus issues here.)

Hmm, i tend to use AF-C in manual. Should try out AF-S in manual.
But i still refuse only central point usage, otherwise all this AF system is just plain junk.

i mostly do not have "unexpected" focus issues with narrow DOF - as wide apertures give. But with auto program line it happens sometimes. So i use Normal or Macro regimes only.

What some call pixel peeping, i call hi-quality printout ability. For family or travel album 30-50 % magnification is sufficient. For 100% size printout - not.
And here we are more at particular lens and sensor complex separation limits, than focusing. With current DA lens-line and 24 Mpixel APS-c pentax is not exactly there yet (and nikon D810, D750 and even D610) are km-s ahead on landscape. Canon 6D separates also far better on its 20 MP than K-3... (having only one meaningful cross-focus point at center).

Overall i try out this AF-S thing and lets see.

---------- Post added 07-27-15 at 12:17 PM ----------

about sony: Camera Database - DxOMark

What sony- were is that sony???
D750 is one of the best landscape cameras for not too high price. (if you think dixo is just pixel-peeping with no real world contact - look flickr user tizziano results with D610 and D750 or do your own search on web).

And if there is no pentaprism viewfinder - there is NO camera.

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-26-2015, 03:46 PM

Confusion and doubts
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 71
Views: 6,783

As i shoot 99% manual, often with focus confirm (specially when it is dark enough), only those points are valid most time. Inconsistent K3 is seen at apertures F5-F13 with different lenses. I mean good weather, strong light with F5,6 -F8 apertures (normally strongest area on most lenses) may have very variable results, depending program line you use. And yes - there is no option else but just to make several shots to hope one hit. Light can change fast and it usually does, sometimes you have no more light than for 3- 4 shots and that it. And IF only central points are capable to wide apertures, then this should be written also in manual. More problematic is fact, that very often there is no focus nowhere while camera thought it was in focus...

If this is just missing "knowledge and skill" then it is hard to explain why one has it while shooting with K-30, K-50, K-5 and lacks same skills with K-3?

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-26-2015, 02:44 AM

Confusion and doubts
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 71
Views: 6,783

You description resembles exactly my experience - on what "inconsistent" means. Worse is, that it it behaves similar on full manual /MF drive also. And tripod does not help here sometimes. It's just or is in focus sometimes, or it is not. And you do not know that before looking results on big screen at home. Have tried different focus points, avoiding linear (not cross) points, tried different exposure area metering in combo with different WB settings. Still no clue why it sometimes does not focus, even on still meadow.

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-26-2015, 01:44 AM

Confusion and doubts
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 71
Views: 6,783

Looking OP works, i would say that pentax/ricoh must jump over his pants to fulfill OP-s need to go ahead. There is nothing in current pentax lineup to go further.
No FF camera, no lenses. Is only big "IF" pentax will do: 1,2,3 ... and etc with good price.

From one point - yes FF in half of year or so, maybe is worth waiting and go another half of year will to get knowledge - what it really gives (and solve/sort out all errors developed with FF). But there is still no lens for it.
With no lens i mean - covered is mostly tele end- 70-200 and 150-450 line.
No FF UWA, no FF good standard lens. And do not start bully with DA this or DA* that. There is no lens in range 10-135 mm for full frame with real resolving power for landscape. No pentax lens go over 20-21 P-mpix, while canon seldom do above 30 p-mpix and nikon best glass go 40-44 P-mpix. smc DA 55 alone is not enough to cover FF. With most pentax crop lenses you can magnify till 30-50% from real size. Seldom 70-100% if shot as macro withs macro lens. No 100% printout with pentax lens on APS-c landscape. And Sigma does not help out here much too.

@ the moment best resolving power offers nikon glass on D810 followed closely by nikon D750. Decent metering, good AF and tracking (again no need for landscape). Looking pictures on OP-s web page i would say that single nikon 24-70 F2.8 - with stabilizer covers all OP-s needs. (yeah - there are new 50 megapixel canon -s, but they look more like freak-line, as they are lacking anything improved but resolving power over 5D mark III). Even 6D will be serious improvement over current K5 or K3 offer on landscape area.

one more thing on "IF"-s. looking pentax current lineup - no pentax camera has decent ISO handling. There is no such thing as real ISO performance above 1270, specially in poor light conditions, outdoors. You get nothing but ISO noise above 1250 in fog. As landscape shooter, this is serious drawback.
K5 does have some 1230 ISO limit , K3 1250-1270, 645Z sits in similar hole. Why would next FF perform much better in this area? I am very pessimistic in this area, as long i see on next FF that it really performs on ISO. I do not care how good it is indoors, taking selfies or birthday cakes.
What about K3, i would say it is very inconsistent camera. On some days it just excels, while some hours later it just can not make any decent picture, not having anything in focus on many pictures.
Some tell -nikon use same sony sensors as pentax. I see this more like problem, not as solution for my needs. And i proceed to think this way as long they prove opposite in practice.
Whatever they are lacking in engineering, problems persist in current lineup. I would say, that best cameras pentax has made are K20 and K5. There is no serious improvement after those ones. (have not used K-S2, but i bet it is as good or bad as K3 is).

So there is just 2 plain ways to go. You or stay and wait (as i do - because financial reasons) or you just do plain switch and can tell us how you improved after.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-08-2015, 12:07 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

No you didn't, but no problem. About 645z -it depends on what iso you look at and what camera you compare with. Same count.s about Canon. On some areas it does not catch up, but overall performance is still very good.

Omited in table of theoretical measures, some of what made 2008-2009? Interesting that D750 isn't there.
But just some 2 pages back i told what are best sensors on current lineup from major brands, and i named 3 Nikons (D810, D610, D750) Then we had to discuss sony A7s. And resume was - canon's answer to nikon lag's some 1,5-2 years usually. So if you like Nikon now, go for it, you make no mistake. Some people just wait for pentax FF and myself for Canon 6D v2 pricerange and functionality wise.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-07-2015, 02:19 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

ETTR or ITTR or HAMMSTR, whatever we call it, is again only part of things to consider. Yes it has strong sides, so it have limitations of it's own.
Pretty good explanation - /little physics behind/ is here: https://luminous-landscape.com/optimizing-exposure/ would say, must read for anyone.

A bit of word rolling, to help understand some concepts from ETTR and its components better here: Are you Shooting HAMSTTR? - ETTR - Expose to the right -- Canon EOS Digital Cameras in photography-on-the.net forums

But again, Source light>(lens+setting -light>Sensor (sensor overall area, pixel size, type, material, micro-lens above it, sensitivity, sensor full, sensor EQ and other parameters )>analog signal- analog signal read, signal-noise ratio, analog signal amplification and it's parameters, analog digital conversion>filtering> all kinds of post-processing.
ETTR is not magic tool to get over differences and limitations in whole chain!
It's just technique to acquire certain types of images in some situations better.

Now, if some one wants truly to understand, why "size matter", when size matter, why all holes "do not feel same" when you put "things" into them, why DR is not only thing what even nowadays matters - what depends on ISO speed or how and when DR matters - i just point out some articles -easily found in internet.

First some "obscure" numbers here: Sensorgen - digital camera sensor data
A lot of numbers. After short while, one should be able to see some patterns in cameras of their taste or interest.
Look at cameras you know, look samples you have seen from ones or others, and THINK- do or how do numbers here relate to picture you see out from these cameras you are interested?

Just enormous work is done by Roger N. Clark, on next links from he's home page.
Some pages that one should read and understand for talking about sensors and camera performance. This is not easy reading, not for everyone understanding, needs and taste. Read only if you are interested.

Clarkvision: Digital Camera Review and Sensor Performance Summary
Not too latest data in some tables maybe, and many Sony's are not there, but limitations in the physics remain, and it's good to know them, before bashing more on sensors MP-s alone.
After reading this one, look back to sensorgen website data, how does this table look now? Do you see why 645Z is noisy? Do you see why old canon 5D and 6 D excels? Do you see, how average in those areas are pentax ones? Do you see how is that K3 sensor is not that good as K5 in some areas?
Also one can see quite obvious sensor parameter differences between consumer series in brand cameras. (price level separations).

If you still don't, and your brain is not over-saturated yet, please read this one:
Clarkvision: Digital Camera Review and Sensor Performance Summary with all links behind.

Very well presented data from one who really UNDERSTANDS what he is talking about!
Excellent article. Most of us can see, but here is it written in one place -why we see results out from cameras, what we see.

I have to repeat myself. Please look WHOLE PICTURE, when you make statements - what really matters in one or other camera and do that according your needs. (most people do not need anything from what is provided). But do not focus on limited set of factors!

And last i like to quote Clark's statement:

Quote:

Image quality is subjective and the bottom line is lighting, composition and subject are more important than the inherent image quality that a camera delivers. I have been studying sensor performance for two reasons: intellectual curiosity and a better camera for astrophotography. In comparing results on this page, do not get too carried away with over-interpreting the results. You would probably do better spending your time out photographing and refining your knowledge on lighting, composition, and subject.

I tend to share that kind of intellectual curiosity too and try to understand what makes cameras really different.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-06-2015, 12:02 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

Looks like you are now overlooking equivalence yourself. Also you do not provide EXIF of images, just show some very similar shots- not too much to calculate.
About format and noise is simply not correct. Even total light captured per sensor area sameness will not mean same kind of signal, nor same kind or amount of noise. There are much more factors.

I think you know theory quite well, but for some reason like to focus only on some aspects of it.
For reminding look this simple documents: Digital Camera Image Noise: Concept and Types
Image Noise: Examples and Characteristics
and this Understanding Digital Camera Sensors

IF and only IF different sensors have same pixel size, same density per area, same sensitivity, same micro-lens structure, same image processing algorithms, same kind of demosaicing, same signal amplifiers, same signal to noise ratio, same amount of static noise, same signal filters and etc. There are so much more things that makes them differ.
Only IF this part is absolutely equal, we can discuss equivalence and DOF as factor to ISO speed or noise. But in practice, it is not. Even if manufacturers use same sensor model, it does not mean same performance on different cameras, nor same result on picture.
and even then : Tutorials – The RAW File Format
So stop focusing on DOF and equivalence alone and look whole picture, as much you can, before you make any assumptions how different cameras with same sensor size "can perform".

Incorrect,. If you will consider all process how digital image is actually created, then you may understand why it is incorrect.

I did, also i did see reaction to post you did:

My first reaction was quite same, as Jimmy-s, but as i have time enough currently and i (and maybe others too) can every time learn from situations like this one, decided to point out some failures in your understanding. Currently looks like, from one side you do understand that 12MP may not equal to another 12 MP, but you do stop on half way, and tend to limit "equivalence" to only limited set of factors out and in USE in different Cameras and different brands. IF sensor matters alone or it's technology, why would do Sony work with Nikon then? Interesting, isn't it?
I hope, that at the very end - we do not need now dig deeper into every Sony's or other existing sensors technology, to just find out, that small differences here or there, impact end result, besides the fact that camera or format DOF and can be equalized.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-05-2015, 06:08 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

i must append... to my previous comment this quote from dp site.

Quote:

Why is it people keep talking about the "poor" dynamic range of Canon's "outdated" sensors and are unable to use their eyes enough to see the DR of the 5D Mk3, particularly in terms of the highlights, is smoking the Sony? Particularly on those big tripod like things in the distance.

LIKE2
REPLY

Flag as inappropriate

By Rishi Sanyal (10 months ago)
No. Those lights were turned off by the city of Seattle by the time I got to the 5D Mark III. The 5D Mark III has demonstrably lower low ISO DR than either Sony camera, though differences even out at higher ISOs. The A7S has higher ISO performance and higher DR than either camera at higher ISOs.
Perhaps an article is in order that correlates DxO data with visual, real-world results to dispel this lingering belief that somehow entirely valid measurements can be disproved simply by 'using your own eyes'.

LIKE6

By GaryJP (10 months ago)
Then it's not much of a comparison image is it? It happens to be the first part of the image that got magnified on my computer, I also note that other highlight areas (lighted windows) do not show "demonstrably" better DR in the highlight areas either. At least not on this sample. They are actually much of a muchness. Even the Seattle Tower light areas have a little more detail on the 5D. You guys shot the images. I didn't.

Or i fell onto exact same assumption as Gary out there, or that "comparison" on dp is not accurate enough. For "eye" Canon wins both. And i totally agree about lighting in windows, and some arcs on the picture. If all shots are over saturated, then in Sony-s pictures light look still worse for me, despite Sony win on DR.

Stagnant - good shots.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-05-2015, 04:14 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

It maybe now goes out of topic a bit. Equivalence article is good reading. Did also seek a bit info on that new 12 MP A7S camera and found article, when A7S, A7R and Canon EOS 5D mark iii are compared. (a bit unfair, but still interesting).
OK, one thing is, if we try to measure real sensor performance, calculate it or "predict" one on based equivalence. In this means, those calculations are valuable.
In real life lets take this one:

On thing is to compare cameras, another to use one or another equipment with same conditions. Lets take thunderstorm, when sky is already darkened.
You want wide scene here, don't you? Then you want probably have low or no noise on end result and you want to have capture fast enough to capture lightening, if you can get one. Overall scene must not mixed to total gray chocolate mass? And now you have three cameras to use.

Key factor in this case is - you must choose appropriate settings for scene, on short end of your lens, wide aperture and highest noise free ISO, you know it will not make too much grain on it. What does this mean- , to get picture - you go to limits on other technical factors- what predict your usable time-frame, not vice versa. Here, as scene is not still at all, equality does not matter, but shutter speed you can use, still having meaningful result. And FF beats crop sensor usually here hands down, because time needed to have same amount of light captured, noise-free is shorter. In practice, lets look one example of my own: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kriimurohelisedsilmad/14683361464/
Picture is taken as

ƒ/4.0

28.1 mm

0.3 sek

800 ISO

Camera used K-30. It was best of hundreds of shots -on "long playing" thunder. Do you see limitations? In shorter times -iso noise was too high to get capture for people for who noise does matter.
So ISO 800 was highest i actually could use on my lens and camera. (kit lens) Now imagine i had FF with F4 or even F2.8 lens with usable ISO near 2250, (as both Nikon D750 and Canon 6d do)
Is that possible that i would get much better picture out there? First normheads style answer - we will never know, because it did not never happen. (And thats the real problem, this moment is gone, as long we do not manipulate TIMEflow itself by ourselves or camera).
Second bet -yes result would be different with better FF camera. Maybe not that good, as we see here: Öine äike, Midnight Lightning
but better than my previous sample.
So my main point is -time is money again. You pay money to get equipment witch one allows to take right shot in right time-frame. And that means -duration of the shot is important.
We can expand duration, but for anything still or fast, we need shorter time - and high ISO performance, not only DOF. Lets take now again river between woods? Or waves on dark day? Maybe you can see why "creamy" rivers and sea are so popular? There is not only "artistic", but technical side behind it. People do shots they CAN DO with camera they have.

And, back to topic - articles authors own comment on that:

Quote:

However, if you did, for whatever reason, choose to shoot two cameras at equivalent focal lengths, apertures and ISOs (and therefore, the same shutter speed), you' d get the same brightness and motion blur and the same depth-of-field. Not necessarily the same noise (as this can depend on sensors, as state in the article

And another one:

Quote:

It's important to bear in mind that the ISO setting doesn't make that much difference to the noise. It's usually the shutter speed and aperture you use.

Here i agree, that sensor "only" is too limited in terms to compare, so ISO only is also too limited.

But, lets take now one more test comparison into account. On that not so dens 12 MP Sony. (i will not try to make Sony looking down as "inferior" here). High ISO Compared: Sony A7S vs. A7R vs. Canon EOS 5D III: Digital Photography Review
The main articles topic is on - how good is new 12MP Sony in dynamic low light with new sensor -4 EV vs canons -3 and etc, and also one may found, how important is not to oversaturate sensor with light. But look at test charts on sample picture.
Article itself explains methods to get them "equalized" on other conditions. Default test opens on 2 Sony-s but you can switch to Canon vs Sony too.
For me is not interesting what happens on 25000 ISO and up, but vice versa, how do details and overall light, picture as such on different regions look as we go down, till to ISO 100.
The lower you get, the better looks "old and not so fancy" canon's result from that side.They all are quite equal at 3200, but canons clarity wins hands down below that on any ISO. And yes, canon is noisier at 25000.
That clarity on end result, right time-frame, ergonomics, lack of major limitations are just some technical sides to consider if i am seeking as buyer/user. I am not looking for GPS, WIFI, whatever speed cinema frame-rate and other bells we may have.
No optical prism viewfinder - not camera for me. Too heavy (Nikon) may also be show-stopper for me, if similar is available in more ergonomic way (i.e Canon). To small (small and very compact is not again -more easier to handle) again no.

So, knowing all i do know and what i don't, i still will prefer Canon or Nikon current high end over Sony A7S as it is. Maybe for 99% people out there those Sony's are ideal or sufficient on all conditions they use it. As it is said:" it's not hard to protect any opinion. It's hard to have one, specially argument-ed way".

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-03-2015, 06:00 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

omg...

first 12MP?

K3=20 MP, APS-c
D750 24 MP on 35,x x 24MM FF
6D 20 MP on 36x24 FF
Some sensors are 36 and some even 51 MP
What matters is sensor density, Misunderstanding is that more dense sensor is always superior- not correct. It depends how much data (light) you want to put there -what depends on frame size and lens used.

Now to "each sensor catches same amount" noise sentence. let's make it wood-simple and lets try paint it to red too.
3 people are looking sunset, they have normal sight, determined by doctors- no eye illnesses, no any defects in cornea, iris or whatever in analog receipting organ, it means eye. But eye is not picture processor. Brain is.
Now all three must draw what they see.
Format to draw in 2 cases are A4 paper, but one is given B5 size paper.
Now one of them is artist, uses fine pen and draws quickly. Another is just advanced student and can draw quite well. third is child, not offered nothing but 12 color pencils.
Would say draw equal pictures? Answer is simple no.
The PICTURE processing, ability to filter what is seen and technical skill to represent it differ and a lot.

All three could see same thing, but make different level of "noise" while they draw it back, separate different level of details as they filter them by brain and one must fit what is seen to smaller size - even more difficult to keep details. Got it???
So are the picture handling engines - called picture processors. Same light and same theoretical noise in same conditions, but very different result.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-03-2015, 12:21 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

here K3 and canon, i hope you now can see the difference. And try to get "over it".
Last picture is provided to show overall scene and lightening.
If you ask were are sharp shots- most them are made on different direction and targets, as i looked for lens separations also. (That would be different story)
In brief, all they can focus very well, lenses were very good, and it was subjectively easier with canon 6D for me. Nikon usage i must learn first.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-03-2015, 12:12 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

Canon 6D

---------- Post added 05-03-15 at 10:15 AM ----------

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-03-2015, 12:10 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

This is very obvious. For local pioneers "red coner" those party shots are guite good, but not for any sized print.
K3 actually can do much better in such light, even K30 can in candle light with some small halogens in big room better. And people tend to move. But this kind shots are very possible without flash. Question is not -can we have a picture, but can we have good picture.

Flugelbinders 5000 ISO shot is not in low light, it is around half of normal environmental lightening indoors, easy cake for any decent camera.

Quite irrelevant. Some post above we already found out, that while sensors in Nikon and k3 are Sony, there are other differences.
Different versions of sensors, different picture processing engine. Also AA filter on sensor or absence of it. Don't bring here canon 70D or Nikon 7100, are contenders to K3 at best, not to any FF camera. Articles main direction was K3 or 6D, i was interested in direction to choose with lenses.
There is a lot of articles out - discussing -can one or other camera focus, can it do that fast or that canon 6D have only one cross type focus point.
Overall, in dynamic range Nikon do better than Canon 6D. Fast auto-focus, focus tracking and 3D tracking are were Nikon rocks. Canon same time does it on real ISO performance. 6 D still outperforms most other cameras on high ISO, with its "old" sensor. And do you know, anything still - landscapes this does not matter, how fast is thing at sports. For birding, yes it matters. most people do not choose 6D as primary camera for anything fast action.
I shoot in RAW+best JPG in camera available. Witch one i choose, depends - what camera was able to give out. Sometimes i manage much better in Darktable, sometimes camera job was excellent, no need to make similar copy manually

As i already told Nikon D810, D750 and even D610 are quite best options at the moment. For me Sony pentaprismless version is NOT an option as camera. Cameras have viewfinder pentaprisms. Robots can use whatever EV they wish. While 6D have exceptional high ISO processing it needs remake to be decent, but it still has very good ergonomics -much better than D750, and for some reason, its easier to hold with same sized and weight lens.

But to stop those "get over dxo" stories, i will show you what 3 cameras do in very same conditions. Yes, it was handhold, not all shots were on same focal length nor exact ISO sometimes and my sigma is half shorter from both F4 lens from canon and Nikon. My purpose was not to test what i all ready knew, but compare handling, focusing and how i manage to use one or other in comparison. I will not provide raw fails here - too small image space as non supporting user. But if you can not see differences in those very basic shots, probably nothing can help you too much.
.
First attachments are from Nikon D750 all crops and some show overall conditions, next i provide canon and K3 crops. Nikon was hardest for me to focus, I was in manual mode and did not get it exactly in 20 minutes. But that should not matter on looking for ISO noise too much. I did not bother to go up with ISO as noise were already there in capture.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-02-2015, 12:52 PM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

That is exactly what i did in store -made shots with low and different lights (K3, Canon 6D and Nikon D750) - just to get knowledge, that labs test were quite correct.
As said: pentax k3 go well till ISO 800. Up from 1250 ISO in low light it starts making pictures for people who: "do not see difference" or just don't care, or to justify beliefs for keeping religions safety-sake.
Nikon starts noise from 1600, more prominent 3200 and gets quite bad at 6400. (indoors, led lights)
ISO can be corrected with various software, (but whats the point if it is possible to live without that noise at all) and that correction procedure takes some time.
Additionally - but when there is thunderstorm, rain, fog, mist and similar conditions, with high ISO will mostly suck because of ISO grain noise, because there is always difficult and mostly low in some areas light, were most cameras also struggle to focus. And here some cameras behave better than others.

For those who still consider that good equipment with proper handling can make difference - this guy here looks like long time Nikon user: https://www.flickr.com/photos/tiziano56/
He uses both - Nikon D610 and D750 and does that in skilled way. Looks like specialist for portraits but has some very good landscapes too.

As my self, i stopped today my plans for immediate movement to nikon or canon. I will wait. Not exactly for Pentax FF but just right time. First, i still can learn with K3 for while. One new 70-200 @ 2.8 tamron does not hurt. D750 gets mature and issues with it will be resolved. Last but least there Canon must respond some way to Nikon too - lagging some 2 years like they usually do. It may be 5D mark4, but can be 6D version II.
I will wait till those suggested FF-s are out. And make my move then, if i still feel limited with K3.

And what must people expect? FF on price of APS-ć? Canon 6D is 1600 EUR and Nikon 2000 body only. So what? Or do some hope that Ricoh will announce FF much under 2K?

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-01-2015, 12:36 PM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

if so - it has to be image processing - both RAW and other improvisation. On nikon Sensor Manufacturer: Sony IMX128AQP
on sony HD CMOS image sensor, whose output is handled by the latest version of the company's proprietary Bionz image processing engine, no model told at quick search.
So, maybe sony, even next canon is rumored to go out with sony sensor, but not same model perhaps and for sure not same image processing engine.

---------- Post added 05-01-15 at 10:38 PM ----------

this post showed only one thing - you post before you actually read, or if you read, you do not pay attention to what is written.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-01-2015, 12:11 PM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

Short update. Just indoors experience, not technically correct maybe.
Spent in store about 1,5 hour.

handling: Both Nikon and Canon were absolutely foreign for me previously. Nikon is a bit heavier (actually quite a lot) while keeping it long on hand. With this one i know i will not held it whole 12 hour trip steadily by hand. At some point mono or tripod is needed.
Both have quite intuitive menus.
First i got menus by my like in nikon faster, but as i learned 6D upper buttons and bigger and more comfortable back wheel, only thing to accomodate was shutter release and upper/front dial simultaneous usage. Took some 5 minutes for accommodation. There after canon felt like something i knew already on basic functions.
manual focusing is a bit easier for me- or more pentaxlike also on Canon. Nikon menus are not bad either, but focusing by "white dot" on lower left without (maybe i just didn't found that sound confirmation yet) sound FL confirmation was a bit more complex.

Nikon's viewfinder is subjectively brighter and a bit wider. But both do well. Nikon has 51 dots, 6d 11. Should be learning curve just on both, on nikon bit longer.

Just indoor focus accuracy on hand-held - about same. I missed more on nicon, partially as canon was more comfortable to hold. (subjective again).
Lens quality i asked to have in same weight category, both constant F4.
On both cameras lenses are sharp almost equal, and 100% crop is without any major CA or blur on center. No back or front focus.

ISO Canon goes without any problem up to 6400 and 12800 is not bad either, didn't go further, not using such values outdoors.
Pentax K3 struggled with anything up from ISO 640-800 with same light and room conditions, and become unusable from 1600 ISO, massive noise 3200 and 6400.
Nikon goes quite well to 3200 ISO, is still usable at 6400, but light noise is remarkable from 1250 upwards and get worse as ISO rises.
In image sharpness and quality (all shots done at finest RAW+Jpg or best Jpg by camera settings), i can not tell clear winner. Canons sweet spot looks like somewhere from 35-70 mm. Nikon does a bit better from 24 mm than canon, but here are already glass differences maybe. Overall picture quality is similar looked by eye. Canon was for me more comfortable (i liked many dials how they function)

So i still have to look these lenses in comparisons, but one is clear - my sigma sucks.
It hardly allows magnification from 25-30% @ f4 -5,6. It is quite usable at F8-11. But none of 100% crop from any aperture is not good to use it and this is one part were my K3 pictures fail - while looking heavily over-detailed environment like rampant in the downtime.
So, partially it may be fixable by limiteds, but... we will see.

With those lenses Nikon and Canon will be equaly expensive - about 2800 EUR's here. But as my Pentax line next gap to fill choice is new F'DA 70-200 @2.8 with 2500 EUR's i see no big difference.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-01-2015, 09:30 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

Did you looked on my pictures, to say - i can not take good ones at all, or just bashing?
But short answer - yolanda, i learn, and i do that quickly.
Second extended answer - my skill or absence of it will be obvious after i accommodate to something else. And i can do everything by skill on any camera - if i change. And i still have to learn same things.

While you did your post, seeking reasons why is should fail, i visited store and actually tried Nikon 750 with Nikkor 24-120mm F4 GEO VR and Canon Eos 6D with Canon EF 24-105 mm F4.0 IS VSM (some L series lens). Now i just take my comparisons. There after i will rent one of them and try it in practice for week for example.
Hand-held, some 120 shots with both and with my K3 also.

For me fallacy looks like one who suggest a lot and measure few. Another missed point of yours - this is time for me to choose what gear to acquire. This is REASON, not thinking that any camera shoots for me.

---------- Post added 05-01-15 at 07:38 PM ----------

Im am not seeking way around physics. But, look then Sony sensor perfomance against Canon and Nikon. Sony have FF sensor available. Same or similar behavior and flaws as K3 have. And if only that matters, 645z should do extremely well, but this is not case- not in ISO, not in details clarity -same test charts. I mean - 645 has noise a lot of it on higher iso.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 05-01-2015, 05:35 AM

K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 95
Views: 22,907

Uhh ohh, i like this thread as i am in very same boat with OP with one exception - i do have K-3, now with latest firmware 1.2. I did upgrade from K-30 i was very satisfied with. Was not maybe best offer but looked viable option to replace via store as upgrade (yeah i still miss K30). What i expected, to get much, i mean much more out from new body, specially from new sensor and then expand my current (nonexistent) gear (i have DA50 1,8, Helios 58mm M7 and Sigma 17-50 f2.8 as my main walkie) (used to have samyang 85 mm F1.4 and tried most pentax DA lenses in range 12 - 300 mm via rentals)

Why i am then is same boat as OP? Because i can not get quality from K3 like i see landing Canon 5D mark III and II, Nikon D810 or D800whatever, even D610. Not talking about phase one - this beast blows any other camera as lightweight wannabe out of ring.
Before all limited LBA-people will struggle to run me down - i am missing limiteds- yes i do (but have tried many of them 15, 21, 20-40 35, 50 different versions). Also you can consider me noob, shooting now 3 years as hobbyist - specially as many of you are shooting from 70-s.
Can i use proper filters - no, have only few and not best ones, as too expensive for me yet. So i use some Cokin ND-s and try survive with them. Sigma needs filters bad, specially on landscapes, so did Samyang. Ghots, flares, comas.

Now to point. Every camera make pictures in right conditions, well.
To have WR - yes, i would call that worry-free and another big bonus. But In landscapes, riverscapes and etc, you have to be able shoot from morning mist to dawn in riverbed or bog. Rivers lakes and bogs, trees tend to be my main objects. People are too complicated and none of my lenses are for reach something flying fast and far away.
First K3 did add detail, maybe too much compared to K30 on my sigma. But those details are not look-able as good similar pictures taken with canons nikons i listed above. i can get sometimes close, but not exactly "there". What i get out you can look here, if you have plenty of time or otherwise nothing better to do: https://www.flickr.com/photos/kriimurohelisedsilmad/
About latest 400 should be taken with K3. If you can not tell difference by picture, then K3 is not much better than K30. Feel free to critique, if you wish.

One more thing to mention - i don't care shit about auto AF-S or AF-E regimes, in any means. I shoot manual. With all lenses. I use my sigma manual mode full time, so do i with every other pentax lens. Yes i use tracking system to select/set focus point and area, but thats it. Focusing and sharpening is made manual. Nor do i use LCD screen more than just to check white balance and exposure where ok after i did shot. Feel free call me freak, it it makes relief.
What i can say - indoors, without flash (sometimes happens) is K3 not much better than K30 was. It very much depends on lighting, but mostly quite difficult to get proper shots from artists and etc. Reason? High ISO noise. There are sources of light you can rise ISO to 3200 or 6400, and have nice picture taken and in other conditions were you can not go up from 800 without massive noise.

Yesterday, before reading this article here, i was seeking experiences from users, who have used different camera systems. I also looked long comparisons on dpreview testshots. Selected different cameras, ISO-s and looked raw and jpeg results here Samsung NX1 Review: Digital Photography Review ( just choose your camera selections and go). And avoiding "normhead like suggestions" - about real world pictures - those test-shots are very real.

What i did mention. If i would put them in subjective order, then: Phase one > till anything else is big step down > nikonD810/Canon 5D quite equal, but in different areas, Canon 6D rocks on ISO performance considering price, Sony best models about same as K3, but i would say - K3 details on green grass/hair are worst, with more blur, worse resolution from all mentioned. Also Sony and K3 sensor (also sony sensor) ISO noise is much worse than Canon 6D Or 5D. Nikon and even D4S has some prominent CA. And -last but not least - i did not see much talked excel in Pentax 645Z performance also.... Last made me think about Issue -will i upgrade to future FF on Pentax, If sensor is again something from existing Sony line??? I have big doubt about it.

And looking these "a lot of noise" in-room pictures previously here on thread.. This adds doubt about ISO handling.
Other hard conditions for K3 are - rain, wet snow, fog, dust in air - mornings and late evenings, so low light + hard to focus atmosphere. You need ISO performance here. If river you can take with underexposed long time and low ISO and see good picture, you can not make same while making panorama or shooting cornfield in wind against the sun. And nor did K30 excel in bog mist and fog, nor does not K3. I would say
better not to try with those.... (yea they work very well in clear night and stars and etc)

So while 6D have old sensor, it's "only" 20 MB - it gives much better ISO by those test in my opinion and even better details in same studio conditions, than Sony or K3 sensor.

Ok, what i do not know -what lens did they use. It may matter a lot. But i assume, they did some reasonable lens choice.
On flickr best landscape shots have done with 6D, 5D, D800, D810 and similar. Pentax lags behind, so do i, like i this or not. Maybe this is because user-base difference, but i doubt. No reason to be overall less skilled by pentaxians.

Considering i have last chance to choose my lens way- i have to decide - stay or go seeking better quality in different brand.
Yes, i know what Pentax offers -small size, collection of prime lenses probably for less money sometimes, good (interesting were- not here in estonia) after-market and two very good FF new long zooms. All those nice features we find at "pro" cameras with lesser price...

But. If i am right, then very core is out of balance -and i mean sensor ability.
All those bells and whistles make K3 "pro level or close to it camera", but as i look it now - maybe not high level enough.

And as such 6D looks like closest by price option. nikon D610 also. Most others are out of topic by price. I will not go with sony (because EVF only).
I know, that i just don't know their bad sides yet.

Whatever camera i choose, there will be a lot to learn, specially light handling, filters and etc. In this means, brand doesn't matter too much. Money and PICTURE quality do.
What i do not like in any forum reviews. A lot of people are not able to consider and talk facts. Are opinions and beliefs. Both lack personal experience or serious testing behind.

So its very difficult to find ones, who will tell what camera or brand gives him what features and what do one loose, on another brand.
But right now, i will proceed looking -is it pentax way, canon way or nikon way to go ahead. At the moment, I am quite serious about testing out 6D or some nikon against K3.

Forum: Lens Clubs 04-20-2015, 04:12 AM

the Samyang Lens Club
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 927
Views: 223,064

You can just use manual F settings, no need for AV mode (it mostly over exposures). Insert focal length and go. But what you do mean under term "exposure flicker" exactly?

Forum: Pentax Medium Format 02-23-2015, 02:43 AM

converted to jpeg
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 10
Views: 1,129

As long you do not learn, camera gives probably better jpeg-s(depends what program did camera use). When you get skilled your own on post-processing, you do not ask that anymore.

Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 02-22-2015, 11:56 AM

Landscape / Street Lens Advice?
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 28
Views: 2,862

It depends. IF 18-35 will focus, it would be sharpest from those zooms. Some people have problems, specially with low light and wide end with narrow DOF. It's heavy, you don't hike with this one.

Sigma 17-50 -i own it, is my current standard zoom main lens. It's controversial one. Sometimes slow, hard to use against strong sunlight, flares enough, needs filter use. Bokeh -not best one (7-8)
Heavy, but not so big as 18-35. Very good from 30-50mm, fully or usable enough from 17-30 at F4-11, not so good wide end at F2,8-4, good color, some CA you may get at wide end at low stops. But it's still very good value for price. I move around with bicycle, but there are much easier lenses to handle (weight, filter size)

Tamron 17-50- is vice versa to Sigma - performs well at wide end, soft at long end.
Have not used 17-70 sigma.

If you are not going to primes (15,21,31), want WR and small weight, take DA20-40. It does not pop, but does reliable job on his range. (This one does not have any macro capabilities)... good on landscape or architecture, well but on people or moving subjects- it's quite slow.

Forget DA16-85, if quality matters.

Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 02-22-2015, 10:58 AM

HD PENTAX-DA 18-50mm F4-5.6 DC WR RE
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 167
Views: 36,191

I doubt, about light, looks more like to collect and keep dust close to front element's new coating :))

Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 02-22-2015, 09:16 AM

HD PENTAX-DA 18-50mm F4-5.6 DC WR RE
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 167
Views: 36,191

Oh thank god you found those tiny strings out from the picture! I feel this lens is now safe and you made my day man. Anything else about beliefs?

---------- Post added 02-22-15 at 06:25 PM ----------

i suggest "stringular hood" - combined from strings and circular. or ministrings perhaps

Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 02-22-2015, 09:03 AM

HD PENTAX-DA 18-50mm F4-5.6 DC WR RE
Posted By Vihmameister

Replies: 167
Views: 36,191

Hmm, looks like mis- understanding of foreign language. I understood at first, that you accuse me for saying something "against" lens i do not know about. So if so, then sorry, peace :)

Search took 0.01 seconds | Showing results 1 to 25 of 56

Page 1 of 3

⟶

Forum Jump

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!