Help to switch at Pentax KP from K-3


antonio72

Link Posted 10/10/2018 - 14:00
Hi all,
I've an Pentax K-3 and usually I shot to max Iso800 to limit the luminance noise.
I ask to the Pentax KP and K-3 (both) owners if the Pentax KP at ISO 800/1600 has less noise respect/than K-3.
Many thanks to the community.
(excuse me to my imperfect english)
Bye

JAK

Link Posted 10/10/2018 - 15:14
This site https://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM shows images taken at a range of ISOs for comparison purposes.

My own thought is to limit the higher ISOs when possible too, but if you need a higher ISO to get the shot then do so. Might be better to increase the ISO than suffer camera shake or to get sufficient depth of field. I'd hope both cameras would be fine up to 3200 (and beyond) in any event.

If noise is your major concern, look to get a K-5 or a K-1 which have a lower pixel density hence less noise. (Or even a 645D.)
John K
Last Edited by JAK on 10/10/2018 - 15:32

antonio72

Link Posted 10/10/2018 - 15:58
JAK wrote:
This site https://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM shows images taken at a range of ISOs for comparison purposes.

My own thought is to limit the higher ISOs when possible too, but if you need a higher ISO to get the shot then do so. Might be better to increase the ISO than suffer camera shake or to get sufficient depth of field. I'd hope both cameras would be fine up to 3200 (and beyond) in any event.

If noise is your major concern, look to get a K-5 or a K-1 which have a lower pixel density hence less noise. (Or even a 645D.)

Many thanks

HarisF1

Link Posted 10/10/2018 - 17:31
In addition to the comparison, going from the K-3 to KP was a huge difference in my opinion. I would find ISO1600 and sometimes 3200 quite usable on the KP.

But if you're going from the K-3, consider the cost, FPS burst and also the single card slot as they might be important to you.

derek897

Link Posted 10/10/2018 - 18:27
If noise is an issue for you, might be worth trying to get a used k1.
I know what i like, If not always why.

michaelblue

Link Posted 10/10/2018 - 22:20
For me, regarding 'noise' the k3 was not even as good as the k5 so i swapped mine for a KP and i'm so glad i did, it's much better at high ISO than both the K3 and the K5.
I must admit though, i did like the 2 card slots on the K3 but i just use a 32gb card now instead so no big deal.
Regards,
Michael
My new website:link

antonio72

Link Posted 10/10/2018 - 23:40
michaelblue wrote:
For me, regarding 'noise' the k3 was not even as good as the k5 so i swapped mine for a KP and i'm so glad i did, it's much better at high ISO than both the K3 and the K5.
I must admit though, i did like the 2 card slots on the K3 but i just use a 32gb card now instead so no big deal.

Many thanks to your help.
But do you see an advantage (less noise) already from ISO 800?
What do you consider for high iso (start Iso 800 or 1600)?
Thank you

redbusa99

Link Posted 11/10/2018 - 14:28
i have seen an article that suggests over exposing by 2 stops at whatever iso you need to push to creates less noise, then pull back the highlights in post. might be worth a try
K3 II and the odd lens or 2

Flickr
ppg
Last Edited by redbusa99 on 11/10/2018 - 14:28

LawrenceKH

Link Posted 11/10/2018 - 17:39
I have both the K3 and the KP and have used them both recently. For the most part I don't notice any noise in PP (I use Lightroom 6). Occasionally when I have a problem with dynamic range, especially in the early morning when I want to get a good sky, but to do that the wooded area beneath becomes totally dark, so I use the "shadow" feature to bring the woods back and it brings some noise with it. But when the light isn't very challenging I don't get any noise from either one of them. But I try not to go above 1600 so that might make a difference.

Then too, I most always shoot in the manual mode. I have played around with the TAv mode (because urged to do so by some forum members) and gotten some noise with some of the TAv constructs but then perhaps I didn't do better because my heart wasn't in it.

Lawrence

michaelblue

Link Posted 11/10/2018 - 17:57
antonio72 wrote:
michaelblue wrote:
For me, regarding 'noise' the k3 was not even as good as the k5 so i swapped mine for a KP and i'm so glad i did, it's much better at high ISO than both the K3 and the K5.
I must admit though, i did like the 2 card slots on the K3 but i just use a 32gb card now instead so no big deal.

Many thanks to your help.
But do you see an advantage (less noise) already from ISO 800?
What do you consider for high iso (start Iso 800 or 1600)?
Thank you

Well anything above ISO 1600 on the K3ii I found almost unusable for printing even at A4. With the KP I'm happy to go up to ISO 6,400. The KP at ISO 800 is definitely better than the K3ii, but then so is the K5.

I used to consider High ISO to start around 800 but since using the KP I would say 1600 upwards
Regards,
Michael
My new website:link
Last Edited by michaelblue on 11/10/2018 - 18:00

richandfleur

Link Posted 11/10/2018 - 20:23
Yeah both my cameras (K-S1 and K-3) are capped in auto iso modes at 3,200. I'll only go beyond that if it's really really necessary for the shot.

Does the K-P perform well in RAW format, as I heard the new accelerator chip was for use on JPEGs only? Not sure on this one.

At all times though its important to work out what can be saved in post (noise on a blurred background doesn't matter if you apply noise reduction) and what can't without losing detail you do need. Noise in group shots is especially difficult for example, as each face is smaller than a single up close portrait. Flicking to B&W often sees noise appear as grain, which isn't too bad at times.

michaelblue

Link Posted 11/10/2018 - 20:37
richandfleur wrote:
Yeah both my cameras (K-S1 and K-3) are capped in auto iso modes at 3,200. I'll only go beyond that if it's really really necessary for the shot.

Does the K-P perform well in RAW format, as I heard the new accelerator chip was for use on JPEGs only? Not sure on this one.

At all times though its important to work out what can be saved in post (noise on a blurred background doesn't matter if you apply noise reduction) and what can't without losing detail you do need. Noise in group shots is especially difficult for example, as each face is smaller than a single up close portrait. Flicking to B&W often sees noise appear as grain, which isn't too bad at times.

I never use Jpegs so I can't compare but I'm quite happy with RAW at ISO 3,200.
I'll have to try a few Jpegs just to see
Regards,
Michael
My new website:link

Jonathan-Mac

Link Posted 12/10/2018 - 10:19
richandfleur wrote:
Yeah both my cameras (K-S1 and K-3) are capped in auto iso modes at 3,200. I'll only go beyond that if it's really really necessary for the shot.

Does the K-P perform well in RAW format, as I heard the new accelerator chip was for use on JPEGs only? Not sure on this one.

At all times though its important to work out what can be saved in post (noise on a blurred background doesn't matter if you apply noise reduction) and what can't without losing detail you do need. Noise in group shots is especially difficult for example, as each face is smaller than a single up close portrait. Flicking to B&W often sees noise appear as grain, which isn't too bad at times.

DPR criticised the K-1 mark II for including the accelerator chip's noise reduction in the RAW so there was no way to avoid it. I imagine that the KP does the same.
Pentax hybrid user - Digital K3 & K200D, film 645 and 35mm SLR and Pentax (&other) lenses adapted to Fuji X digital
Fan of DA limited and old manual lenses

HarisF1

Link Posted 12/10/2018 - 10:24
I'm of the opinion that the sensor in the KP may be different from that of the K-3. It certainly doesn't show the same detail reducing NR (or to the same level) as the K1ii.

antonio72

Link Posted 18/10/2018 - 12:44
I want to thank everyone for the precious help you have given me. I also thought not to change the camera and invest the difference in price for the transition from K-3 to K-P in brighter lenses, trying, therefore, to work at low Iso.
Thanks again and have a nice day.
Antonio from Italy
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.