|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-23-2014, 08:00 AM
|
| |
Thanks, for the link. The SP6 output looks more detailed, yet more noisy. I guess I prefer this kind of NR as opposed to SP5.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-18-2014, 12:33 PM
|
| |
 - FA 50 1.4 F10 30 seconds. RAW Therapee - no corrections applied.
 - Same scene, same settings OOC JPG and shot as Multi-Exposure 6 shots.
As usually the images are downloadable in full resolution.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-18-2014, 11:59 AM
|
| |
 - RAW Therapee, no corrections at all. 13 seconds. F 5.6. 18-55 WR kit.
 - OOC JPG. F5.6, 10 seconds. ISO 200. 18-55 WR kit.
If you don't trust JPG, I can upload one of the RAWs.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-18-2014, 03:13 AM
|
| |
I made a number of long exposure shots using K-3 : I haven't noticed any noise that would affect the image. If you are interested, I can post some samples.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-12-2014, 04:12 AM
|
| |
According to some website (I can't remember the name), measurements showed that there is no RAW NR in K-3. It certainly is present in K-01.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-12-2014, 01:45 AM
|
| |
At this point it is seems that the performance of sensor gives you only a half of the result, the other half depends on the post processing. It also seems, that each converter even at default or zeroed settings gives different results, so it is hard to decide what the contents of the raw file actually is like.
dosdan , thanks for the comparison. If you shoot K-3 in DNG, in SilkyPix you have an option to choose "DNG" instead of "Natural" or "Faithful". In case with DCU vs RT vs SP, I would say that RT produced a more detailed image.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 03:38 PM
|
| |
These shots were meant to push the camera to the limit in very harsh conditions. As you might have noticed there are shots with more or less realistic settings (ISO 400, ISO 200 both at F9), considering the presence of a tripod.
I decided for myself that I can safely go up to 12800 in normal conditions and fix the noise in post processing. 12800 or even 6400 with K-01 was last resort, as even post processing could not compensate for the amount of noise and in-camera smoothing.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 01:55 PM
|
| |
@dosdan, in all the samples, except for the last one (default settings), I manually set all the sharpness and noise adjustments to 0 in silkypix. White balance was set to AWB, because initially I intended to do a comparison with K-01, which does not have M AWB. Unfortunately the shooting conditions changed considerably between the two sessions, so this ended up being just K-3 at high iso.
I used to have RAWTherapee on my PC, but I haven't used it, so it got removed.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 12:53 PM
|
| |
In my experience certain software has advantage when it comes to certain scenes.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 12:03 PM
|
| |
 - Processed using default settings in DxO.
 - Processed using default settings in SilkyPix.
Default settings in these programmes imply noise reduction, sharpening, contrast, etc. Click the preview images to get the original size from flickr. You may notice, that colour noise is gone and that the images look much smoother now.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 06:54 AM
|
| |
This is perhaps due to the several facts :
* normally you would not use F9 in such condtions.
* normally you would not turn EVERYTHING off, when doing post processing. For example in DxO the preset "default" already shapes you image in a certain way. The same goes for SilkyPix and to a lesser extent it applies to Lightroom. PDCU is a thing of its own but it still acts in a similar fashion.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 06:03 AM
|
| |
That's due to a method I used for creating the crops in the photoshop. Each next image was layered on top of the 12800 file and then all the layers were cropped simultaneously. Then layers were exported to files. Download the original fullzise images from a link in the first post and you can compare the crops against them and examine exifs.
Link : https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8INe0_VKyQ8Z3ppNXhsaWpGVjQ/edit?usp=sharing |
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 04:11 AM
|
| |
Rondec, would you mind, uploading the original image size, or at least a 100% crop ?
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-07-2014, 03:11 AM
|
| |
The "thumbnails" you see on the main page are not full size. If you click the thumbnail in the Flickr enviroment and chose all sizes, you will get the option to see the original size. With the vertical resolution of 1294, they are highly unlikely to fit most of the screens. So it would be incorrect to call these images 100 % crop.
 - 100 % Crop processed in SilkyPix
 - 100 % Crop processed in Lightroom
 - 100 % Crop processed in PDCU
Full scene (uploaded in its original size and downloadable) :
 - SilkyPix
 - Lightroom
 - PDCU
In SilkyPix I used Standard contrast and zeroed sharpness, noise reduction, demosaic sharpness. In Lightroom i turned off all the possible adjustments. PDCU was tricky. Assuming that it is based on SilkyPix I set the contrast and sharpness to minimum and turned off all the other adjustments.
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-06-2014, 05:36 PM
|
| |
I tried processing these shots with DxO's PRIME noise reduction engine. I had a feeling that it was very harsh in these conditions - it smoothed everything out. I can post the de-noised shots as well.
De-noised shots
PEF file at 12800 |
|
Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II
03-06-2014, 05:15 PM
|
| |
The test scene was shot in worst possible conditions : artificial light, drizzle and mist. 18-55 WR Kit and a tripod. 50 mm F9.0, Av mode, multi segment metering. The images were developed from RAW in DxO 9 without any corrections applied. ISO 100 shot was too blurry due to a gust of wind.
ISO 200
ISO 400
ISO 800
ISO 1600
ISO 3200
ISO 6400
ISO 12800
These are crops (click on the icons and choose original size to view). Here is a link to full size JPG files.
|
