Most underestimated camera currently available

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Jhaakas wrote:

Thank you very much for this post

Pentax KP and K-1ii strike out significantly as outstanding in terms of DR and ISO.

Pentax KP shows amazing numbers - pretty much comparable to a FF!

Beats Canon

As I have written a couple of times already - those numbers are possible to manipulate. They are based upon the signal to noise ratio. And, if you do noise suppression this ratio goes up. In practice, state of the art sensors all have the same signal to noise behavior if they have the same size. More or less. The differences are marginal.

The noise suppression kick in can easily be seen in the curves. If you compare K-1 and K-1 II, you see that they have identical values up to ISO 636. At that point K-1 II adds a noise suppression algorithm that gains one and a half stop. You can do the same for K-1 in post processing.

The two question regarding this noise suppression in the RAW data are

1. Is this noise suppression superior to one made in post process?
2. Does this noise suppression do anything degrading to the image?

NOTE - it is, of course, practical to have it in most cases. But, question 2 above is kind of important, for some of us.

Thanks for the nice details.

I am now trying to narrow it down further:
Let us say if we get Nikon/Sony/Pentax bodies having same sensor and used Pentax lenses on all with adapters and manual focus/settings.. will we then get pretty much exact raw files?

I am trying to find oiut what makes the real difference .. looks like it is the lenses. And just to take out the s/w from equation - I mentioned raw.