All Forum Comments
Comment by dcweather posted on K3 - K5 ISO1600 Noise comparison at 15/11/2013 - 15:37
screwdriver wrote:
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.
Are they cropped the same? I'd be interested to know what caused the difference because I have found this to some extent but always put it down to the amount of post processing and cropping I had done.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
Comment by dcweather posted on K-3 20 page review out at 15/11/2013 - 15:10
I was thinking about what all this means in the real world. One thing that is more obvious is that we now have cameras, at greater resolution, producing an ISO performance equivalence of at least one stop better than we did not so many years ago, eg K7, K-r era. Surely, given equal optical lens performance, this lowers the need to rush out and buy fast, heavy, expensive f2.8 telephotos for example?
Another interesting comment often used by myself and others is "I never tend to shoot above ISO X00 anyway" (insert as appropriate). While this is true I suspect it is the subconscious knowledge of knowing when noise starts to creep in and have an effect and this value quoted will become higher in the future!
Another interesting comment often used by myself and others is "I never tend to shoot above ISO X00 anyway" (insert as appropriate). While this is true I suspect it is the subconscious knowledge of knowing when noise starts to creep in and have an effect and this value quoted will become higher in the future!
Comment by dcweather posted on K3 - K5 ISO1600 Noise comparison at 15/11/2013 - 09:23
Thank you.
Comment by dcweather posted on K-3 Vs. K-5iis at 14/11/2013 - 22:46
Mike-P wrote:
[quote:3496ace15f="sbrads"]
My point is though that most cameras can grab the odd shot or two of birds, planes, whatever, it's the extreme situations where your equipment comes more into the equation. It makes no difference how good a photographer you are if the camera makes up it's mind not to stay locked on the intended subject but instead decides to do it's own thing completely.
Sorry Mike, I did do a smiley. But this is exactly what I am saying. There has been an implication that if you are very experienced or skilled and know your equipment you can succeed. It is true but you will succeed more with a better system all things being equal.[quote:3496ace15f="sbrads"]
My point is though that most cameras can grab the odd shot or two of birds, planes, whatever, it's the extreme situations where your equipment comes more into the equation. It makes no difference how good a photographer you are if the camera makes up it's mind not to stay locked on the intended subject but instead decides to do it's own thing completely.
Comment by dcweather posted on Ephotozine K-3 review at 14/11/2013 - 22:26
ChrisA wrote:
[quote:3496ace15f="mille19"]
It wouldn't be hard, for instance, to pick a few lenses (the Bigma comes to mind) that exist in Nikon and Pentax mount, and to compare the K-3 with the D7100.
--------------------------------------
Good idea
---------------------------
I've also done quite a lot of airshow photography with the K10D and the K-5, and I have air-side access to lots of airfields, so I could easily do a realistic, and reasonably scientific (in approach, if not laboratory-reproducible) assessment of the AF capabilities of the K-3.
-------------------------------------------------
Can I add myself to what would be a very big list of people wanting to borrow one
----------------------------------
It doesn't have to be aircraft, of course, cars would do just as well. But I don't do cars, just aeroplanes.
--------------------------------------------[quote:3496ace15f="mille19"]
It wouldn't be hard, for instance, to pick a few lenses (the Bigma comes to mind) that exist in Nikon and Pentax mount, and to compare the K-3 with the D7100.
--------------------------------------
Good idea
---------------------------
I've also done quite a lot of airshow photography with the K10D and the K-5, and I have air-side access to lots of airfields, so I could easily do a realistic, and reasonably scientific (in approach, if not laboratory-reproducible) assessment of the AF capabilities of the K-3.
-------------------------------------------------
Can I add myself to what would be a very big list of people wanting to borrow one
----------------------------------
It doesn't have to be aircraft, of course, cars would do just as well. But I don't do cars, just aeroplanes.
My K30 seems to be able to cope with planes and cars quite well.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Comment by dcweather posted on Ephotozine K-3 review at 14/11/2013 - 16:01
Thanks for doing that David. Most informative. While we are on noise does anyone know - was there any difference in performance in this respect between K30 to K5 to K5ii ?
Dave
Dave
Comment by dcweather posted on K-3 Vs. K-5iis at 14/11/2013 - 15:07
Dave, I should not put bird photography with action I agree. To be honest I know nothing about birding and even though i have tried to photograph a few over the years, its certainly an area that requires a lot of learning and practice.
In relation to lenses, I think Ricoh will be introducing some new longer focal length lens with DC motors which I think will be a step in the right direction of improving lens speed, the only question is when.[/quote]------------------------------------
Yes I think that is something to look forward to and with Pentax may be the way forward on the AF front. Anyway I hope my point has been taken amicably as this is only a small part of the total Pentax package and I look forward to getting a K3 for all of the other features and abilities the K30 doesn't have. (Especially the quiet shutter!)
Dave
In relation to lenses, I think Ricoh will be introducing some new longer focal length lens with DC motors which I think will be a step in the right direction of improving lens speed, the only question is when.[/quote]------------------------------------
Yes I think that is something to look forward to and with Pentax may be the way forward on the AF front. Anyway I hope my point has been taken amicably as this is only a small part of the total Pentax package and I look forward to getting a K3 for all of the other features and abilities the K30 doesn't have. (Especially the quiet shutter!)
Dave
Comment by dcweather posted on The misunderstanding about AF in sports and birds in flight at 14/11/2013 - 14:40
I agree as well. But Gareth, if you go back to my original post I was trying to emphasise the very big differences between "action" shots and "birds in flight". People still seem to be happy to put the two together. It still seems only the out and birders can see the difference.
Dave
Dave
Comment by dcweather posted on The misunderstanding about AF in sports and birds in flight at 14/11/2013 - 10:25
johnriley wrote:
In terms of the K-3 this translates in different ways, but I'm talking about a general principle. Whatever the image being shot, the advantages will only be realised with good photographic technique.
------------------------------------------In terms of the K-3 this translates in different ways, but I'm talking about a general principle. Whatever the image being shot, the advantages will only be realised with good photographic technique.
I'm still not quite sure what this means. I'm not disagreeing, just not sure what bits of technique are going to need to change because it is a higher resolution camera?
Comment by dcweather posted on Upgrading from a K-r at 14/11/2013 - 10:14
While this is true I suspect it is the subconscious knowledge of knowing when noise starts to creep in and have an effect and this value quoted will become higher in the future!
Noise per se is not the problem though, any more than grain was with film. As long as the type of noise and the effect it produces is something we like, then it's fine.
Shooting JPEG as I do, I don't have a problem with noise and just whack that ISO up to whatever is necessary. It's much better than old ASA 1000 films ever were.
Incidentally, if noise does look off then sometimes converting to black and white helps.
Yes it does seem to help but my Kingfisher pics don't look so good
Anyway another thought on this, and I'm sorry to keep on about wildlife but that's mostly what I do, is the effect of working with heavy crops. We are so often having to use maybe a 75% crop and it is more about how the noise will appear in the sky, the feathers, leaves etc, when cropped that much. SO for me it is often which has the lowest noise at say 200-400 ISO when cropped to 100%, which is somewhat different I think.