Asking a favour form anyone who owns a K5iiS and a K3


aliengrove

Link Posted 24/01/2014 - 19:19
I'm still vacillating about what camera to get; whether to wait for the mythical FF....or even whether to get a Sony A7R. Experiments I have done since getting the GR have really surprised me. I am not sure why, but the difference in resolution in images taken with the K5 and GR on the ground, and those taken with both cameras through thick glass on an aircraft, show that the glass windows somehow greatly exaggerate the effect of the AA filter.

Basically, I have realised that I need an interchangeable lens camera, preferably with internal image stabilisation as I have loads of un-stabilised lenses, that does not have an AA filter. However, I also want as little high ISO noise as possible, which leads me to comparisons of the K3 and K5iis. I know it's been done to death here, and I'm not looking for opinions or links to tests; I'd like to process some RAW files myself. None of the RAW files I have found on-line have been suitable for the sort of processing I want to try. Once processed, I'd print them at 24 inches wide or so and compare them. This obviously would entail up-scaling the K5iis image.

Anyway, to get to the point of this post....I was wondering if any owner of both the K3 and K5iis would be willing to shoot a hand-held low-light scene, slightly under-exposed (1-2 stops), at ISO 3200 and 6400, with both cameras, and let me have a play with the unprocessed RAW files to do my own comparison, using DXO Optics Pro and various other processing techniques I use. Preferably I'd like night scenes with high contrast, ie bright lights (without blown highlights) and dark areas in the same image. Something like a city centre at night. That's assuming also that you live somewhere it's safe to do this! If necessary I can provide on-line storage to upload the files to.

I realise it's probably highly unlikely that anyone will actually take up my request, but, hey, nothing ventured, nothing gained! I can't promise any reward except a mention on my under-subscribed blog and my eternal thanks! Though I'd happily donate a very good condition (almost mint) smc-M 1:2 50mm (that I originally bought for IR experiments) as a token of my gratitude.
Flurble

My Website
PPG
flickr
G+
Facebook
Last Edited by aliengrove on 24/01/2014 - 19:25

Fletcher8

Link Posted 24/01/2014 - 19:30
Hi Jonathan

I no longer have a k5lls, but i do own two K3's I would be happy to take a few night shots of Leeds at ISO 3200 in RAW and Dropbox them to you if you are interested.

PM with an email address and i will send you a invite to dropbox with a few images in. give me a couple of days though.


Fletcher8
Fletcher8.

Helpful

davidstorm

Link Posted 24/01/2014 - 20:03
Hi Jon

I might be your man! I have both cameras and also have a Mk1 K-5 as well. I will be happy to take shots as similar as possible with the K-3 and K-5iis, both in RAW at the settings you have suggested. If you PM me details of how / where to send them I will get the RAW files to you, as long as you promise not to post them on here or post any constructive criticism of the image quality!!!

It will be Saturday most likely before I can do this, very busy at work and on house renovations at present, so please excuse any slight delay.

Best regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

Helpful

aliengrove

Link Posted 25/01/2014 - 04:34
Thanks very much guys! Don't worry, I won't be posting the shots on here unless you want me to!
Flurble

My Website
PPG
flickr
G+
Facebook

dcweather

Link Posted 28/01/2014 - 10:22
The results would be nice to hear about though!

aliengrove

Link Posted 28/01/2014 - 14:42
I'll post my ideas about he images here, in the next couple of days.
Flurble

My Website
PPG
flickr
G+
Facebook

eoinandpaula

Link Posted 28/01/2014 - 15:19
Hi Jonathan

I also have both cameras and could do the tests if no-one else has or cannot do so for whatever reason. Unfortunately I live in the back of beyond with minimal light pollution but could try to photograph my house from the outside with lights on internally if that would be of any use.

Regards

Eoin Hanley

richandfleur

Link Posted 28/01/2014 - 18:46
dcweather wrote:
The results would be nice to hear about though!

+1 go on David

aliengrove

Link Posted 30/01/2014 - 17:58
David Storm has very kindly uploaded some RAW files for me to play with. Unfortunately the fan on my computer is playing up again and it gets a bit warm when I do too much processing....I'm going to the UK next week and have ordered a new fan, so will finish the experiment then.

However, I have processed three files taken at ISO 6400, -2ev, all of the same scene with the same lens. It's surprised me: the K3 does indeed have more noise, negligibly, but it's very fine-grained, and after a bit of processing there is far more detail than in the K5 and K5iis shots. If I try and get rid of all the noise in the K3 file, there's not much to choose between the three cameras. However, with these ISO 6400 images processed to the point that I think they look good at 100%, and once all the images are resized to a size midway between the K3 and K5 file sizes, the K3 produces the best images imo (significantly so), with the most detail and least noise.

I'll update this for those who are interested once I've processed all the files.

As for my choice of what camera to buy next (I was planning to next week), Ricoh have thrown a spanner in the works as it seems there's some new models coming out.
Flurble

My Website
PPG
flickr
G+
Facebook

ChrisA

Link Posted 30/01/2014 - 18:12
aliengrove wrote:
I'll update this for those who are interested once I've processed all the files.

Very interesting. Yes, I'd be very interested in anything more you can add to this, in particular, similar comparisons at even higher ISOs.

At present rate, the day I walk into SRS with a big bag of stuff to trade in against the K-3 is rapidly approaching.

The OP's comment on the video linked to in this thread over the pond brought me a lot closer to pulling the trigger, as they say, and your comment has me at the brink
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.

jules

Link Posted 03/02/2014 - 17:41
aliengrove wrote:
David Storm has very kindly uploaded some RAW files for me to play with. Unfortunately the fan on my computer is playing up again and it gets a bit warm when I do too much processing....I'm going to the UK next week and have ordered a new fan, so will finish the experiment then.

However, I have processed three files taken at ISO 6400, -2ev, all of the same scene with the same lens. It's surprised me: the K3 does indeed have more noise, negligibly, but it's very fine-grained, and after a bit of processing there is far more detail than in the K5 and K5iis shots. If I try and get rid of all the noise in the K3 file, there's not much to choose between the three cameras. However, with these ISO 6400 images processed to the point that I think they look good at 100%, and once all the images are resized to a size midway between the K3 and K5 file sizes, the K3 produces the best images imo (significantly so), with the most detail and least noise.

I'll update this for those who are interested once I've processed all the files.

As for my choice of what camera to buy next (I was planning to next week), Ricoh have thrown a spanner in the works as it seems there's some new models coming out.

Pretty much as I see it, in real use the K3 is better and not just by a bit but you need to turn off the defaults use RAW etc. I suppose some would argue that you have to "Fiddle" to get the best out of it but regardless it is better.
It's stopped me wanting a K5II (of any version) as a second body and got me looking fwd to a K60, if indeed it's real...
People need to Pony up and buy a K3, test it in the real world, I'm loving mine!
I wish I could afford two like Fletcher8!
Cheers Jules...

My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.

www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Last Edited by jules on 03/02/2014 - 17:44

aliengrove

Link Posted 25/02/2014 - 19:08
Hi folks, due to continuing computer problems (still not got a replacement fan) I can't run DXO Optics Pro on my computer at the moment without it overheating, so my experiments with RAW files have been somewhat delayed. From the few I have managed to process, there's very little in it as far as the K3 and K5iis at high ISO, and whichever I buy is going to be a stop-gap anyway. For the reason of economy I'm looking for a second-hand K5IIs for the moment, as the AA filter is something I can get rid of now, and it's also a high priority for me. If the K3 had any advantages noise-wise beyond the perhaps half a stop I have seen from my own experiments and examples I've seen on the web, I'd buy one. However, I'm looking for 2 to 3 stops over what I get now from my K5, and Pentax don't currently produce a camera that fits the bill. If Ricoh don't bring out a FF camera later this year, or a radical new APS-C camera with the high ISO performance of something like the new D4S, I will be switching brands. I'd really like to have a FF camera with in-body stabilisation; if the A7R had it, I would have bought one already.
Flurble

My Website
PPG
flickr
G+
Facebook
Last Edited by aliengrove on 25/02/2014 - 19:09

Smeggypants

Link Posted 25/02/2014 - 19:36
jules wrote:
aliengrove wrote:
David Storm has very kindly uploaded some RAW files for me to play with. Unfortunately the fan on my computer is playing up again and it gets a bit warm when I do too much processing....I'm going to the UK next week and have ordered a new fan, so will finish the experiment then.

However, I have processed three files taken at ISO 6400, -2ev, all of the same scene with the same lens. It's surprised me: the K3 does indeed have more noise, negligibly, but it's very fine-grained, and after a bit of processing there is far more detail than in the K5 and K5iis shots. If I try and get rid of all the noise in the K3 file, there's not much to choose between the three cameras. However, with these ISO 6400 images processed to the point that I think they look good at 100%, and once all the images are resized to a size midway between the K3 and K5 file sizes, the K3 produces the best images imo (significantly so), with the most detail and least noise.

I'll update this for those who are interested once I've processed all the files.

As for my choice of what camera to buy next (I was planning to next week), Ricoh have thrown a spanner in the works as it seems there's some new models coming out.

Pretty much as I see it, in real use the K3 is better and not just by a bit but you need to turn off the defaults use RAW etc. I suppose some would argue that you have to "Fiddle" to get the best out of it but regardless it is better.
It's stopped me wanting a K5II (of any version) as a second body and got me looking fwd to a K60, if indeed it's real...
People need to Pony up and buy a K3, test it in the real world, I'm loving mine!
I wish I could afford two like Fletcher8!

Spend 978.00 just to test something?


ROFL!! you are a funny sometimes Jules.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

Smeggypants

Link Posted 25/02/2014 - 19:40
aliengrove wrote:
Hi folks, due to continuing computer problems (still not got a replacement fan) I can't run DXO Optics Pro on my computer at the moment without it overheating, so my experiments with RAW files have been somewhat delayed. From the few I have managed to process, there's very little in it as far as the K3 and K5iis at high ISO, and whichever I buy is going to be a stop-gap anyway. For the reason of economy I'm looking for a second-hand K5IIs for the moment, as the AA filter is something I can get rid of now, and it's also a high priority for me. If the K3 had any advantages noise-wise beyond the perhaps half a stop I have seen from my own experiments and examples I've seen on the web, I'd buy one. However, I'm looking for 2 to 3 stops over what I get now from my K5, and Pentax don't currently produce a camera that fits the bill. If Ricoh don't bring out a FF camera later this year, or a radical new APS-C camera with the high ISO performance of something like the new D4S, I will be switching brands. I'd really like to have a FF camera with in-body stabilisation; if the A7R had it, I would have bought one already.

Yes my main want is much better ISO performance. A Pentax FF DSLR or Mirrorless 16MP with a high ISO equalling the D4S would have me salivating gratuitously.

The stupid MP race is holding back the increase in IQ of images
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

jules

Link Posted 25/02/2014 - 19:48
Smeggypants wrote:
jules wrote:
Quote:
David Storm has very kindly uploaded some RAW files for me to play with. Unfortunately the fan on my computer is playing up again and it gets a bit warm when I do too much processing....I'm going to the UK next week and have ordered a new fan, so will finish the experiment then.

However, I have processed three files taken at ISO 6400, -2ev, all of the same scene with the same lens. It's surprised me: the K3 does indeed have more noise, negligibly, but it's very fine-grained, and after a bit of processing there is far more detail than in the K5 and K5iis shots. If I try and get rid of all the noise in the K3 file, there's not much to choose between the three cameras. However, with these ISO 6400 images processed to the point that I think they look good at 100%, and once all the images are resized to a size midway between the K3 and K5 file sizes, the K3 produces the best images imo (significantly so), with the most detail and least noise.

I'll update this for those who are interested once I've processed all the files.

As for my choice of what camera to buy next (I was planning to next week), Ricoh have thrown a spanner in the works as it seems there's some new models coming out.

Pretty much as I see it, in real use the K3 is better and not just by a bit but you need to turn off the defaults use RAW etc. I suppose some would argue that you have to "Fiddle" to get the best out of it but regardless it is better.
It's stopped me wanting a K5II (of any version) as a second body and got me looking fwd to a K60, if indeed it's real...
People need to Pony up and buy a K3, test it in the real world, I'm loving mine!
I wish I could afford two like Fletcher8!

Spend 978.00 just to test something?


ROFL!! you are a funny sometimes Jules.

Late getting that un Smeggy!
Cheers Jules...

My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.

www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.