K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Started Oct 28, 2010 | Discussions
Devorama Regular Member • Posts: 129
K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Hey all,

If you recall the release of the K-x about a year ago, you may remember my post with comparison pictures of K-x vs. K-2000 (K-m). Well I have a new K-r, so I've done some new comparisons.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/11899953@N02/sets/72157625259849744/

All photos were taken in DNG RAW and process with no additional noise reduction with the Pentax RAW utility that came with the K-r. I've included 100% crop "ISO elevators" for the convenience of the pixel peepers.

My conclusion from these pictures is that the K-r is not noticeably improved over the K-x.

 Devorama's gear list:Devorama's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Sony a7 II Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Samyang 85mm F1.4 Aspherical IF +6 more
pcarfan Veteran Member • Posts: 3,948
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Wow! what an incredible effort. Thank you. I also agree with your conclusion.
--

[url= http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=2323984&subSubSection=0&language=EN]MY PPG[ url]
K10D, K-7

Pentax: DA15/4, DA21/3.2, FA31/1.8, FA43/1.9, FA77/1.8, F135/2.8, FA*28-70/2.8, FA*80-200/2.8
Sigma Zooms: Sigma 100-300 F4

'Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming... 'Wow! What a ride!'

NorthwestF Senior Member • Posts: 1,040
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Devorama wrote:

My conclusion from these pictures is that the K-r is not noticeably improved over the K-x.

How could that be? johnbee said it's better than D700, and it's the best thing since slice bread.

Steven Lam Contributing Member • Posts: 916
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Johnbee tested k-5. So I guess kr is less capiable than k5. Well, time will tell.

NorthwestF wrote:

Devorama wrote:

My conclusion from these pictures is that the K-r is not noticeably improved over the K-x.

How could that be? johnbee said it's better than D700, and it's the best thing since slice bread.

-- hide signature --

Steven
K20d + grip,Tamron 17-50, 28-75, DA* 50-135, Metz 48,
Da21, Sigma 24/2.8, FA50/1.7, FA77, Kenko 1.5xTC,
Domke F-5XC

ptodd
ptodd Senior Member • Posts: 1,327
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Devorama wrote:

Hey all,

If you recall the release of the K-x about a year ago, you may remember my post with comparison pictures of K-x vs. K-2000 (K-m). Well I have a new K-r, so I've done some new comparisons.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/11899953@N02/sets/72157625259849744/

All photos were taken in DNG RAW and process with no additional noise reduction with the Pentax RAW utility that came with the K-r. I've included 100% crop "ISO elevators" for the convenience of the pixel peepers.

My conclusion from these pictures is that the K-r is not noticeably improved over the K-x.

I had a quick peep at the 3200 samples and concur with your conclusion. Good news for me since I just brought a K-x

-- hide signature --

Peter

 ptodd's gear list:ptodd's gear list
Pentax K-30 Samsung D-Xenon 50-200 F4-5.6 ED Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro Google Nexus 4 +1 more
NorthwestF Senior Member • Posts: 1,040
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Steven Lam wrote:

Johnbee tested k-5. So I guess kr is less capiable than k5. Well, time will tell.

Before K-5 images appeared, Johnbee was claiming he has K-r RAW images and it's better than D700. Basically he was making same statements about K-r that he is doing now about K-5.

eruditass Senior Member • Posts: 1,052
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Anyone up for a good ol fashion lynch mob?
--
Correct my incorrect photography answers at:
http://photo.stackexchange.com/

Please update the Camera Shutter Life Expectancy Database with your experiences:
http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/

sankos Senior Member • Posts: 2,374
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

I suspect the culprit might be the Pentax DCU application. John Bee used RPP for his conversions.

When I compared the results I could get from the app with my K10D pefs the program proved to be the worst as far as detail retention and noise reduction. I compared it to ACR 6.2, Capture One 5.2, Sagelight and PSP X2.

I agree about the colour profiles that DCU has really spot on for the Pentax cameras (no surprise here) but I still think the demosaicing, sharpening and NR algorithms should be really improved to compete with the likes of C1 or ACR.
--
Marcin
http://flickr.com/photos/sankos/

Barry Fitzgerald Forum Pro • Posts: 29,888
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

They look very close..as it is I think we've got it pretty good nowadays with high ISO.
I still think the K-r is appealing as is the K-x in it's own way.

Users of both cannot really complain..of course if you want to go back to those 10mp CCD days, be my guest. Looking at some K-x shots at high ISO I think it tears apart the old 10mp CCD, though the 6mp one was pretty decent.

mvb123 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,302
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Thanks for the work!

I can't see any difference but that's no problem to me, the K-r has other pluses. The exif says that you adjusted the AF of the K-r to -10, the K-x is zero. Is this adjustment to -10 correct for all your lenses?
--
Menno
http://www.xs4all.nl/~mvanb

OP Devorama Regular Member • Posts: 129
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

mvb123 wrote:

Thanks for the work!

I can't see any difference but that's no problem to me, the K-r has other pluses. The exif says that you adjusted the AF of the K-r to -10, the K-x is zero. Is this adjustment to -10 correct for all your lenses?

I'm glad people are finding these interesting.

The K-x does not have any fine AF adjust. I found my K-r was significantly front focusing in tungsten light. Even with the maximum -10 adjustment, it's still a bit forward. With -10 dialed in, it's actually slightly rear focusing in fluorescent light now. These pictures were manually focused with a 50mm prime Zeiss lens I have for maximum sharpness. So that should not have any influence here.

 Devorama's gear list:Devorama's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Sony a7 II Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Samyang 85mm F1.4 Aspherical IF +6 more
ozdean
ozdean Forum Pro • Posts: 26,175
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Thanks - might be half a stop maybe?
--
Regards Dean - Capturing Creation

 ozdean's gear list:ozdean's gear list
Pentax MX-1 Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax K-50 Pentax smc DA* 55mm F1.4 SDM Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited +13 more
Barry Fitzgerald Forum Pro • Posts: 29,888
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

ozdean wrote:

Thanks - might be half a stop maybe?

Could be a tad less colour noise on the K-r? Looks very slightly better

mvb123 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,302
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Devorama wrote:

The K-x does not have any fine AF adjust.

I don't know if it is called fine AF adjust, but I can adjust the AF in debug mode on my K-x.

I found my K-r was significantly front focusing in tungsten light. Even with the maximum -10 adjustment, it's still a bit forward. With -10 dialed in, it's actually slightly rear focusing in fluorescent light now. These pictures were manually focused with a 50mm prime Zeiss lens I have for maximum sharpness. So that should not have any influence here.

Okay, I hope you don't have to adjust the AF again while shooting in different light

Hopefully the K-5 does a better job there as it seems to take the wavelength of the light into account with AF.

-- hide signature --

Menno

DuncanM1 Contributing Member • Posts: 817
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Devorama wrote:

Hey all,

If you recall the release of the K-x about a year ago, you may remember my post with comparison pictures of K-x vs. K-2000 (K-m). Well I have a new K-r, so I've done some new comparisons.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/11899953@N02/sets/72157625259849744/

All photos were taken in DNG RAW and process with no additional noise reduction with the Pentax RAW utility that came with the K-r. I've included 100% crop "ISO elevators" for the convenience of the pixel peepers.

My conclusion from these pictures is that the K-r is not noticeably improved over the K-x.

The K-x was already achieving extremely low noise results:

so saying that the K-r is not improved over the K-x, in terms of noise, is not necessarily a bad thing...

OP Devorama Regular Member • Posts: 129
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

sankos wrote:

I suspect the culprit might be the Pentax DCU application. John Bee used RPP for his conversions.

I debated about using RAW Therapee or Lightroom for the RAW conversions, as they are more standardized. But since I was going for an image with minimum possible noise reduction, I didn't think it would make much difference.

When I did my K-m to K-x comparison a year ago, someone suggested RAW Therapee would be a more fair test than DCU, as it was suspected that Pentax applied some minimal noise reduction even when you turned it off when using DCU. But after re-running all the tests, the results didn't seem noticeably changed. Keep in mind, these tests are really only relevant to compare the K-r and K-x.

 Devorama's gear list:Devorama's gear list
Olympus E-M1 Sony a7 II Canon EF 100mm f/2.0 USM Panasonic Lumix G 20mm F1.7 ASPH Samyang 85mm F1.4 Aspherical IF +6 more
jonny1976 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,277
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

NorthwestF wrote:

Devorama wrote:

My conclusion from these pictures is that the K-r is not noticeably improved over the K-x.

How could that be? johnbee said it's better than D700, and it's the best thing since slice bread.

 jonny1976's gear list:jonny1976's gear list
Nikon D2X
MajStriker Contributing Member • Posts: 848
Re: K-r vs. K-x ISO comparison pictures (return of the ISO flower!)

Quite apparently, JohnBee talks about a great deal of things of which he knows not.

Interestingly enough with as many posts as he has had in his K-5 threads, one would think he would be willing to defend his K-r comments here? Perhaps he is too busy trawling for K-5 pictures that he can stretch to compare to the D700/D7000 and pronounce the camera far better even though he doesn't own any of them.

NorthwestF wrote:

Devorama wrote:

My conclusion from these pictures is that the K-r is not noticeably improved over the K-x.

How could that be? johnbee said it's better than D700, and it's the best thing since slice bread.

-- hide signature --
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads