Reading mode: Light Dark

What is next in the Pentax pipeline

Go to last post
The whole "Pentax High ISO noise" is a load, and people just zero-in on it too much. I would say that it does depend on post-processing, software, and final output size and media, viewing distance, etc. so YMMV, certainly.

Also, remember to use SR; that's why Pentax put it in there to start with...

Anyway, here are some shots I did at silly-high ISO's on a K20D. I could probably do the same shots at ISO 4000 or more. 6400? Not so much :)

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=32446455

--
Noel.
http://afterexposure.wordpress.com

http://www.modelmayhem.com/member.php?
id=545970

http://twitter.com/afterexposure
 
Slugger said:
noser said:
But more realistically, what could they do that would be considered enough of an upgrade from the K7?
Click to expand...
Why do people keep saying this? The body is brand new! Almost all features are updated including a ground up rebuild of the K20's sensor. Read the specs!
Click to expand...
I think you read what I wrote the wrong way around...

To answer my own question in context:

Q: What could they do that would be considered enough of an upgrade from the K7?
A: Make a 645D

Seriously!

Maybe a more Nikonian sensor would please the masses.

Maybe a faster FPS... (pulls random # from the air) .. how about 24 fps? So we can do full res HD?

Maybe squeeze 55MP in an APS-C size (ok so no ISO over 100 would actually work...)

Maybe.... you see what I'm saying? The K7 is a good thing. I don't think they COULD offer a step-up body if they tried - at least not one that was so dramatically better in all respects as to be seen as a true step upward.

--
Noel.
http://afterexposure.wordpress.com

http://www.modelmayhem.com/member.php?
id=545970

http://twitter.com/afterexposure
 
noser said:
The whole "Pentax High ISO noise" is a load, and people just zero-in on it too much. I would say that it does depend on post-processing, software, and final output size and media, viewing distance, etc. so YMMV, certainly.

Also, remember to use SR; that's why Pentax put it in there to start with...

Anyway, here are some shots I did at silly-high ISO's on a K20D. I could probably do the same shots at ISO 4000 or more. 6400? Not so much :)

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=32446455
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if you're replying to my post, but if you are you did not read all of what you said.

I am not concerned about ISO3200 and 6400 on the K-7. The issue I have with the K-7 sensor is that the ISO 400 and 800 noise and dynamic range at low ISO is not competitive with the two year old D300.
--
Jeff Kott
 
JanneM said:
The K20D is reportedly a stop better than the K10 in this respect and the K-7 seems to improve somewhat further on it.
Click to expand...
In regard to the K20D:K-7 comparison, this is not what tests indicate. The failure to improve high ISO noise is my reason for not buying a K-7 at the present time.

The K20D is indeed better than the K10D in this regard.

Joe
 
Jeff Kott said:
I'm not sure if you're replying to my post, but if you are you did not read all of what you said.

I am not concerned about ISO3200 and 6400 on the K-7. The issue I have with the K-7 sensor is that the ISO 400 and 800 noise and dynamic range at low ISO is not competitive with the two year old D300.
--
Jeff Kott
Click to expand...
I just took a peek at the ISO 400's and 800's at Imaging Resource. The differences are dramatic; I'd take the detail in the K-7 shots that is missing in the softer D300's, any day. For example, there label on the wine bottle is missing texture and the small row of gold dots at the edge. These details survive light NR (I just did it with Noise Ninja 2), so I'm not sure I follow. Doesn't the D300 do NR by default?

Perhaps once factored in with DR you have something (ie detail in highlight/shadows).

--
Noel.
http://afterexposure.wordpress.com

http://www.modelmayhem.com/member.php?
id=545970

http://twitter.com/afterexposure
 
noser said:
I just took a peek at the ISO 400's and 800's at Imaging Resource. The differences are dramatic; I'd take the detail in the K-7 shots that is missing in the softer D300's, any day. For example, there label on the wine bottle is missing texture and the small row of gold dots at the edge. These details survive light NR (I just did it with Noise Ninja 2), so I'm not sure I follow. Doesn't the D300 do NR by default?

Perhaps once factored in with DR you have something (ie detail in highlight/shadows).
Click to expand...
Noel, I can't tell anything from web images. All the cameras are fine for the web. Also, I think these are out of the camera jpegs. The results processing raw files through a good converter will be dramatically different.

--
Jeff Kott
 
Jeff Kott said:
Noel, I can't tell anything from web images. All the cameras are fine for the web. Also, I think these are out of the camera jpegs. The results processing raw files through a good converter will be dramatically different.

--
Jeff Kott
Click to expand...
You might be right! The D300 file is only 3.5MB, while the K7 is 9.8MB.

Maybe IR really really has a hate on for Nik*n and used low res/low quality jpegs!

Here are the files I'm referring to:

Pentax:
http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/K7/FULLRES/K7INBI0800.JPG

Nikon:
http://75.126.132.154/PRODS/D300/FULLRES/D300INBI0800.JPG

--
Noel.
http://afterexposure.wordpress.com

http://www.modelmayhem.com/member.php?
id=545970

http://twitter.com/afterexposure
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top