Reading mode: Light Dark

DPReview Redone K-5 Images

Go to last post
It would appear that most of the concerns raised in this (and the other) forum have been addressed. Differences between the K-5 and the D7000 can largely be explained by differences in the lenses used and the exposure levels.

I am puzzled by dpreview's specifying that the D7000 raw images were processed with "ACR NR off" but did not do the same for the 60D and the K-5. The ideal methodology for such testing would be to eliminate any and all variations, but dpr has apparently introduced a huge one right from the start. The K-5 toasts the D7000 in noise levels at ISO 3200 and above, but is this just a matter of different processing? I suspect that it is. Why was it done in this manner? Compare apples to apples.

Rob
 
The D7000 and K-5 raws have been processed in exactly the same way, it's just that the description is different because different people added them to the compare tool.

I intended to switch the K-5 over to DNG mode before reshooting but it slipped my mind, sorry about that.

Richard - dpreview.com
 
As a Pentax (and K5) owner, I appreciate the efforts put in to help us know the strengths and weaknesses of our gear.

So, before you get 1,000 complaints because the teddy bear in the D7000 shots was smiling but the one in the K5 shots was looking glum, let me say a real thanks for the work.
 
There's a thread on one of the Pentax sites regarding mirror reverberation when shutter speeds are set above 2000, the ambient temperature is below zero and heavy lenses are used without a tripod...

Of course, it only happens when your right hand is busy, but someone like yourself should understand well enough. I'm sure it's a common problem for you.
 
I want to add my thanks....and a question.

For the REALLY high ISO shots have you considered reducing the lighting to demonstrate the low light abilities. Of course I am not sure how you do that in a controlled way so I am not much help.

Again, thanks for all the hard work.

--
Very happy K200 owner!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ksuwildkat/
 
R Butler said:
The D7000 and K-5 raws have been processed in exactly the same way, it's just that the description is different because different people added them to the compare tool.

I intended to switch the K-5 over to DNG mode before reshooting but it slipped my mind, sorry about that.

Richard - dpreview.com
Click to expand...
--
::> I make spelling mistakes. May Dog forgive me for this.
 
Richard thanks for listening to our critisms and doing something about it - much appreciated and I say again love the new format - it's tops.
--
Regards Dean - Capturing Creation
 
The 60d is impressive.
--
Regards Dean - Capturing Creation
 
Good healthy competition we are spoiled for choice.
--
Regards Dean - Capturing Creation
 
I'm sorry to tell you that, but this still a useless comparison, because of shifted focus point. A proof?
Front of your scene:



Back of your scene:



Focus point at different ISO:



And finally, how it affect details at high ISO:



What's the problem with using CDAF or MF to focus properly? Or why didn't you calibrate AF with that lens?

Another thing you do completely wrong is that you're using ACR, which is well known to use different "0" sharpening for RAW files from different cameras, so you don't actually compare the camera output/resolution, but the ACR's interpretation of camera output.
--
http://jaad75.zenfolio.com
 
The focus plane is exactly that a finite plane, it would be impossible to run all these tests and get it to absolute perfection each time. When we pixel peep like this dof becomes irrelevant to a certain degree, we have to allow for slight disparities in exact focus to the mm.
--
Regards Dean - Capturing Creation
 
But this plane is shifted forward in all of those K-5 samples. There are shift differences for different ISO settings, but all those sample shots are shifted. And it is relatively easy to obtain proper and consistant focus for current DSLRs - just use a contrast detection AF or focus manually with LV on.
--
http://jaad75.zenfolio.com
 
I agree that some parts of the K-5 images looks as out of focus. However a close inspection of the image shows (at least to me) that the sharpest K-5 area is still less sharp then sharpest areas of Canon/Nikon.

I guess, this insignificant blur could be explained by the FA50/1.4 behavior at f8.

I'm convinced by K-5 and I am waiting for the $1k price to hit the "Buy me now" button. :).

Thanks to DPR for doing the great job.

--
Cheers,
Alex
 
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