Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Showing results 1 to 25 of 184 Search:
Forum: Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 09-01-2009, 12:34 AM  
The Canon 7D for $1699.
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 71
Views: 10,429
If you haven't yet, take a look at the shots where Noise Reduction was off. Quite impressive. The standard NR shots do look smudgy at high ISO, but with NR disabled detail is retained while noise is very acceptable and easily cleaned up. I didn't expect Canon to be able to pull it off, but they've conjured up some magic it seems.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-26-2009, 07:01 PM  
Pentax K7 or Canon 500D?
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 137
Views: 31,439
Good analogy. As capable an image capture device the 500D is, it really feels cheap (to be fair, it is cheap!) and lacks the functional niceties of more refined cameras like the K-7.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-16-2009, 12:23 PM  
Even if $ is no real issue, it's not easy to replicate a Pentax system.
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 86
Views: 10,518
digitaldevo,

I don't disagree with you in principle--Canon have a lot of 'splaining to do about their recent debacles--but I think you're a bit over the top.

You've listed a lot of problems with Canon, but only some of them are real and due to design issues. 1DIII focusing issues--check. 20D grip shorting out--check. But many of the issues you listed aren't as widespread as you make them sound and are down to individual copies breaking down. Stuff breaks, and when you sell as much stuff as Canon more stuff breaks than manufacturers that sell less. It happens. I'm not happy with Canon's QC either, but it's not all doom and gloom and the-sky-is-falling like you make it sound. I've had my fair share of items needing repair straight out of the box, but the majority of stuff I've had has been solid from day 1. To be fair though, if I'd had as much trouble as you I might've switched too.

I agree that there's not a whole lot of inspiring camera bodies in Canon's lineup right now, which is why I'm still shooting a 5D + 40D. I, too, hate how they artificially segment their products from one another (stingy with the weather sealing and AF) and how their product lineup doesn't make much sense right now (5DII AF is worse than 50D that costs less than 1/2 the price, for instance).

I wouldn't mind trying Nikon, but Nikon don't have the lenses I want nor do they meet the AF requirement I have for my next camera, i.e. cross-type AF points spread through the whole frame instead of clustered in the middle. Plus Nikon aren't interested in in swappable focusing screens, and I've come to really depend on the Ee-S focusing screen on my 5D that makes manually focusing large aperture primes much more doable.

Canon overpriced? Try pricing an equivalent Nikon system (if the lenses match up at all) and see how your wallet likes that.

And in case you think the QC grass is greener on the other side, there are disgruntled Nikonians who have switched to Canon due to poor repair experiences there too. Unfortunately these days you pick your poison and hope for the best.



You've gotten some really duff L lenses then. I can't imagine getting significantly better quality than what I'm getting from my 35L, 85L, and 135L. Some L lenses aren't the greatest across the entire range, for instance the 24-70L and 70-200L IS, both of which I own. "L" isn't a guarantee of absolute image quality. You have to know what you're getting into with each lens. It's the same with every manufacturer. "Limited" isn't a guarantee of image quality with Pentax either, although some might think so just based on the name and reputation.

And keep hoping lady luck is with you and your Pentax gear. Chances are some day you'll need a Pentax item repaired, so don't let your love affair with Pentax end that day.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-12-2009, 03:16 PM  
K 7 iso 3200
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 38
Views: 8,967
Maybe not user error per se, but rather very challenging conditions. I wouldn't expect any user with any camera to do radically better under those shooting conditions. That shouldn't stop one from trying to get the shot though, so this example can still be indicative of what to expect when shooting in such extreme conditions (bright sky and dark subject needing correction in post).
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-11-2009, 07:29 PM  
Even if $ is no real issue, it's not easy to replicate a Pentax system.
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 86
Views: 10,518
Current crop sensors have more pixels/sensels per unit of area than current FF. The comparison gets more dicey when comparing older crop sensors with current FF. Always keep an eye on pixel pitch/size.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-11-2009, 04:37 PM  
K 7 iso 3200
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 38
Views: 8,967
Wish the OP would come back to confirm/deny whether this was pushed in post. I wouldn't be surprised if it was, but no sense in us arguing back and forth without knowing the facts.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 07-11-2009, 04:33 PM  
So it's July 7th, where is Samsung?
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 55
Views: 14,373
They had to specify a different flange distance, but they didn't necessarily need to make the opening smaller. Making the opening smaller would make sense to maximize the size saving potential of the format but not mandatory.



Or they could design their mirrorless mount to cover FF in the first place, in which case lenses usable on the initial NX (1.5x crop) would also be usable on an eventual FF if that's indeed the plan.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-11-2009, 02:53 PM  
K 7 iso 3200
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 38
Views: 8,967
No, you don't need to "shoot to the right with all high ISO shots". The original shot is quite bright for an ISO 3200 shot, and if anything has already given the camera a leg up in terms of keeping noise to a minimum. Exposing brighter than it already is on top of that? Come on.

Complaining about underexposure--ok, I can go with that. But now we're not even allowed to take a shot at the proper exposure? :confused:

To the OP: wow that Noise Ninja job is awful. Have you tried NR Low in-camera? From test shots I've seen it strikes a good balance between noise reduction and detail retention. It particularly does a good job reducing the chroma noise that's so visible in your original shot.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-11-2009, 11:04 AM  
Even if $ is no real issue, it's not easy to replicate a Pentax system.
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 86
Views: 10,518
Just a few counterpoints from me, although we definitely agree on the broad strokes:



Amazon is crazy high on the 5DII price. Everybody else is selling it for $2700.



Cropping down to a lower res might be valid if you're interested in per-pixel performance, but the real test (i.e. closest to how most photographers actually shoot) is by using the full resolution of both cameras. Example of real life application: say I'm taking a portrait with APS-C (1.5x), 85mm lens. To take the same portrait with FF and the same lens I'd get closer to fill the frame. So in real life scenarios you don't force both cameras to take shots from the same distance and crop down the FF to the level of APS-C. The only time per-pixel noise comes into play is if you're focal length and distance limited, i.e. you're already using your maximum focal length and can't get any closer, when chances are you'd have to crop with even an APS-C sensor let alone a FF.



Yeah, Canon have definitely shuffled the ISO numbers around a bit. I think they used to be 2/3 stop over standard (is that right?), but recent cameras have had their calibration adjusted downward to be closer to accurate, although from your numbers they might've swung too far in the other direction. But you're right, it does matter and it can be misleading. The 5D vs. 5DII for instance--5DII looks like it's about 1 1/3 - 1 2/3 stops better than 5D, but after adjustment for ISO inflation is really only 2/3 stops better. That still puts it about 2 stops better than the best APS-C though, give or take (more "take" really; probably more like 1 1/2 - 1 2/3 stops).



Really? That's nuts. I don't consider ISO 12800 usable on any camera to date.



Right, but that's not how photographers actually shoot.



Absolutely. Too much hyperbole out there about FF being the magic tonic to take your photography to the next level.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-11-2009, 08:10 AM  
Even if $ is no real issue, it's not easy to replicate a Pentax system.
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 86
Views: 10,518
FF isn't the magic photography bullet. Neither are good lenses. Neither is a particular brand. Cameras and lenses have matured so much that there's not a whole lot of difference in image quality in most scenarios, even at pixel peeping levels. Image quality across the board is pretty similar as long as you're not pushing the camera to the limit. But there are scenarios where FF has inherent benefits over APS-C. It just so happens that most people don't shoot in such situations most of the time.

Example 1: low light photography. A 5DII will smoke any APS-C at ISO 3200 and above. Regardless of how usable you think any given APS-C is at high ISO, the 5DII is significantly better.

Example 2: portrait photography. If you're trying to take a portrait in a place with a busy background, FF affords you more background separation/blurring than APS-C.

If you can't see the difference between FF and APS-C, then you're not shooting in situations where FF is a benefit and FF isn't for you, so be happy with APS-C. Different strokes for different folks.



Back to the topic of replicating a Pentax system with a different brand, if you're into the compact aspect of Pentax (DA Limiteds) there's no substitute at any cost except Leica, at which point you lose autofocus so it's not an exact replacement. Micro 4/3 is coming along and could eventually be a real contender in the compact system market, but still has a long way to go to be a serious consideration as a main system. None of the other manufacturers give a rip about making smaller APS-C lenses that maximize the size benefits of the smaller sensor, more's the pity.

But if you don't care about size, Canon more or less has the lenses covered. I'd take Canon's lenses for what/how I shoot (more and better large aperture primes), but some might prefer Nikon's (better f/2.8 ultra wide angle and standard zoom). If you think Canon's stuff is big, get a load of Nikon's. They've really gone off the deep end of the size-be-damned pool. Their 24-70 f/2.8 is even larger than Canon's, and that 14-24 f/2.8 is massive.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-11-2009, 07:44 AM  
Even if $ is no real issue, it's not easy to replicate a Pentax system.
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 86
Views: 10,518
Good luck, brecklundin. Hope photography can be an outlet for you during these difficult times.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-10-2009, 09:29 AM  
Even if $ is no real issue, it's not easy to replicate a Pentax system.
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 86
Views: 10,518
Ain't that the truth! I want a camera that has a 5DII sensor, 1-series AF, K-7 body and sealing, A900 viewfinder, Olympus dust removal, Pentax in-body IS, Leica M8 craftsmanship, and compact FF lenses a la old Zuiko 28mm f/3.5. Is that really too much to ask? :lol:
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-10-2009, 09:21 AM  
I was shooting today again with 5D MKII
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 79
Views: 8,671
No, because 1DsII (16MP FF) has bigger pixels than 50D (15MP 1.6x). 50D works the glass harder than 1DsII (did I just make an inadvertent ice hockey reference?).

But really we won't know for sure whether we've hit the limits of glass until a new higher res camera comes out that doesn't resolve any better than the previous one. We haven't hit that point yet. It could very well be that 15MP 1.6x of the 50D is pushing the limits, but we won't know until a higher-res 1.6x comes out that offers no resolving power increase over the 50D.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-09-2009, 09:51 PM  
Even if $ is no real issue, it's not easy to replicate a Pentax system.
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 86
Views: 10,518
If your absolute sticking point is IS/VR/whatever, then you're better off sticking with a brand that offers in-camera stabilization, because neither Canon nor Nikon will fill your need there. But if you're right about being able to use ISO 2-3 stops higher on Canon/Nikon and that equalizes the loss of 2-3 stops stabilization with Pentax, I would take the higher ISO all things considered. Having a higher usable max ISO allows you more flexibility than stabilization. They might cancel each other out in terms of handholdability, but you can't freeze motion with image stabilization while a higher ISO would afford you a higher shutter speed that might be enough to freeze motion.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-09-2009, 09:38 PM  
I was shooting today again with 5D MKII
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 79
Views: 8,671
I think most everybody would agree with that.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-09-2009, 07:58 AM  
I was shooting today again with 5D MKII
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 79
Views: 8,671
I've learned to take everything Michael Reichmann says about image quality with a huge, HUGE grain of salt. He does great hands-on reports on how cameras handle in the field, and I enjoy reading those reports, but his eye for image quality is suspect. I find it funny how derisive he is (was?) about pixel peeping but then he tries to do it himself and fails at it.

Here's another example of what pingflood mentioned regarding his over-exuberance. In his 1DIII hands-on report he said, "I judge the MKIII to have between a one stop and two stop advantage over any Canon camera to date in terms of high ISO noise." The 5D was out by this time, so that claim includes the 5D. Careful controlled tests at other sites showed the advantage to be about 2/3 of a stop. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he meant the 1DIII had a 1 stop advantage over some cameras and 2 stops over others, which would be pretty close to accurate, even though he didn't say that.

But then in his 40D hands-on report he claims, "I find that the IQ of the 40D is on a par if not even slightly better than that of the Canon 5D." Sorry, but I have both cameras and he's simply wrong. 40D is very good and to be fair quite close to the 5D in terms of noise. But it's not on a par and definitely not better. There's no way I can spin this statement in favor of Reichmann. It's at this point that I recognized the exaggeration trend and tuned out his image quality analysis.

I don't mean to bash the guy, but facts are facts. I don't know if he says controversial (and wrong) things just to get a rise out of his audience and increase traffic to his site or if he really thinks he sees these things, but either way he's not a reliable source for image quality info. Like I said his hands-on impressions are great and on the money, and that's why I enjoy reading his articles.

Sorry about burdening you with all that. You hit a nerve with a LL quote. As I'm about to show, that's just a rabbit trail though.

Based on the quote, I don't see where you're getting that he claims the 5DII is outresolving lenses. He's not wrong that the 100-400 is weak at the long end, but that's not because the 5DII is stressing it. You can see the difference between a 100-400 and a 400 prime on cameras with lower pixel pitches than the 5DII like the 1DII or 5D. 24-70L is also known to not be the highest resolving lens in the world, which again can be seen on cameras with lower pixel pitches. 2 of the lenses he used happened to not be the most stellar performers.

What I read from that quote was simply that Canon need to redesign some lenses, which is absolutely true. Nowhere in that quote did I get the sense that he was saying, "... there is no glass available that can potentially match the Canon's 5D MK11 sensor," as you claimed. He was simply saying some lenses won't bring out the best of the 5DII. There are plenty of L lenses that are up to the challenge of the 5DII and more. I personally think we might be getting close on APS-C with 15MP, but 21MP on FF leaves a lot of room to still go up in resolution and not outresolve all lenses.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-08-2009, 05:00 PM  
K7 high ISO - will it be competitive?
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 104
Views: 22,600
Magic, man. MAGIC! :lol:

As I said--unrealistic expectations. At ISO 3200 noise levels are more or less even with 50D for instance, which isn't shabby. FF has me spoiled rotten I suppose.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-08-2009, 03:29 PM  
K7 high ISO - will it be competitive?
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 104
Views: 22,600
Now that Imaging Resource has put up their standard suite of test shots taken with a production K-7, for me at least the answer to your original question is "no". I was hoping for some last minute magic with the sensor changes they supposedly made, but no such magic is forthcoming. ISO 1600 is still very good, while 3200 is still not good enough. That's my view anyway.

Looks like I'll be sitting this one out. I had such high hopes, probably unrealistic ones now that I think about it.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-08-2009, 03:20 PM  
I was shooting today again with 5D MKII
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 79
Views: 8,671
21mm, 40mm, 70mm, and 31mm Limiteds are all more expensive than when I started looking at them in February. Considering that those are the only 4 lenses I was considering, Pentax are batting a thousand with their price increases as far as I'm concerned. :mad: Not a 40% increase or anything (probably more like 10%), but still.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-08-2009, 09:19 AM  
I was shooting today again with 5D MKII
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 79
Views: 8,671
Respectfully, all the chatter about a 21MP FF sensor outresolving lenses is hogwash. Those lenses weren't even outresolved by the 10MP 40D sensor (1.6x crop), which has a smaller sensel size than the 5DII has. Theoretically the 40D is tougher on lenses in terms of resolution because of the smaller sensels, so if the 40D still gains from good glass then so does the 5DII. At some point we'll reach the limits of lens resolution, but we're not there yet.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-08-2009, 08:49 AM  
I was shooting today again with 5D MKII
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 79
Views: 8,671
Outer AF points are a known weakness of the 5D/5DII AF system. They aren't cross-type points, so they don't acquire targets as well as the center point. Canon totally skimped on that, which is pretty ridiculous considering the $2700 price tag and that every other Canon camera at any price has multiple cross-type AF sensors except for Rebels.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-07-2009, 07:11 PM  
Pentax K7 or Canon 500D?
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 137
Views: 31,439
From early tests I'd call 1600 on the K-7 quite clean. 3200 isn't where I'd want it to be, but noise at 1600 isn't an issue.

Again regarding noise on the 500D, don't just look at amount of noise. Compare detail as well:
Canon EOS 500D / Digital Rebel T1i Review: 26. Compared to (Higher ISO): Digital Photography Review

At 1600 and up you start losing detail in the 500D shots. And here:
Olympus E-P1 Digital Camera - Hands-On Preview - The Imaging Resource!

At 3200 it's alarming how much detail gets blurred out by the T1i (another name for 500D) compared to other cameras. In fact I'd rate it as having the most smudging at ISO 3200 compared to its detail at ISO 100 among all the cameras compared there. That is, it starts out really sharp at ISO 100 but loses all that detail at ISO 3200, whereas others either start out soft and stay soft, or start out sharp and lose only a little detail.

But there's no accounting for taste. If all you care about is amount of noise then the 500D will do fine. Just know that with the 500D you're making a significant sacrifice in detail to achieve that level of noiselessness. At this point I would guess that you can achieve at least the same level of noiselessness and smudging with K-7 at ISO 1600 if you crank up the noise reduction.

Having said that, I agree that the K-7 isn't as clean as I had hoped with all the talk of a completely redesigned sensor and all.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-07-2009, 05:19 PM  
I was shooting today again with 5D MKII
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 79
Views: 8,671
24-105 is a nice lens. I like mine.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-07-2009, 05:09 PM  
Pentax K7 or Canon 500D?
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 137
Views: 31,439
If by "you" you really mean YOU, then sure. Not me though.



You're talking about a difference of 0.4 Megapixels. Really? That's significant to you? Either you're really ignorant or are a troll. Which one is it? I should probably stop responding, but I've got this bad habit of replying when I shouldn't. Oh well :)






QuoteQuote:

2, Canon 500D has much cleaner picture than K-7. Just look at the comparasion
Canon EOS 500D Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

Pentax K-7 Review - Image Quality | PhotographyBLOG

It is seen that ISO3200 for 500D is just equivalent to ISO800 for K7



This is an easy trap to fall into, so you get a free pass on this. I don't typically subscribe to the Canon-noise-reduction-smudges-away-details conspiracy theory, but in the case of the 500D it's really true. They've managed to keep noise to a minimum by sacrificing detail.



500D has 1080p at 20 frames per second. 20. That makes 1080p a useless resolution to use, which means its highest usable res is 720p.



And? Some of the 500D's features aren't available in the top-of-the-line 1-series cameras. Does that mean the 500D is better than the 1DsIII or 1DIII? And to say that the 500D has anti-shake because you can buy lenses to attach to it that have Image Stabilization is laughable.



Just off the top of my head, K-7 has these compared to 500D:
  • 100% pentaprism viewfinder vs. less-than-100% pentamirror with less magnification

  • Full weather sealing vs. no weather sealing

  • Solid metal body vs. plastic body

  • 9 cross-type AF points vs. 1

  • 5.2 fps vs. 3.5 or so

  • Deeper shot buffer

  • Pre-shot composition adjustment using sensor shift

  • Digital level indicator


I'm sure I'm missing a few, but that's what I remember right off hand. I can't claim that those extra features are worth the price difference since that's a personal call, but you're really short-changing the K-7 in your analysis. And this is coming from a Canon user.
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 07-07-2009, 04:53 PM  
I was shooting today again with 5D MKII
Posted By Yohan Pamudji
Replies: 79
Views: 8,671
What lens? Lens makes a big difference. Some Canons are buzzy, but the best ones are virtually silent
Search took 0.06 seconds | Showing results 1 to 25 of 184

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:17 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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