K5 dxo mark up, remarkable score, 1160 high ISO

D3x vs A900/850,
That's the only one with a real difference. And at > 3 times the price, not completely unexpected.
D90 vs A700
Actually, it's the A700 vs D300 (they came out around the same time) and lo and behold, they perform similar.

The D90 peforms better but also shows NR artifacts in RAW.

The D300s performs similar to the A500 (both released around the same time) and interestingly.... both worse than the D90. No longer NR artifacts.
Pentax K-x. I'm not assuming anything.
Known to use NR, see also DXO comments.

Nikon D80 and D60 vs Sony A300, similar.
 
Nothing? I've seen people submerge an E3. Until I see that test repeated with a Pentax, I wouldn't state the latter can't be matched.
 
There is a saying in the UK "you get what you pay for".

I am sure there is similar in other cultures, given that when people see two item with similar specs priced differently they tend to investigate why.

Providing Specs can justify the increased cost it will sell fine.

Pentax has a reputation for selling cheap they have attracted a user base of penny pinching users who want the world for nothing and will badger and bash Pentax till they get it.

Predominately this has been in the US were rebates on already low prices are the norm not the exception.

Pentax's new pricing policy in the US is the correct one it will drive the high maintenance zero value customers into the arms of other companies leaving the serious photographer to enjoy better service.
--
My PPG

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=1471087&subSubSection=0&language=EN
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
 
D3x vs A900/850,
That's the only one with a real difference. And at > 3 times the price, not completely unexpected.
D90 vs A700
Actually, it's the A700 vs D300 (they came out around the same time) and lo and behold, they perform similar.

The D90 peforms better but also shows NR artifacts in RAW.

The D300s performs similar to the A500 (both released around the same time) and interestingly.... both worse than the D90. No longer NR artifacts.
Pentax K-x. I'm not assuming anything.
Known to use NR, see also DXO comments.
But no NR artefacts !!

And the K5 Nr is even cleverer applied at different parts of the image wher needed but still not affecting detail or resolution.
Nikon D80 and D60 vs Sony A300, similar.
So your saying beside the linear NR applied to Nikon RAW their engineers are not capable of applying any other Nr in a transparent manner.?

Doesn't bode well for Nikon APS-c performance , perhaps their development resources are elsewhere.

--
My PPG

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=1471087&subSubSection=0&language=EN
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
 
D3x vs A900/850,
That's the only one with a real difference. And at > 3 times the price, not completely unexpected.
D90 vs A700
Actually, it's the A700 vs D300 (they came out around the same time) and lo and behold, they perform similar.

The D90 peforms better but also shows NR artifacts in RAW.

The D300s performs similar to the A500 (both released around the same time) and interestingly.... both worse than the D90. No longer NR artifacts.
Pentax K-x. I'm not assuming anything.
Known to use NR, see also DXO comments.
But no NR artefacts !!
I disagree. I do agree that they are less visible than those from the D90, but instead there's a certain overall veil. The lunch wasn't completely free still.
And the K5 Nr is even cleverer applied at different parts of the image wher needed but still not affecting detail or resolution.
I have yet to see any kind of NR (not counting those at electronic level) that doesn't affect fine detail. Hence why I prefer to be in control when it comes to NR.
 
D3x vs A900/850, D90 vs A700, Pentax K-x. I'm not assuming anything.
Are you saying that D90 , A700 and k-x share same sensor????
That's a silly assumption, and I own a D7000 and D3100, so I'm not spouting brand-loyalty here. There is nothing quite so sobering to that idea as looking at the A33 and NEX cameras vs. the D3100. The max 3100's max DR is markedly worse than both (very Canon-like). Nothing got improved there.
--
::> I make spelling mistakes. May Dog forgive me for this.
 
Pentax K-x. I'm not assuming anything.
Known to use NR, see also DXO comments.
As I told you this before, let me repeat: Kx NR starts at ISO 3200. Dxomark scores are calculated way before ISO 3200. DR, color depthh, tonal range, is calculated at base ISO. lowlight score is calculated at 30db (that is around ISO 800 for Kx).

So RAW NR is not the reason why Kx scored better than A500/A550. It scored better because A500/A550 were MISSING ISO 100. Kx scored some big numbers (for example DR) at ISO 100 and got better overall score.

Nex was also missing ISO 200. Had Sony included ISO 100, Nex would have kicked some butt (they do it anyway, even without ISO 100). Look at A33 vs Nex. The only reason A33 gets better overall score is because of ISO 100. Nex is better from ISO 200 and up.

For practical purposes, there is not much difference between ISO 100 and ISO 200, but given dxomark influence, Sony needed ISO 100 on these cameras (make it ISO 50 next time!)
 
One question on dxomark.

Which impact have the used lenses to the sensor test and which lenses they use for testing on body ?

Edit
another question

on http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Learn-more/Understanding-DxOMark-Database/DxOMark-testing-protocols/Noise-dynamic-range they write,

"The light box (placed behind the target) is composed of two fluorescent daylight spectrum tubes with a diffusing sheet on top, achieving a perfect uniformity on each filter. The luminance is about 1500cd/m2.

We use filters having different light absorption levels ranging from 0% to 99.99%, so as to test over a dynamic range of 4 density steps (= 13.3 f-stops — a dynamic range much greater than today’s digital cameras). When shooting such a chart, the sensor of the camera being tested sees a wide range of light levels, with a 1/10,000 ratio from minimum to maximum. For comparison, a printed target dynamic is typically 2 density steps (6.65 f-stops), which is inadequate to simulate high dynamic range or back-lit scenes."

What does filters with 4 density steps mean (=13,3 f-stops) ? Does it mean, that the maximum level they can measure is 13,3 ?!
 
There is a saying in the UK "you get what you pay for".

I am sure there is similar in other cultures, given that when people see two item with similar specs priced differently they tend to investigate why.

Providing Specs can justify the increased cost it will sell fine.

Pentax has a reputation for selling cheap they have attracted a user base of penny pinching users who want the world for nothing and will badger and bash Pentax till they get it.

Predominately this has been in the US were rebates on already low prices are the norm not the exception.

Pentax's new pricing policy in the US is the correct one it will drive the high maintenance zero value customers into the arms of other companies leaving the serious photographer to enjoy better service.
Oh and with already small market share, Hoya/Pentax will lose customer base???? Leaving the serious photogs to enjoy better service? You really think a manufacturer of a product cares more about satisfying a few serious photographers, or market share, profits (or less losses in case of Pentax). "Penny pinching users and bottom line cheap Pentax cameras" is what still keeps them in business (and having Hoya making money on selling filters).

If I am a small manufacturer of anything competing with big companies with large marketshare, the only way to succeed is to produce BETTER PRODUCTS at BETTER PRICES. Not similar products at similarly high prices. Unless they have no ambitions whatsoever and want to be a specialty small manufacturer that makes niche products. But these are not even niche products they are selling.
 
All the lenses you mentioned are rebadged Tokina lenses. Prices from B&H:

Tokina 12-24mm F-mount : $499.00, Pentax $699.95

Pentax: http://www.photozone.de/pentax/133-pentax-da-12-24mm4-f4-al-ed-if-review--test-report?start=1

Tokina: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/273-tokina-af-12-24mm-f4-at-x-pro-dx-nikon-lens-test-report--review?start=1

And as a comparison the Nikon 12-24mm F/4: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/229-nikkor-af-s-12-24mm-f4g-if-ed-dx-lab-test-report--review?start=1

Tokina 16-50mm F-mount : $549.00, Pentax $1,029.95
Pentax: http://www.photozone.de/pentax/405-pentax_1650_28?start=1

Tokina: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/274-tokina-af-16-50mm-f28-at-x-pro-dx-nikon-lens-test-report--review?start=1

And as a comparison the Nikon 17-55mm: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/231-nikkor-af-s-17-55mm-f28-g-if-ed-dx-review--test-report?start=1

Tokina 50-135mm F-mount , discontinued. If you're buying third-party lenses, then the Sigma 50-150mm HSM is as good a alternative as any.

Pentax: http://www.photozone.de/pentax/137-pentax-smc-da-50-135mm-f28-ed-if-sdm-review--test-report?start=1

Tokina: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/278-tokina-af-50-135mm-f28-at-x-pro-dx-nikon-lab-test-report--review?start=1

And as a comparison the Sigma 50-150mm HSM, sadly not the newer II version:

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/322-sigma-af-50-150mm-f28-ex-hsm-dc-nikon-mount-review--test-report?start=1

The Pentax 16-50mm and 50-135mm are sealed, have Pentaxs own coating, and come with a USM, so that makes up for the price difference a bit. But it's important to remember that neither are better performers than Sigmas alternatives, and the Sigmas have HSM for the same price.
I wouldn't say Pentax lenses are expensive compared to Nikon lenses or any other comparable lenses. They're not the bargain they were, but I still don't think they are expensive.

For example, of the Pentax lenses I have, the closest Nikon equivalents are more expensive:

Pentax 12-24mm £754, Nikon 12-24mm £798

Pentax 16-50mm £693, Nikon 16-55mm £1039

The next on my list is the 50-135mm (£849), Nikon doesn't have a direct equivalent DX lens, but the closest equivalent would be the 70-200mm at £1625. Admittedly the latter is a FF lens, but there is no cheaper DX equivalent.

As for not being able to buy locally, that can be a problem, but in most cases Warehouse Express or similar are cheaper and even offer better service than local stores so it doesn't matter to me.
 
The D3x body accounts for much of the price-difference, see the D3 and D700.

The D300(s), D90 and K-x share the same base sensor.
That's the only one with a real difference. And at > 3 times the price, not completely unexpected.
Actually, it's the A700 vs D300 (they came out around the same time) and lo and behold, they perform similar.

The D90 peforms better but also shows NR artifacts in RAW.

The D300s performs similar to the A500 (both released around the same time) and interestingly.... both worse than the D90. No longer NR artifacts.

Known to use NR, see also DXO comments.

Nikon D80 and D60 vs Sony A300, similar.
 
I use Nikon because it is a superior system camera. Granted, the Pentax kicks butt at lower ISOs but their lens selection simply can't match the Nikon system. So what Pentax lens would you use instead of the Nikon 10-24? How does it stack up? How about the low cost Nikon 70-300?
You are kidding right? The Nikon system as a whole is never going to be matched by Pentax but perhaps aren't aware that Pentax probably has the best range of APS-C lenses across the makers and none of the others are doing something special like the range of small and beautiful 'Limited' prime lenses. Nikon and Canon shooters have to dip into the unnecessarily large and heavy full frame range of lenses to get the options Pentax gives. Pentax is a great option for the enthusiast who enjoys an inconspicuous, small, light system.
I applaud Pentax! Really. What a great job. However, I feel the D7000 is superior.
--
The D7000 will surely be great and the two cameras will go head-to-head on features and performance but only until the next great enthusiasts DSLR is released :)

--
Brett
http://www.pbase.com/shreder



The Journey is the Thing
 
I use Nikon because it is a superior system camera. Granted, the Pentax kicks butt at lower ISOs but their lens selection simply can't match the Nikon system. So what Pentax lens would you use instead of the Nikon 10-24? How does it stack up? How about the low cost Nikon 70-300?
You are kidding right? The Nikon system as a whole is never going to be matched by Pentax but perhaps aren't aware that Pentax probably has the best range of APS-C lenses across the makers and none of the others are doing something special like the range of small and beautiful 'Limited' prime lenses. Nikon and Canon shooters have to dip into the unnecessarily large and heavy full frame range of lenses to get the options Pentax gives. Pentax is a great option for the enthusiast who enjoys an inconspicuous, small, light system.... and the Pentax DA12-24 in tests I have seen blows away anything else in the 10-24mm range while the inexpensive Pentax DA55-300 surprises more expensive competition given it's 'consumer' price - it's got a very good reputation.
I applaud Pentax! Really. What a great job. However, I feel the D7000 is superior.
--
The D7000 will surely be great and the two cameras will go head-to-head on features and performance but only until the next great enthusiasts DSLR is released :)

--
Brett
http://www.pbase.com/shreder



The Journey is the Thing
 
The D7000 brackets 3 shots with 2 EV increments. If I'm not mistaken both have a native ISO range of 100-6400. Thus, weather a the maximum pushed ISO is 25600 or 51200 doesn't matter, as there are no increases in gain after 6400.

And, if we're measurbating, then the D7000 has a shutter-life of 150 000 shots vs 100 000

The D7000 has AF-finetune.

The AF module in D7000 has 39 points with 9 cross-type, while the K-5 as 11 points with 9 cross-type.

The D7000 has a 2016 segment RBG meter, while the K-5 has a 77-segment meter.

And, this is the biggest one of all, the K-5 costs 1599, while the D700 costs 1199.
• AE bracketing 3 to 5 frames, with up to 2 EV increments.
vs
• AE Bracketing 2 to 3 frames with up to 1 EV increments.

And there are other differences that may prove to be significant for some users.

• Sensitivity up to ISO 51,200.
vs
• Sensitivity up to ISO 25600.
 
Jon Rty wrote:

untrue..the 16-50 has a level of contrast simply amazing for a zoom..sigma and pentax hae differentcolor rendering and contrast level.
All the lenses you mentioned are rebadged Tokina lenses. Prices from B&H:

Tokina 12-24mm F-mount : $499.00, Pentax $699.95

Pentax: http://www.photozone.de/pentax/133-pentax-da-12-24mm4-f4-al-ed-if-review--test-report?start=1

Tokina: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/273-tokina-af-12-24mm-f4-at-x-pro-dx-nikon-lens-test-report--review?start=1

And as a comparison the Nikon 12-24mm F/4: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/229-nikkor-af-s-12-24mm-f4g-if-ed-dx-lab-test-report--review?start=1

Tokina 16-50mm F-mount : $549.00, Pentax $1,029.95
Pentax: http://www.photozone.de/pentax/405-pentax_1650_28?start=1

Tokina: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/274-tokina-af-16-50mm-f28-at-x-pro-dx-nikon-lens-test-report--review?start=1

And as a comparison the Nikon 17-55mm: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/231-nikkor-af-s-17-55mm-f28-g-if-ed-dx-review--test-report?start=1

Tokina 50-135mm F-mount , discontinued. If you're buying third-party lenses, then the Sigma 50-150mm HSM is as good a alternative as any.

Pentax: http://www.photozone.de/pentax/137-pentax-smc-da-50-135mm-f28-ed-if-sdm-review--test-report?start=1

Tokina: http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/278-tokina-af-50-135mm-f28-at-x-pro-dx-nikon-lab-test-report--review?start=1

And as a comparison the Sigma 50-150mm HSM, sadly not the newer II version:

http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/322-sigma-af-50-150mm-f28-ex-hsm-dc-nikon-mount-review--test-report?start=1

The Pentax 16-50mm and 50-135mm are sealed, have Pentaxs own coating, and come with a USM, so that makes up for the price difference a bit. But it's important to remember that neither are better performers than Sigmas alternatives, and the Sigmas have HSM for the same price.
I wouldn't say Pentax lenses are expensive compared to Nikon lenses or any other comparable lenses. They're not the bargain they were, but I still don't think they are expensive.

For example, of the Pentax lenses I have, the closest Nikon equivalents are more expensive:

Pentax 12-24mm £754, Nikon 12-24mm £798

Pentax 16-50mm £693, Nikon 16-55mm £1039

The next on my list is the 50-135mm (£849), Nikon doesn't have a direct equivalent DX lens, but the closest equivalent would be the 70-200mm at £1625. Admittedly the latter is a FF lens, but there is no cheaper DX equivalent.

As for not being able to buy locally, that can be a problem, but in most cases Warehouse Express or similar are cheaper and even offer better service than local stores so it doesn't matter to me.
 
I use Nikon because it is a superior system camera. Granted, the Pentax kicks butt at lower ISOs but their lens selection simply can't match the Nikon system. So what Pentax lens would you use instead of the Nikon 10-24?
The Pentax DA 12 -24

How does it stack up? How about the low cost Nikon 70-300?

Pentax DA 55 -300
I applaud Pentax! Really. What a great job. However, I feel the D7000 is superior.
--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com
--
Younes ( Paris, FR)
K100D,K10D,D40 + lenses
 
pentax has 9 lenses sealed and all the nw lenses will be selaed...nikon sealed lenses cost from 1300 and above.

pentax can be used with 10 pancake lenses in trekking without relevant weight or with a complete sealed kit. so flexibility.

the nikon d7k? or the canon 7d? onluy big gun fo big quality and fast aperture , only loens made for full frame.

so why bother with apsc in nikon camp? i understAND th ff camera if you buy nikon , but not the apsc casuse simply nikon and canon dont have a dx system dedicated.
I would trust that in the rain before ANY other camera. I've handled the D7k, its rock solid, and I wouldnt want it any smaller. And the D7000 is sealed well enough to shoot in rain, not a monsoon tho. And fwiw, not all pentax lens are sealed, weakest point, right? I seldom bracket, but the D7k can of course bracket. I like the CLS system, dual slots, powerful fast AF, user configurable controls, 6 fPS, (enough), 100%VF, HD video with AF (don't need except for occasional utube). And I fully believe the D7K will be a full match for Pentax IQ. Or at least close enough, seeing as they are cousins.

Not meant to be a pee match, I find the Pentax a VERY cool camera, as my posts indicate. Pentax has been doing some very cool things lately. But for the price, system included, I find the Nikon more compelling. And I trust Nikon, everything they put out the last few year just flat rocks. Nary a dog in the group. Incredibly responsive in new lens lineup, a great set of dx zooms, and now starting the F4 lineup.

FWIW, if I had to buy a different brand, it would be the Pentax K5.
 
superior system and u suggest 10-24 and 70-300? in sigma and tamron mount u can fnd many of this lenses.

ff system of nikon is superio in apsc the best dedicated system is penta. i have more than 13 lenses and apart from long gun, i dont use, i have all focal covered with fast aperture. im not interested in slow lenses.

by the way the k5 with 18.-135 sealed lenses ais 1600 euro and u have a compelte sealed system. now try to match this wth a similar combo.
I use Nikon because it is a superior system camera. Granted, the Pentax kicks butt at lower ISOs but their lens selection simply can't match the Nikon system. So what Pentax lens would you use instead of the Nikon 10-24? How does it stack up? How about the low cost Nikon 70-300?

I applaud Pentax! Really. What a great job. However, I feel the D7000 is superior.
--
Steve Bingham
http://www.dustylens.com
http://www.ghost-town-photography.com
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top