Pentax 645D vs D800 Image Quality

ET2 said:

tcom said:

The D800 sensor shares the same sensor technology than the K-5 and does even feature the same pixel density (the D800 in DX mode shoots nearly 16MP). But the sensor has likely become some small tweaks since the dev. of the K-5/D7000 sensor which will result in a slight better score on dxomark.

Click to expand...

This is not true. Even if D800 sensor tech is identical to D7000 (and let's assume it is), then D800, given it's 36 MP, will score much higher than D7000. That's because Dxomark scores are calculated by normalizing all cameras to 8 MP. Obviously, the gain from down-sampling 16 MP to 8 MP would be lower than down-sampling 36 MP to 8 MP. So D800, even if it performs identically to D7000 at pixel level, will score much higher than D7000 when both are normilzed to 8 MP. That's how Dxomark calculates scores; they normalize everything to 8 MP.

Click to expand...

I never tried to figure out what's behind the overall scores of dxo, and I do not really care about, the resolution gives me an indication as to which size I can print a photo or what cropping possibilities it offers. Apart from that, I consider in the dxomark measures of SNR and DR, but prefer to go out and use the camera.

ET2 said:

In fact, I won't be surprised if D800 becomes the highest rated camera ever on dxomark.

Click to expand...

But do not forget to take photos rather than comparing numbers.

--
Dominique

International Press Association
http://ipaimpress.com/author/dominique/

http://www.pbase.com/tcom
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dschreckling/

Awaldram, I just did with photoshop.

For color profiling, in photoshop RAW, you can select the color profile, ACR3.7 or K10D.
Then the PP are : Autolevel, Match Color and Saturate.

If you want, I will upload the RAW file share and share the link for you all and everybody feel free to download the file.

I will start other thread.

awaldram said:

Rusma

Your work continues to astound me truly awe inspiring.

I note your shooting DNG raw and processing with ACR3.7 how do you handle colour profiling .?

or maybe the odd cast is irrelevant in IR

--
My PPG
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/andrewwaldram
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
1x.com
http://1x.com/artist/awaldram/wall

Click to expand...

--
------------------------------------------
-- Rusma

my multiply : http://kesha.multiply.com

ET2, pls...pls...pls...
This thread is up because someone is trying to compare D800 and 645D.

I saw many of our friends here that have seen many many of 645D photos in this forum disagreed with that statement.

You can see in the Nikon forum, some of the members in there gave very very bad words but knew nothings about 645D, maybe never seen 645D photos.

If Pentax has this FF, I will be very careful to say that this FF will be better than 645D, that is the point.

Last year, 645D won the GP Japan - Camera of The Year 2011, I don't know where the D3x position is, but I doubt D800 will kill the D3x also.

ET2 said:

awaldram said:

I also agree with the comment within this thread that if it had Pentax on the front it would have been well and truly spanked.

Click to expand...

lol @ that. Both K-5 and Kx got universal positive reviews. Why D800 would have been spanked if it was Pentax branded? That's just outright stupid statement.

If D800 had Pentax on the front, most here would have called it the greatest thing since the slice bread.

Click to expand...

--
------------------------------------------
-- Rusma

my multiply : http://kesha.multiply.com

the problem with you is u are paid by sony.

the problem is u are not a photographer but just somebody who speaks about photography with numbers.

i saw all the samples from nikon. analyze print them, and i saw thousand of samples from 645d, yes i wanna one i have many lenses already and i m waiting for a price drop in the near future, and even a blind can easily see the abysmal difference between the IQ. is not resolution or noise or DRange, is the rendering, the clarity, the tone smoothness, the color depth, the images from 645d come out the paper the d800 are dull, lifeless, even the studio shots, they look more like resized k5 file than MF files.

ET2 said:

Kesha said:

Thank you Jonny1976 for your thread in the neighbour forums.

All your research for D800 IQ vs 645D is very true, it is different league, Camaro vs Roll Royce.

Click to expand...

Johnny isn't a neutral observer. 645D scores about the same as K-5 on dxomark. D800 will easily do better than both (if the sensor tech in D800 is same as K-5). As I said, wait for studio shots on IR. It's too early to claim anything.

ET2 said:

D800's IQ is not far from D7000 or K5, so why to buy a camera that just give you double size with double price, with the same iso but lower fps?

Click to expand...

I find this double standard funny. So D800 isn't as good as 645D because 645D has a larger sensor than D800, but K-5 is just as good as D800, even though K-5 sensor is smaller than D800 (and the resolution difference between 16 MP vs 36 MP is far larger than 36 MP vs 40 MP).

Could it be that you are just biased, so both K-5 and 645D are good, but D800 just not so good, in your world?

Click to expand...

that et doesn't understand this point is not strange for me, but that even most of nikonians, that i have always considered a kind of pentaxian compared to canon and sony fanboys, don't understand that IQ is not resolution or chart, that' hits me.

CCD sensor are much much better IQ speaking compared to CMOS images at least at base iso. no contest. CMOS are widely used for practical purpose, but CCD is much better. sometimes i lok back at my k10d files with ccd sensor. and at base iso it produces excellent images.

I add that at 2300 dollar even the sd1 surpass for IQ the d800 at least at base iso.

then i wanna punctualize that d800 is a great camera at this price, and IQ is very good in all the iso spectrum. But for ultimate IQ at a good price, pentax 645d is unsurpassed

Kesha said:

I got the Jonny1976 points, the image from 645D is not same with D800, although they have almost enough Mpix.
It is not about the ISO, but the IQ.

ET2 said:

Kesha said:

Thank you Jonny1976 for your thread in the neighbour forums.

All your research for D800 IQ vs 645D is very true, it is different league, Camaro vs Roll Royce.

Click to expand...

Johnny isn't a neutral observer. 645D scores about the same as K-5 on dxomark. D800 will easily do better than both (if the sensor tech in D800 is same as K-5). As I said, wait for studio shots on IR. It's too early to claim anything.

Click to expand...

Studio shot on IR, you mean Infrared?

I have studio shot on Infrared, used my old and dinosaurus age Pentax K10D, but I like the CCD for IR.

here are some:





I didn't do any masking of those photos.

In Studio, when you have a good setup light, and shot with base ISO, it is not very far the photo from APS-C to FF, but medium format is a different story.

Kesha270057 said:

Kesha270057 said:

D800's IQ is not far from D7000 or K5, so why to buy a camera that just give you double size with double price, with the same iso but lower fps?

Click to expand...

I find this double standard funny. So D800 isn't as good as 645D because 645D has a larger sensor than D800, but K-5 is just as good as D800, even though K-5 sensor is smaller than D800 (and the resolution difference between 16 MP vs 36 MP is far larger than 36 MP vs 40 MP).

Could it be that you are just biased, so both K-5 and 645D are good, but D800 just not so good, in your world?

Click to expand...

No, I mean D800's best IQ is not up to 645D's best IQ.

D800 is a good camera, but the IQ is on par with D7000 or K5 (as what I saw in the samples), not for 645D.

--
------------------------------------------
-- Rusma

my multiply : http://kesha.multiply.com

Click to expand...

it s useless u cannot understand.

ET2 said:

Kesha said:

No, I mean D800's best IQ is not up to 645D's best IQ.

D800 is a good camera, but the IQ is on par with D7000 or K5 (as what I saw in the samples), not for 645D.

Click to expand...

D800 IQ would be closer to 645D (definitively higher score than 645D on dxomark) than K-5 would be to D800. That's my prediction based on common sense --- and you will find it out too once the reviews and studio samples (and dxomark scores) are posted.

(1) D800 IQ > K -5 (no doubt about that)

(2) D800 vs 645D? 645D will win the resolution match, but overall IQ, will put my money on D800, especially D800 will have better DR than 645D.

Click to expand...

he doesn't take photo.
he just watch number and talk about what he doesn't know.

probablyhe has never seen a single 645d samples, and maybe not even the d800 samples.
he's obsessed with sony and numbers.

tcom said:

ET2 said:

tcom said:

The D800 sensor shares the same sensor technology than the K-5 and does even feature the same pixel density (the D800 in DX mode shoots nearly 16MP). But the sensor has likely become some small tweaks since the dev. of the K-5/D7000 sensor which will result in a slight better score on dxomark.

Click to expand...

This is not true. Even if D800 sensor tech is identical to D7000 (and let's assume it is), then D800, given it's 36 MP, will score much higher than D7000. That's because Dxomark scores are calculated by normalizing all cameras to 8 MP. Obviously, the gain from down-sampling 16 MP to 8 MP would be lower than down-sampling 36 MP to 8 MP. So D800, even if it performs identically to D7000 at pixel level, will score much higher than D7000 when both are normilzed to 8 MP. That's how Dxomark calculates scores; they normalize everything to 8 MP.

Click to expand...

I never tried to figure out what's behind the overall scores of dxo, and I do not really care about, the resolution gives me an indication as to which size I can print a photo or what cropping possibilities it offers. Apart from that, I consider in the dxomark measures of SNR and DR, but prefer to go out and use the camera.

tcom said:

In fact, I won't be surprised if D800 becomes the highest rated camera ever on dxomark.

Click to expand...

But do not forget to take photos rather than comparing numbers.

--
Dominique

International Press Association
http://ipaimpress.com/author/dominique/

http://www.pbase.com/tcom
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dschreckling/

Click to expand...

Thanks Rusma

Thats very kind of you.

I will try my PP workflow and see if the end result is close to yours.

I find this intriguing as my work-flow is based around resolving detail whilst controlling noise, not in maintaining texture and colour as yours appears to excel in.

It is an opportunity that I feel may well result in better output for my own Hi-ISO images.

--
My PPG
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/andrewwaldram
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
1x.com
http://1x.com/artist/awaldram/wall

jonny1976 said:

CCD sensor are much much better IQ speaking compared to CMOS images at least at base iso. no contest.

Click to expand...

Why don't you then sell your K-5 and buy K10D and live ever after?

jonny1976 said:

he doesn't take photo.
he just watch number and talk about what he doesn't know.

probablyhe has never seen a single 645d samples, and maybe not even the d800 samples.

Click to expand...

Funny that is coming from someone who after two hour of D800 announcement proclaimed it's IQ is not good.

Thanks but no thanks. I will wait for proper reviews, studio shots, and dxomark results

u dont understand is clear.

i said the Iq is not nowhere near the Iq of a MF camera as many in NIkon camp were suddenly screaming all over the place. That's why i compared MF and d800. and they are in different league.
does this mean the Iq of d800 is not good for me?

no. is good , a i said it looks like a k5 iq uprez to 36 million pixel. and i consider the iq of k5 very good, but clear not on par with 645d, and k5 has better noise and better dr according to dxo mark. In your world k5 will have better iq than 645d.
Apart number there is also a visual part of IQ.

Nikon posted sample shoot in raw by professional photographer. they were made using top notch expensive nikon pro glass.

all the sample suffer from lack of 3d lack of micro contrast and clarity. they have soft corner, practically all landscape, and even the library shot that makes nikonians scream WOW , looked carefully show lack of fine detail and so so corner sharpness.

i don't need chart to see the obvious. the d800 is the best 35 so far. But MF is simply another planet for ultimate IQ at base iso. and that's where most of the people want to use 35 or more pixel. what's the point of shooting high iso with 36 million pixel. What's the purpose?
they should have kept the number lower and they would have had a better IQ.

ET2 said:

jonny1976 said:

he doesn't take photo.
he just watch number and talk about what he doesn't know.

probablyhe has never seen a single 645d samples, and maybe not even the d800 samples.

Click to expand...

Funny that is coming from someone who after two hour of D800 announcement proclaimed it's IQ is not good.

Thanks but no thanks. I will wait for proper reviews, studio shots, and dxomark results

Click to expand...

jonny1976 said:

i don't need chart to see the obvious.

Click to expand...

I do .. I won't pass any judgment until there are studio shots in controlled setting with same subjects and lighting.

jonny1976 said:

But MF is simply another planet for ultimate IQ at base iso. a

Click to expand...

That has yet to be seen.

jonny1976 said:

they should have kept the number lower and they would have had a better IQ.

Click to expand...

No thanks. 36 MP are just fine. You can always downssample it later and lower the noise.

ET2 said:

No thanks. 36 MP are just fine. You can always downssample it later and lower the noise.

Click to expand...

Garbage in garbage out, If you've already destroyed the detail with noise no amount of down-sampling will restore it.

This is why hi-iso down sampled images though showing no noise look plasticity and veiled.

Mind you run a SNR scan over the result and you'll get some amazing figures

Same with MTF figures run sharpening up high and ignore niquest your can achieve resolution figures many times greater than the resolution of the sensor/lens combo looks great for sales looks crxp for viewers.

--
My PPG
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/andrewwaldram
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
1x.com
http://1x.com/artist/awaldram/wall

It is ok Awaldram, I hope we can share how to do the PP.

I have started the thread : http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=40556993

Pls let me know your result.

awaldram said:

Thanks Rusma

Thats very kind of you.

I will try my PP workflow and see if the end result is close to yours.

I find this intriguing as my work-flow is based around resolving detail whilst controlling noise, not in maintaining texture and colour as yours appears to excel in.

It is an opportunity that I feel may well result in better output for my own Hi-ISO images.

--
My PPG
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/andrewwaldram
My Photo Stream
http://www.flickr.com/photos/awaldram/
1x.com
http://1x.com/artist/awaldram/wall

Click to expand...

--
------------------------------------------
-- Rusma

my multiply : http://kesha.multiply.com

Hi All,

I can relay some personal experience since I have shot extensively with the 645D and virtually all Nikon pro DSLR's since their inception. I've also been shooting Pentax for decades including 645 and 67, so there is no need to say I have a bias towards one manufacturer or another. No one at this point can say with any degree of certainty how the D800/D800e files will compare with the 645D until a well controlled test and comparison is done, especially with a properly selected lenses for each system.

From my experience though I can say with a good degree of certainty that the one area that shouldn't be underestimated is the physical size of the sensor and the role that plays in the how the final image is rendered...and I'm not simply referring to higher ISO performance nor simply reproduction of depth of field at a given focal length/f-stop. That's why in many cases the image obtained from 20-22MP medium format backs simply appear to most well versed photographers of both systems, to be superior to a 24MP full frame 35mm DSLR. Of course it's not as simple as that, as bit depth, lens selection, electronics and more play a role, but there is no getting around the physics of the actual sensor.

A test and observation of not only 100% crops of both cameras will and should be performed but output to large format prints, which often is a excellent way to determine the impact each camera contributes to the final image quality.

Arguments can go on endlessly, especially when two cameras haven't yet put through their paces, side by side, but until that's done, all the #'s and specs in the world aren't going to even remotely answer the question on how close these two cameras, image wise really are. Trust me, 37 years of actively being in this game, especially using and testing most of the latest and greatest does provide quite a bit of insight.

Lastly this post doesn't even remotely touch upon the valuable use of each system and both the positives and negatives for their use in various applications. It's not luddite to say that like the Nikon D3x 24MP body and most all medium format digital backs and cameras, superb and meticulous techniques and the absolute best optics will be required to extract the max. potential of the D800/D800e. It's been shown time and again what decent above average lenses do when used on the D3x and often it results in images that looked no different than a good 12MP DSLR. Most are underestimating this fact.

Just a FYI Jonny 1976 , I sent you a message through the dpreview message system

Dave

awaldram said:

ET2 said:

No thanks. 36 MP are just fine. You can always downssample it later and lower the noise.

Click to expand...

Garbage in garbage out, If you've already destroyed the detail with noise no amount of down-sampling will restore it.

Click to expand...

And 36 MP captures the detail that 16 MP don't, so you are staring out from more detail. And you are just babbling nonsense. It's a well known fact that downsampling reduces noise.

If it's sensors we are comparing, given the same pixels I'd say size is an advantage. But then it's not as easy as that because the bigger the sensor we get a shallower DOF. The camera will also end up being bigger and the lenses much more expensive.

So without even getting into technical discussions involving lot's of numbers and tests there is plenty to help you decide.

The larger the format the more detail and quality you are going to get in a photo given a similar quality in the sensor. But on the other hand the bigger your headaches will be.

The great success of the 35mm format was that it was small but at the same time it wasn't so small that the quality was terrible. (Also as it was the standard film industry, it was cheaper). I believe APS-C is the 35mm of nowadays.

Of course larger formats will give more quality. They should! But sadly in this life there is always a trade-off.

Dave said:

Hi All,

I can relay some personal experience since I have shot extensively with the 645D and virtually all Nikon pro DSLR's since their inception. I've also been shooting Pentax for decades including 645 and 67, so there is no need to say I have a bias towards one manufacturer or another. No one at this point can say with any degree of certainty how the D800/D800e files will compare with the 645D until a well controlled test and comparison is done, especially with a properly selected lenses for each system.

Lastly this post doesn't even remotely touch upon the valuable use of each system and both the positives and negatives for their use in various applications. It's not luddite to say that like the Nikon D3x 24MP body and most all medium format digital backs and cameras, superb and meticulous techniques and the absolute best optics will be required to extract the max. potential of the D800/D800e. It's been shown time and again what decent above average lenses do when used on the D3x and often it results in images that looked no different than a good 12MP DSLR. Most are underestimating this fact.

Click to expand...

Member said:

Dave

Click to expand...

+1 to that - a mature and balanced analysis.

I would say that as a guestimate (and I include myself here) 80% of photographers will not have the lens resolving capacity, technical capability, artistic skill or experience to use most of the high capacity of these camaeras. Most of us are just boys in the toyshop wishing for a bigger toy

--
Rob Lewis
http://www.broughttolight.com
http://www.pbase.com/rmlewis
Blog at http://rmlewis1.wordpress.com/

'Being rich is having money; being wealthy is having time (to take photos).' Apologies to Stephen Swid

ET2, judging from the images you posted vs the images Kesha posted...I'd probably take Kesha's advice when it comes to picking a camera.

This said, I'm sticking with the D700, all the while still hoping the new Pentax will come up with an FF body to make full use of the K-mount lenses. At least until the word is out about the D800's mirror flap, a lot of Nik0n owners still do not want to upgrade.

I'm missing the K-7's quiet shutter.

ET2 said:

Kesha said:

Thank you Jonny1976 for your thread in the neighbour forums.

All your research for D800 IQ vs 645D is very true, it is different league, Camaro vs Roll Royce.

Click to expand...

Johnny isn't a neutral observer. 645D scores about the same as K-5 on dxomark. D800 will easily do better than both (if the sensor tech in D800 is same as K-5). As I said, wait for studio shots on IR. It's too early to claim anything.

ET2 said:

D800's IQ is not far from D7000 or K5, so why to buy a camera that just give you double size with double price, with the same iso but lower fps?

Click to expand...

I find this double standard funny. So D800 isn't as good as 645D because 645D has a larger sensor than D800, but K-5 is just as good as D800, even though K-5 sensor is smaller than D800 (and the resolution difference between 16 MP vs 36 MP is far larger than 36 MP vs 40 MP).

Could it be that you are just biased, so both K-5 and 645D are good, but D800 just not so good, in your world?

Click to expand...

Because people shoot at higher than the base ISO sometimes?

At base ISO, CCD has always beaten CMOS of the same generation or even one higher.

ET2 said:

jonny1976 said:

CCD sensor are much much better IQ speaking compared to CMOS images at least at base iso. no contest.

Click to expand...

Why don't you then sell your K-5 and buy K10D and live ever after?

Click to expand...