noise comparison - istD & k10D?

Anyone able to say how much worse the noise appears to be from the k10d when compared to the istD? Eg is the k10d as bad at 1600iso as the istD at 3200 iso, and is there any perceivable difference, say, at up to iso400?

I appreciate replies will probably be subjective, unless someone else has done 'scientific tests'!

Apologies if this has already been asked and answered elsewhwre!

Andy

Alf,

I can only compare with the DS, and I'd say at 1600 they are pretty much the same. I don't see much noise upto 800 ISO, and Neat Image makes a damn good job of removing what noise there is. Also, you can set it so that ISO changes in 1/3 ev steps, so you get far more choice than 100/200/400/800/1600 ISO, you can effectively select the minimum ISO for your chosen Aperture and Exposure.

Thanks for the reply, Tim. And I suspect the DS is slightly better than the istD anyway. Sounds as though k10 is pretty good!
Andy

Here's a photo from the K10D taken yesterday.
ISO800, 148mm (222mm equiv 35mm), F6.3, 1/80
The inset is the original and the main pic is a portion of it at 100% of original size

I think it shows a lack of decernable noise and just how good the anti shake is as this was hand held in overcast consitions.

Thanks Rodger - looks clean. I inadvertently took a few on my *istD at 1600 ISO t'other day - looked awful! I wonder if there is a fault that doesn't screw up lower ISO piccies. The camera did go back to Pentax about a year ago whilst still under warranty - however not sure if they sorted anything out or not!
Andy

Hi Andy
I never really go above ISO800 for just that reason - remember the days of film

ISO1600 film was really grainy.

If it gets dark enough for ISO1600 I'd put the flash on

There are situations where you have no choice but to use high ISO values. The Viking below, was only lit by the flaming torch and I felt flash wouldn't have given me the effect I wanted. The picture had to be hand-held, so with my 50mm 1:1.4 lens set at f2.8, ISO upped to 3200 it allowed me to use a hand-hed speed of 1/180 sec. There is grain /noise, but I feel it doesn't distract too much in this type of picture.

I see what you mean, the grain possibly helps this picture - gives it a feeling of age

so far my subjective opinion is that high ISO shots from the K10D have a similar level of noise to my DL2, but a different type if you follow my meaning.

There seems to be less blotchy colour noise from the 10D, and therefore what noise there is is more easily corrected in software.

The only thing I have noticed with the 10D is that it's noise performance under tungsten light can be disapointing. It has to seriously amplify the blue channel in this situation and you end up with a lot of "salt and pepper" noise on that channel. The best way I have found to deal with this is to do a median cut filter on the offending channel with a radius of about 2 before doing neat image or whatever your personal favourite noise reduction program is.

Hi Galoot

Your piccy is very clean compared to what my *istD will produce!

Andy