That's true... they all seem to use the same sensor(or variant). However, I also noticed that noise characteristics(noise patterns) seem to have alot to do with the way a final image will look(cleaned-up). And though I haven't tried any 5n files to date, I do know the A580 and D7000 do not offer the same level of IQ as the K-5 at higher ISO(6400+) IQ.
I have not noticed that as they all look pretty much the same to me.
--
When looking over JPG's, I would say you are right in saying this. But its in RAW that I found each system to have unique noise characteristics ie. Nikon leaning toward the higher frequency noise with prominent luma artifacts(bright specs), whereas Sony has low frequency noise(red and blue channel blotching. However I have good reason to conclude that Pentax filters out these artifacts through inline processing(SEE: magenta cast removal, noise processing etc) which results in superior noise patterns or characteristics.
I think the biggest issue with such assessments is due to the nature of noise in images. ie. since noise is exponential in nature, one stop of noise(at any point) will scale up respectively as sensitivities go up. However what many people fail to take into account is that noise patterns are just as important as noise itself when we get right down to it. And one example of this can be seen with low frequency noise(splotching) which is very difficult to deal with and usually a stopper in most image clean-up tasks.
Exactly. Same here.I think the biggest issue with such assessments is due to the nature of noise in images. ie. since noise is exponential in nature, one stop of noise(at any point) will scale up respectively as sensitivities go up. However what many people fail to take into account is that noise patterns are just as important as noise itself when we get right down to it. And one example of this can be seen with low frequency noise(splotching) which is very difficult to deal with and usually a stopper in most image clean-up tasks.
Having said that, after looking at a few A77 RAW files I was shocked to find chroma noise in files as low as ISO50
Since they all use the same sensor Pentax must be "cooking" the RAW files, something RAW fans absolutely hate. When the A700 first came out and found Sony was doing something similar there was a huge uproar!!!
Yes there is definitely in line processing with K-5 RAW files. However, I don't think this is necessarily bad given the benefits that come from this. And so I guess it becomes a case of whether the processing is beneficial or not.
Not if you shoot indoor events. I have shot sports, rodeos, stock shows, cat shows, etc. The minimum ISO one usually wants at these venues is 3200. It is not unreasonable to dial in 8000 or higher, depending on the circumstances. Some gyms and arenas are poorly lit. Also, some public outdoor ballfields are poorly lit due to budget constraints of townships.
And don't forget nature shooters and macro(f/16 or 22 anyone?)
Yes the A700 uproar was a few years ago but the RAW purists want completely unadulterated files. Many don't even want them in some lossless compressed form.
Still you don't get the point. He said "almost exclusively". Do you shoot iso 3200 and above almost exclusively?
I shoot macro and nature yet iso 3200 and above is the exception, not "almost exclusively". For macro especially you want the highest detail possible so flash or some good lighting source is much better than iso 3200 and above.And don't forget nature shooters and macro(f/16 or 22 anyone?)
If you look at 100% views, then yes you can see chroma noise more than other cameras even at ISO50. If you normalize the sizes, the differences are trivial.Having said that, after looking at a few A77 RAW files I was shocked to find chroma noise in files as low as ISO50
Any filtering that considers neighboring pixels (median type of noise reduction) is potentially destructive and eliminates some effective post-processing possibilities, particularly for long exposures. Dark frame subtraction can introduce more noise than it reduces if the RAW process acts differently for the dark frame and the light frame for example.
I sometimes shoot dancers under stage lighting and clean 6400 is required. My feeling is there's more difference between lenses than sensors at base iso but the sensor is the limiting factor at high iso.
