K-3 20 page review out
Posted 15/11/2013 - 15:16
Link
Was the first one very underexposed to begin with?
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
Posted 15/11/2013 - 17:27
Link
johnriley wrote:
Why not have a really close look at the studio ISO results in the EPZ review. You'll find out that the detail at ISO 6400 is slightly better in the K-3, even though the noise level is slightly higher. A real life example is in the sample shots, the one of the leaning gravestone.
Have a close look and a play with a few images and forget what anybody says, judge for yourself. Also check out the comparisons between the K-5 IIs reviews shots and the K-3 ones. How could amyone not be impressed by the difference....
I haven't denied there's more detail in the K-3. Given it's a 24MP versus 16mp sensor there's bound to be. I can get even more detail out my Nokia phone at 38MP, but that doesn't make the IQ better than even a K20D.Why not have a really close look at the studio ISO results in the EPZ review. You'll find out that the detail at ISO 6400 is slightly better in the K-3, even though the noise level is slightly higher. A real life example is in the sample shots, the one of the leaning gravestone.
Have a close look and a play with a few images and forget what anybody says, judge for yourself. Also check out the comparisons between the K-5 IIs reviews shots and the K-3 ones. How could amyone not be impressed by the difference....
My point is that the extra the detail on the K-3 is lost at my regular viewing sizes (yes I agree that cropping benefits )
[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
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
Posted 15/11/2013 - 17:30
Link
screwdriver wrote:
The K3 has more Mp crammed onto the same sized sensor, so the pixels are smaller, will it have more noise - yup, but that's not the whole story, it will also have finer resolution, more detail to start with so noise reduction blur has less effect.
Disagree from my findings with high ISO K-3 FilesThe K3 has more Mp crammed onto the same sized sensor, so the pixels are smaller, will it have more noise - yup, but that's not the whole story, it will also have finer resolution, more detail to start with so noise reduction blur has less effect.
Quote:
My final point is that as yet there is no software that optimizes K3 files for noise or anything else as the software hasn't yet caught up except for, may be, the Silkypics software bundled with the camera, so your comparing K5 images which have been optimized for noise reduction with K3 images that, as yet, haven't.
The noise reduction that features in Lightroom works as it should with 24MP or even higher MPs ( I wish it worked with members of parliament )
My final point is that as yet there is no software that optimizes K3 files for noise or anything else as the software hasn't yet caught up except for, may be, the Silkypics software bundled with the camera, so your comparing K5 images which have been optimized for noise reduction with K3 images that, as yet, haven't.
[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
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
Posted 15/11/2013 - 20:43
Link
gartmore wrote:
Was the first one very underexposed to begin with?
Yes I think that's the main reason for the noise Ken. Probably a combination of me not applying EV compensation in the heat of the moment and the camera being foxed by the bright sky. May be that's why Pentax spent the time and money to increase the accuracy of the exposure on the K3, because they knew there would be (slightly) more noise to deal with. Getting the exposure spot on reduces noise.Was the first one very underexposed to begin with?
Smeggypants wrote:
What findings were those?
The noise reduction in Lightroom is just blurring the image globally, the retention of detail, that's also applied in Lightroom, it can't do because Lightroom, as yet, can't read the hexadecimal codes in the Raw file which tell Lightroom and any other software which pixels are affected.screwdriver wrote:
The K3 has more Mp crammed onto the same sized sensor, so the pixels are smaller, will it have more noise - yup, but that's not the whole story, it will also have finer resolution, more detail to start with so noise reduction blur has less effect.
Disagree from my findings with high ISO K-3 FilesThe K3 has more Mp crammed onto the same sized sensor, so the pixels are smaller, will it have more noise - yup, but that's not the whole story, it will also have finer resolution, more detail to start with so noise reduction blur has less effect.
What findings were those?
Quote:
My final point is that as yet there is no software that optimizes K3 files for noise or anything else as the software hasn't yet caught up except for, may be, the Silkypics software bundled with the camera, so your comparing K5 images which have been optimized for noise reduction with K3 images that, as yet, haven't.
The noise reduction that features in Lightroom works as it should with 24MP or even higher MPs ( I wish it worked with members of parliament )My final point is that as yet there is no software that optimizes K3 files for noise or anything else as the software hasn't yet caught up except for, may be, the Silkypics software bundled with the camera, so your comparing K5 images which have been optimized for noise reduction with K3 images that, as yet, haven't.
There is a lot of data in the Raw file that you seem unaware of. There is approximately 3-4Mb of data in the Raw file other than the image data, some of that is the EXIF data, around 100K, around 800Kb is the embedded Jpeg in a DNG file, the rest (several Mb) is data about that specific exposure, it's how content aware works in Photoshop or Lightroom. It's how Lightroom will know which pixels are effected by noise and by how much, then Lightroom can apply noise reduction based on data it can't currently read when it opens the image, when the algorithms are included for the K3, there may be no visible noise, or very little. As yet we don't know, but you are comparing adjusted K5 images with, as yet, unadjusted K3 images, images that have only been De-mosaiced into a visible image with none of the embedded image data applied.
Chris
Posted 15/11/2013 - 21:44
Link
I do hope the PENTAX designers don`t read this forum or they will all commit suicide. They bring out a great camera and all the experts on here slag it off.To Most people noise goes in there ears not eyes. a picture looks nice or not,
TO many on this forum appear obsessed with technicalities.
Just my observations.
Cheers
Dave:
TO many on this forum appear obsessed with technicalities.
Just my observations.
Cheers
Dave:
Posted 15/11/2013 - 22:03
Link
FAT8BIKER wrote:
I do hope the PENTAX designers don`t read this forum or they will all commit suicide. They bring out a great camera and all the experts on here slag it off.To Most people noise goes in there ears not eyes. a picture looks nice or not,
TO many on this forum appear obsessed with technicalities.
Just my observations.
Cheers
Dave:
Agree entirely
I do hope the PENTAX designers don`t read this forum or they will all commit suicide. They bring out a great camera and all the experts on here slag it off.To Most people noise goes in there ears not eyes. a picture looks nice or not,
TO many on this forum appear obsessed with technicalities.
Just my observations.
Cheers
Dave:
Regards,
Michael
Michael
Posted 15/11/2013 - 22:07
Link
likewise.
Posted 15/11/2013 - 22:17
Link
It would be nice if someone was enthusiastic about all these new offerings, I agree also.
Best regards, John
Posted 15/11/2013 - 22:23
Link
johnriley wrote:
It would be nice if someone was enthusiastic about all these new offerings, I agree also.
I am !
It would be nice if someone was enthusiastic about all these new offerings, I agree also.
Posted 15/11/2013 - 22:34
Link
There will always be a negative side to any release. Those who genuinely dislike something will not buy it. As for the K3, it's a very good product.
Best regards
Best regards
Too far from a shore.
Posted 15/11/2013 - 22:38
Link
michaelblue wrote:
I also agree entirely.FAT8BIKER wrote:
TO many on this forum appear obsessed with technicalities.
Just my observations.
Cheers
Dave:
Agree entirelyTO many on this forum appear obsessed with technicalities.
Just my observations.
Cheers
Dave:
Smeggypants wrote:
[Who cares about the minority eh? I'm alright Jack.
I am always open to the views and opinions of others on this Forum, I will not always agree with them but I am open to them, whether they are minority or majority views.[Who cares about the minority eh? I'm alright Jack.
What I don't like is when the comments are personalised like the one from Smeggy above. There is no need to lower discussions about technical equipment down to levels where personal snide comments start to appear. I don't do it and I object to others doing it. This is a camera forum, not a soapbox for aiming personal snipes at people. Regardless of what one may think of someone else there is a value called integrity that dictates how most decent people conduct themselves.
It would be great if we could all get on with enjoying our cameras and making the most out of them that we can, as mentioned by Dave (Fatbiker) if a picture looks nice, it looks nice.
Regards
David
Posted 15/11/2013 - 22:51
Link
FAT8BIKER wrote:
To Most people noise goes in there ears not eyes. a picture looks nice or not,
Too many on this forum appear obsessed with technicalities.
Just my observations.
Then just use your phone to take pictures, mostly you need nothing more.To Most people noise goes in there ears not eyes. a picture looks nice or not,
Too many on this forum appear obsessed with technicalities.
Just my observations.
Those of us that are prepared to spend £2000 or more on a body and a couple of lenses because we want more than our phones can produce, are going to be a bit more demanding.
.
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)
.
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)
.
Posted 15/11/2013 - 23:00
Link
Being demanding is fine, being discourteous about it is something else.
We should all remember to attack the argument, not the person.
We should all remember to attack the argument, not the person.
Best regards, John
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
1204 posts
16 years
Laindon,Essex
Noise is not as simple as "I turn ISO up - therefore I will get more noise", this shot was taken at an ISO of 400 on a K5 with a Sigma 70 - 300mm lens
[
Vulcan 02 by Chris_Judge, on Flickr]
and is full of noise.
Same camera, same lens - different day shot at 3200ISO
[
Botanical_Gdns_0199 by Chris_Judge, on Flickr]
No trace of noise.
Dave