Search Results

The Latest

Forum

Cameras

Showing results 1 to 20 of 20 Search:

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-13-2018, 04:21 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Hmm. $149 at B&H . I would like to know where.

Yeah, a bit of a pain. I did that for a while with my K-30 with Aftershot before there was an official camera profile for it. Would rather buy software that's still being supported, of course.

Thanks, I'll think about it. Why VM for CS2 ? Does it require an old OS ?

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-13-2018, 04:01 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Not being able to print is a pretty damn big problem. Are you sure that is the case ? Last year I did a trial, and I was still able to print afterwards.
Maybe they have changed it since. My computer had Windows reinstalled since, which is why I am able to do another trial.

The hobby is not brand new to me. I have digital photos going back 18 years with 3MP Olympus compacts. I got my first DSLR in 2008 - a K200D. I started shooting in RAW with my K-30 in 2012. That's when I became a little bit more serious. I'm still going to keep looking for something other than Lightroom, as I simply object to the subscription model. I hope I will find it soon. So far, nothing else is looking good.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-13-2018, 03:43 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

I don't know how you came to that conclusion, but that seems completely wrong. I have taken plenty of pictures on my K-30 at ISO 3200 - 6400 that are great. They did need some NR. But those are photos that I could simply not have taken on my K200D, which maxed at ISO 1600. I would have had to use lower shutter speed and tripod, or more expensive lenses than I could afford with the K200D.
The K-30 was a godsend to me for indoor & night-time outdoor photography. I bought the K-1 II in large part because of the larger sensor, to get more light, but also higher ISO. My own results show there are plenty of usable pictures at ISO 12,800 . 25,600 looks usable too. If I was better at processing, ISO 51,200 and even 102,400 might be usable too.

The CC subscription model is exactly what I object to. I'm not a pro, and I find it expensive. For me photo is just a hobby. I don't sell my art or have clients, or even enter any photo contests. I only want to pay for software for upgrades for new features. I especially don't want to hold my collection of photos hostage to ransomware, which Lightroom Classic CC is. I'll gladly pay $120/every year if there are new features I want, but if not, I want to be able to keep using the software without having to pay over and over again. Of course, I'm only really interested in Lightroom, and not Photoshop or any of other programs included in the Adobe photo subscription, so $120/year for that really seems too much. Photoshop may be a great program, but the subscription is just a non-starter for me. Of course, I would never have paid $500 for the Adobe software suite. It is just not true to say that the subscription has made things cheaper - I would say it is the opposite, if one only wants one program. I think there are probably many other cheaper programs which can be replacements for Photoshop. But as far as image management, I have really found all other programs besides Lightroom very wanting.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-12-2018, 04:47 PM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Thank you. This just goes to show that it's hard to claim that the accelerator is doing something detrimental to the image. And I'll feel quite comfortable shooting at high ISO on my K-1 II, even if Pentax never provides an option to turn it off. Of course, it might be interesting to repeat the test with different ISO and closer focus. It is just time consuming. I would like to shoot more interesting targets with my camera, rather than some more rather than tests to prove that the accelerator doesn't cause noticeable IQ loss.

---------- Post added 05-12-18 at 04:57 PM ----------

I simply don't see why you would do that. Personally, I never carry a tripod outside my house. To me, not requiring a tripod is one of the benefits of having a high ISO camera. And the stabilizer means that I don't have to buy and carry expensive and heavy glass, either. Because of those benefits, I'm more than happy to carry a big bulky camera like my Pentax K-1 I I. It still fits in my camera bag.

If I'm in a low-light situation outdoors - and that is actually my favorite type of shooting, I am simply not going to be shooting ISO 100 . ISO 3200 and 6400 were very usable on my K-30 previously, with some minimal NR in post (couldn't apply too much without blurring the images). I have done bracketing with different ISOs at +/- 1 EV, and generally found that I liked to push the underexposed images at ISO 1600 more than the ISO 6400 images. But between the -1 EV and 0EV images, there just wasn't a massive difference. The most important thing I found was using a reasonable shutter speed to avoid blur, as blurred shots just cannot be recovered in post. They just have to be discarded, unless the blur is minor that you can compensate by sharpening in post, and you are doing only 4x6 prints.
ISO 12,800 and 25,600 seem very usable on my K-1 II now. I will likely use 12,800 quite a bit. And have zero hesitation about ISO 3,200 or 6,400 . I had my K-30 set to ISO AUTO 100 - 6400 almost all the time. I have set my K-1 II to ISO AUTO 100 - 12,800 so far, and liking the results. Though I sometimes force fixed ISO, or aperture, or shutter speed. I never shot in green mode on my K-30, and won't on the K-1 II either. Most often, I shoot in P mode. Rarely use the other modes unless I'm doing something very specific like the sorts of tests I have been doing lately and posting to PF.

---------- Post added 05-12-18 at 05:06 PM ----------

Thanks. Plastic wonder seems like a fair assessment of FA50/1.4. My only other 50 is the DA50. It autofocuses better and faster than the FA50/1.4, but isn't as sharp at equal aperture.
I had an FA50/1.7 before. Lots of CA and PF with it. Had loaned it to a friend who broke it. He bought me the DA50 as a replacement. That was years ago.
I hope the D FA 50 / 1.4 will be an improvement over both lenses. I know I just won't have $500 in my budget for it. Maybe in another 10-15 years I can buy it used for $100 too :)

Yeah, and you would need to pay for such post processing software. I have only used fairly inexpensive software up to this point - Corel Aftershot and Paintshop Pro mostly. Never used Photoshop before. Not really looking forward to it due to price. I heard the learning curve is high too. I would much rather have something quick like Aftershot. Too bad it is an unstable program, as is ON1 which I'm trying now. Still looking for a suitable replacement that isn't ransomware.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-12-2018, 05:24 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

You are right, I should have said that it was easier to compress by JPEG algorithm, which isn't lossless.
I'm simply not versed in the demosaicing process, or complex photo compression. I have worked on basic data compression, though. For very simple lossless algorithms like RLE, smaller file size implies redundancy of information, and for things like bitmaps, video or audio files, less resolution.
But it doesn't necessarily mean larger files are better if the increase in compressed file size is due to unwanted noise and artifact removal.
Which is at the whole core of this whole accelerator/NR chip discussion : does it do more harm than good ? And are there situations where it's really beneficial to turn it off, where you really, really wouldn't want tot eliminate the extra artifacts/noise in post ?
So far, my little blind test is not very conclusive when it comes to ISO 500 vs 800.
But all players picked the tripod PS over non-PS, so that was nice.

---------- Post added 05-12-18 at 05:31 AM ----------

I also have a DA50/1.8 I could try with, which works in FF. The FA50 is sharper at equal aperture, though.

Assuming I wanted to play again, is there anything you would do different, besides :
- turn off remote AF . Use one-time AF, or MF instead
- stop the lens down more to increase DOF
- use tethered shooting to change ISO and/or PS settings ? I don't know if there is anything that will do this for K-1 II.

Still, these are difficult parameters to easily duplicate for a non-professional. And it seems minute changes in them may have more influence on the picture than the accelerator NR. Unless you really think my test didn't prove even that ?

I also have many other lenses to test with, see my signature.

Well, if you buy me one, I will glady test it !
Would love a D FA 15-30, too :)

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-12-2018, 03:03 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

The difference in focus point is because the camera was set to refocus with AF with the remote control. I could reshoot without that setting.
I had to touch the camera to change the settings - ISO and PS/no PS - and slightly moved things when I did. I would need to use tethered shooting program in order to avoid that problem to meet your high standard, I think. I am just a hobbyist. Never thought I would buy a $2000 camera like the K-1 II.

Do you think my FA50 / 1.4 is not a proper lens ? I got it for $100 two weeks ago. It looks fine to me at f/1.8 . Not so sharp at f/1.4, which is why I stopped it down to f/1.8, but it depends on the subject.
I could have gotten more of the frame in focus by stopping it down further, but chose not to.

So, since you played, let me reveal what the files really are :
1. ISO 800, no PS
4. ISO 500, no PS
You got those two reversed. Do you like #1 more than #4 ?
And if so, did you think the accelerator was in picture #4 and hurting the quality ?

2 is indeed ISO 500 PS
3 is indeed ISO 800 PS

You got those right. I'm impressed you got 50% right. Do you prefer #2 over #3 ?

Overall, #2 seems to be the most popular, as ranked by the other players - LensBeginner and Mallee boy.

I haven't actually pixel-peed the shots myself. All 4 look very good to me. I knew what each one was, so there was no purpose in playing. Happy to play the game with your shots, though.I think I would be very happy with any of them unless I did huge enlargements, and even then, not sure.
I don't think I would have fared well in this game, but it was your game.
I can make the rendered JPGs and DNGs available if anyone wants them. Probably going to be about 500MB.

One thing I can say is that the profiles in RawTherapee significantly changed the color vs what was initially displayed in RT, and when rendered.
This color shift does not occur when I use Aftershot at default settings. But aftershot doesn't support PS, so I couldn't use it for the PS test.

In any case, your other claim was that PS at ISO 800 was making thing worse, vs no-PS at the same ISO 800 .
Do you still see that in these shots ?

One interesting thing is that the rendered PS files - regardless of ISO, and ~~regardless of original RAW or rendered~~ only JPEG, (obviously RAW PS files are larger)- are significantly smaller than non-PS files.
That means some information got eliminated. Yet, people still seem to prefer the ISO 500 PS image #2, which is the second smallest of all 4 JPEGs.
So, the PS must be eliminating some unwanted information somehow.

Here are the sizes of original RAW files :

05/11/2018 17:38 42,859,883 ISO500.DNG
05/11/2018 17:38 157,822,689 ISO500PS.DNG
05/11/2018 17:35 42,784,080 ISO800.DNG
05/11/2018 17:37 158,751,797 ISO800PS.DNG

Obviously, PS RAW files are larger than non-PS.
And here, ISO 800 files are slightly smaller than ISO 500, regardless of PS.

For JPG files :

05/11/2018 18:35 5,779,612 ISO500.jpg
05/11/2018 18:33 4,265,957 ISO500PS.jpg
05/11/2018 18:31 5,221,428 ISO800.jpg
05/11/2018 18:32 3,780,444 ISO800PS.jpg

Here, there is a significant difference between ISO 500 and ISO 800 files. The ISO 800 files are much smaller, ie. compress better with JPG algorithm.
I tried rendered in lossless 16-bit PNG also, but got files that were larger than all 4 original RAW files :)

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-12-2018, 01:17 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

To add to this, it would help if you can guess which shots are ISO 500 vs 800, since the main point of my test was to check if the accelerator NR, which kicks in at ISO 640, results in visible less detailed shots.
I could have just done two shots for this, but did 4, to add PixelShift into the mix, since MJKoski asked, saying PS hurts the image.

So, we have 2 ISO 800 images, both with accelerator/NR . One with PS, one without PS.
And 2 ISO 500 images, both without the accelerator/NR . One with PS, one without PS.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 11:38 PM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Your vote has been registered also, thank you !

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 11:24 PM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Thank you for playing. I was getting desperate that I shot those for nothing.
Your vote has been duly registered.

I am waiting for the answers from MJKoski, who started this thread and has been so vocal about the inferiority of the K-1 II NR, before I reveal the answers.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 07:01 PM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

OK, I played your little game. Use tripod PixelShift on my K-1 II at ISO 800 . The lens I chose is an FA50/1.4, stopped down to F1.8 .
The subject is part of the inside of my K280 grand piano. There was a bit of daylight coming through the front door and windows, but ceiling LEDs were also turned on to help a bit.

I shot using infrared remote control, with 3 seconds delay. This automatically disables the SR in the camera.

I shot at two different ISOs - 500 and 800, single frame. I rendered these with the "auto-matched curved - ISO medium" profile.
Then, I shot again at those same ISOs, but with PixelShift . I rendered these with the "PixelShift - PS ISO medium" profile.
Output files were all JPEGs at the default settings - 92 percent quality. They were in the 5MB range.

I then uploaded them to imgur, which stripped all the EXIF data, including ISO and PixelShift data.

I won't tell you which one is which. I will leave it up to you figure that part out.

First image :

Second image :

Third image :

Fourth image :

You can pixel-peep all these images in your browser at the full 36MP resolution by clicking them, "view image" in Firefox, and then double-clicking the magnifying glass. I await your answer.

Adding the rules ::

We have 2 ISO 800 images, both with accelerator/NR . One with PS, one without PS.
And 2 ISO 500 images, both without the accelerator/NR . One with PS, one without PS.

Please state which 2 shots you think are with ISO 800, ie. with NR, and which two shots are ISO 500, ie. without NR.
And then, for both ISO 800 shot, figure out which is PS and non-PS. And same for both ISO 500 shots.

"best" is certainly a valid answer, but I was hoping MJKoski (and others who are RAW NR purists) could actually figure out when it's happening and when it isn't.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 05:11 PM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Thanks. All the RawTherapee icons look extremely small on my 4K screen. Unlike just about every other Windows program made, F1 does not bring up any manual or help. I couldn't find any PDF manual for RawTherapee 5.x either on their web site. 4.0 was the latest manual and is marked obsolete.
It took me a while to figure out what the "gear icon" might be. Is that the one next to the save button ? I'm using RawTherapee 5.4 .
Is it really necessary to use a processing queue when processing a single image ?

And is there any way in RawTherapee to see the 4 individual frames contained in the PS file ?

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 05:53 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Seems like there are 4 versions of the model in each DNG file - one for each frame. At least that's what I see in exiftoolgui .
I used exiftool -Model, but it only changed the value of the model for the first frame.
There is also another field called "uniqueCameraModel". Would appreciate if you could share what exact command you used to change the model for PEF that made the file work in LR.
I think I have pretty old exiftool/exiftoolgui on my system too, so need to update them. Knowing which versions you used that worked would also help.
Time for me to sleep for now...

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 05:42 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

OK, so that makes two of us ! Found this video, but it has zero explanation .

You Tube

You Tube

src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/F2RWSYHAAdg?controls=1" allowfullscreen><br />

Having never processed a file in RawTherapee, much less a PS file, it would seem that is not the best way to go for my first try.

OK, going to try this now.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 05:05 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

OK, that makes sense.

Do I have to shoot PEF files ? If I shoot DNG and use exiftool to change the camera model, will that work too ?
Going to try this now on a few DNGs I shot in PS (hand-held) earlier.

Just opened one of those DNGs (unmodified) files in RawTherapee. It does say that it sees 4 frames. Not clear how to display them individually.

Also tried in PDCU 5, but it's doing something horribly wrong - basically locking up the machine, before I can even get the chance to open a ny file. Not even the mouse pointer moves for several seconds. Haven't seen other programs do that on my i7 .

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 04:35 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Interesting.

I'm looking forward to playing with the astrotracer some day. Lots of fun ahead.

I'm shooting in DNG now. have Raw therapee installed solely for the PS feature, but have never actually tried it yet. I find the UI extremely intimidating. Is there a quick how-to of what I need to do to process a PS file ?

I am also in my 2nd day of Lightroom classic trial, so I can use that as well. But if LR only shows the first exposure in the PS file, what is the point of shooting PS ?
And what do you mean "where you can see the NR being done" ? I'm still very ignorant about how PS works. I know the camera shoots 4 frames, which must all be in the PEF/DNG. Is there a 5th frame in the RAW file that is processed in-camera ? Or do the 4 frames need to be processed on computer when one has a PS RAW file ? And if the later, can LR do it and how ?

I normally process with RAWs with Corel Aftershot. I was able to create a profile for it that allows both PEF and DNG files from the K-1 II to work. But I don't think Aftershot has any PS support.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-11-2018, 02:50 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Which software are you using to process the RAW files ?

I have done very few shots in PS, and only DPS so far, not tripod. And I have not processed any of the RAW files yet.

I'm more than willing to play your game, I just need to know all the variables.

Quote:

[/COLOR]And this folks, is how it is done: Learning-to-See-in-the-Dark/README.md at master · cchen156/Learning-to-See-in-the-Dark · GitHub

Pure AI power. Now waiting for some brand to implement such, in the future (requires massive computation), and give an *option* to enable it.

Sounds cool, but we may be waiting a while for this to show up in a camera the size of the K-1 II, to speak nothing of the power source. If it needs an AC adapter, it's less useful, except for studio use, mainly on tripod or for video.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-10-2018, 08:15 PM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Do you mean PS on tripod or hand-held ?

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-08-2018, 03:24 AM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

This is actually a problem with the lens in the top right corner, IMO, not the camera.

See :
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/190-pentax-k-1/365652-opportunity-get-ba...ml#post4274841

Foliage in other parts (lower) of the shot looks favorable on the K-1 II :

Image comparison: Digital Photography Review

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-07-2018, 06:53 PM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

Can we really be sure the difference is solely the camera, though, when they didn't even use the same lens in both tests ?
Also, others on DPR forums seem to have pointed out other differences in the methodology.

Forum: Pentax K-1 & K-1 II 05-07-2018, 06:31 PM

K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By madbrain

Replies: 561
Views: 46,148

What is odd is that DPR did not criticize the accelerator in their reviews of the K-70 and K-P vs previous APS-C cameras.
So, is the accelerator only hurting with the K-1 IQ ?

Search took 0.00 seconds | Showing results 1 to 20 of 20

Forum Jump

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!