A breakthrough in K-3 images in shade ......

Started Jan 14, 2014 | Discussions
Petroglyph
Petroglyph Veteran Member • Posts: 6,052
Re: A breakthrough in K-3 images in shade ......

Jim in Hudson wrote:

emem wrote:

KL Matt wrote:

Bright Mode!!!! The killer of image quality rears its ugly head.

Well, Bright Mode is the default setting for the K-3. I did try the Natural setting briefly but found it way too dull. Perhaps to a RAW shooter, Natural may be ok. But when I chimp after taking a shot, I prefer seeing something on the rear screen that looks kind of like the real thing, not some desaturated version of it.

The bigger problem with the Natural JPEG preset is the way it displays Caucasian skin tones. Too pink-ish or maybe lacking in yellow (I'm not a color expert). Could this be why Pentax has chosen Bright as the default for Western countries while leaving Natural as the default for Asian countries?

Regardless, you can desaturate Bright in-camera to get an improvement for overall shooting if JPEG is what you're after.

This probably explains why I never notice this.  The first thing I do with any camera is shoot raw + jpeg with a neutral "scene mode" and zero sharpening.  Even though I only use the raw file, it's in case I try to cut a corner and do a batch conversion of raw to tiff by a converter (when I don't want the converter applying any extra brightness or sharpening) before I get to put the final touches on an image in LR.

Cheers.

 Petroglyph's gear list:Petroglyph's gear list
Sony Alpha a7R II Sony FE 90mm F2.8 macro Rokinon 135mm F2.0 Samyang 20mm F1.8
emem
OP emem Veteran Member • Posts: 4,216
Here you go Ed ..............

Qwntm wrote:

When you were one of the only people having a problem, people were not too thrilled about claims that the K-3 was a bad camera... That was really the only problem.

I would do a complete factory reset and start over. Turn the HIgh ISO noise Reduction off and turn the AFA to AF-s and see where your at.

I bet your photos improve dramatically.

No, they won't. Here's a sample.

I've turned High ISO Noise Reduction to Auto. I've turned Slow Shutter Speed Noise Reduction to Auto.  I never have my camera set to AF-A. I've set my camera to the Custom Image settings suggested by David Tittermary. I never fully believed your assertion about the noise reduction being the problem (or possibly ANY problem) but was hardly in a position to argue a case, but now I'm getting close. Time will tell. In the meantime, have a look at the image below, shot at 6400 ISO with NR set to Auto. Shot in a reasonably dark corner of a shed. I opened it in ACDsee and applied a little NR then resized it for here, otherwise it's as taken. Enlarge it to 100% and see if you'd be happy with it had you taken it?

Can you tell me here what settings to use to replicate the problem you were getting with aggressive NR? I'd like to try it from scratch.

-- hide signature --

Mike McEnaney. (emem)
www.veritasmea.com

 emem's gear list:emem's gear list
Pentax *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Nikon D300S Pentax K-5 IIs +12 more
david tittermary Contributing Member • Posts: 550
Re: Here you go Ed ..............

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

When you were one of the only people having a problem, people were not too thrilled about claims that the K-3 was a bad camera... That was really the only problem.

I would do a complete factory reset and start over. Turn the HIgh ISO noise Reduction off and turn the AFA to AF-s and see where your at.

I bet your photos improve dramatically.

No, they won't. Here's a sample.

I've turned High ISO Noise Reduction to Auto. I've turned Slow Shutter Speed Noise Reduction to Auto. I never have my camera set to AF-A. I've set my camera to the Custom Image settings suggested by David Tittermary. I never fully believed your assertion about the noise reduction being the problem (or possibly ANY problem) but was hardly in a position to argue a case, but now I'm getting close. Time will tell. In the meantime, have a look at the image below, shot at 6400 ISO with NR set to Auto. Shot in a reasonably dark corner of a shed. I opened it in ACDsee and applied a little NR then resized it for here, otherwise it's as taken. Enlarge it to 100% and see if you'd be happy with it had you taken it?

Can you tell me here what settings to use to replicate the problem you were getting with aggressive NR? I'd like to try it from scratch.

I think what what Ed was saying and I agree (but it was not your major issue) is the the auto NR will variably degrade the image and give similar results to what you were seeing ie smudged details in lower light outside overcast type lighting. To avoid this random degradation if you turn the auto NR and set it to a level you're comfortable with you can avoid this. Again at the risk of sounding like a broken record I suggest turning it completely off along with sharpening and just do it post, take 2 seconds and gives you the control.

It would appear the baseline setting I suggested are giving you a nice contrasty fairly vivid image which from your work i have seen seems to be what you're looking for.

I understand you're not big on raw and I am sure your know this but you can set up a little recipe in your raw program that suits your taste apply this on import into your post software and you can have a nice image thats close to what you  want with very little effort once you set this up. This allows your take advantage of the increase DR and Sharpness raw can give you, or not just throwing it out there.

-- hide signature --
jackdan Contributing Member • Posts: 896
Re: Here you go Ed ..............

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

When you were one of the only people having a problem, people were not too thrilled about claims that the K-3 was a bad camera... That was really the only problem.

I would do a complete factory reset and start over. Turn the HIgh ISO noise Reduction off and turn the AFA to AF-s and see where your at.

I bet your photos improve dramatically.

No, they won't. Here's a sample.

I've turned High ISO Noise Reduction to Auto. I've turned Slow Shutter Speed Noise Reduction to Auto. I never have my camera set to AF-A. I've set my camera to the Custom Image settings suggested by David Tittermary. I never fully believed your assertion about the noise reduction being the problem (or possibly ANY problem) but was hardly in a position to argue a case, but now I'm getting close. Time will tell. In the meantime, have a look at the image below, shot at 6400 ISO with NR set to Auto. Shot in a reasonably dark corner of a shed. I opened it in ACDsee and applied a little NR then resized it for here, otherwise it's as taken. Enlarge it to 100% and see if you'd be happy with it had you taken it?

Can you tell me here what settings to use to replicate the problem you were getting with aggressive NR? I'd like to try it from scratch.

I don't believe anyone has posted a photo that  replicates Qwntm's result with the blur from auto ISO noise reduction. Qwntm says that is because only a special kind of flat lighting activates the high level of NR. On the other hand there have been many photos posted that like yours do not exhibit the problem. Turning high NR on and off shows high NR will degrade the image, but apparently no one else has knowingly had auto NR trigger high NR And told us about it.

So there is no doubt that if auto NR activates high NR sharpness will suffer. The question that remains unanswered  is exactly when and how often does auto NR actually activate high NR. It is actually a moot point now here at DPR anyway, because everyone within earshot of DPR has turned off auto NR.

By the way, I am glad that high/low key suggestion was helpful.

jackdan Contributing Member • Posts: 896
Re: A breakthrough in K-3 images in shade ......

Jim in Hudson wrote:

emem wrote:

KL Matt wrote:

Bright Mode!!!! The killer of image quality rears its ugly head.

Well, Bright Mode is the default setting for the K-3. I did try the Natural setting briefly but found it way too dull. Perhaps to a RAW shooter, Natural may be ok. But when I chimp after taking a shot, I prefer seeing something on the rear screen that looks kind of like the real thing, not some desaturated version of it.

The bigger problem with the Natural JPEG preset is the way it displays Caucasian skin tones. Too pink-ish or maybe lacking in yellow (I'm not a color expert). Could this be why Pentax has chosen Bright as the default for Western countries while leaving Natural as the default for Asian countries?

Regardless, you can desaturate Bright in-camera to get an improvement for overall shooting if JPEG is what you're after.

I am in the Bright Mode camp (K30). I sometimes get the impression that some (no one here, of course) who advocate Natural are influenced more by labels. They jump to the conclusion that Bright must be for teenage girls that don't know better.

emem
OP emem Veteran Member • Posts: 4,216
Re: Here you go Ed ..............

david tittermary wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

When you were one of the only people having a problem, people were not too thrilled about claims that the K-3 was a bad camera... That was really the only problem.

I would do a complete factory reset and start over. Turn the HIgh ISO noise Reduction off and turn the AFA to AF-s and see where your at.

I bet your photos improve dramatically.

No, they won't. Here's a sample.

I've turned High ISO Noise Reduction to Auto. I've turned Slow Shutter Speed Noise Reduction to Auto. I never have my camera set to AF-A. I've set my camera to the Custom Image settings suggested by David Tittermary. I never fully believed your assertion about the noise reduction being the problem (or possibly ANY problem) but was hardly in a position to argue a case, but now I'm getting close. Time will tell. In the meantime, have a look at the image below, shot at 6400 ISO with NR set to Auto. Shot in a reasonably dark corner of a shed. I opened it in ACDsee and applied a little NR then resized it for here, otherwise it's as taken. Enlarge it to 100% and see if you'd be happy with it had you taken it?

Can you tell me here what settings to use to replicate the problem you were getting with aggressive NR? I'd like to try it from scratch.

I think what what Ed was saying and I agree (but it was not your major issue) is the the auto NR will variably degrade the image and give similar results to what you were seeing ie smudged details in lower light outside overcast type lighting. To avoid this random degradation if you turn the auto NR and set it to a level you're comfortable with you can avoid this. Again at the risk of sounding like a broken record I suggest turning it completely off along with sharpening and just do it post, take 2 seconds and gives you the control.

It would appear the baseline setting I suggested are giving you a nice contrasty fairly vivid image which from your work i have seen seems to be what you're looking for.

I understand you're not big on raw and I am sure your know this but you can set up a little recipe in your raw program that suits your taste apply this on import into your post software and you can have a nice image thats close to what you want with very little effort once you set this up. This allows your take advantage of the increase DR and Sharpness raw can give you, or not just throwing it out there.

Appreciate your comments (and input so far) David. I have a good idea what Ed was saying, having read many of his posts here (although some of the threads on this "blur" problem are so well posted to that it's hard to find exact statements that I recall Ed making - I'll look more thoroughly when I have the time). What I'M saying is that I think Ed has seized on this as the explanation for a general blur complaint in the early days after release of the K-3 BUT HE WAS WRONG TO ATTRIBUTE THE BLUR PROBLEM TO THE NR SETTING, his videos notwithstanding. I wasn't the only one who had problems. Several people returned their cameras to the store because of it. My opinion is that there were several things going on, Ed's video explanation only one possible (and I still haven't actually seen anyone 100% agree with Ed after replicating his problem). I believe my camera had a fleeting problem with SR malfunction of some sort. Sticking? A stiffness in application? To do with the new anti moire control? Who knows, but some of my shots were coming out as almost a double exposure.

Complex equipment, particularly in the marriage of mechanical and electronic controls, can do odd things. I had a strange occurrence with the K-3 a few weeks back. I was shooting a few bits and pieces in my backyard when the shutter started firing rapidly - the full 8fps by the sound of it. This started without me pressing the shutter button. I turned the camera off but it had no effect on the rapidly firing shutter - it continued until I opened the battery compartment and released the battery. It's only happened once but it was scarey at the time.

But I digress. Perhaps at the same time as the SR malfunction or soon thereafter, my Custom Image settings have been changed inadvertently, or carelessly, I don't know which or how. As a complication, I don't know of any exif reader that can yet read all of the K-3 exif data. I certainly don't have one that will.  We really need that to be able to have any sort of idea of what is actually going on in the camera when a shot is taken.

So, thanks again for your help in getting to the bottom of MY problem. I'm looking forward to fully tuning things to my liking now and getting out and shooting with this great camera when it's set up the way I want it.

-- hide signature --

Mike McEnaney. (emem)
www.veritasmea.com

 emem's gear list:emem's gear list
Pentax *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Nikon D300S Pentax K-5 IIs +12 more
emem
OP emem Veteran Member • Posts: 4,216
Re: Here you go Ed ..............

jackdan wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

When you were one of the only people having a problem, people were not too thrilled about claims that the K-3 was a bad camera... That was really the only problem.

I would do a complete factory reset and start over. Turn the HIgh ISO noise Reduction off and turn the AFA to AF-s and see where your at.

I bet your photos improve dramatically.

No, they won't. Here's a sample.

I've turned High ISO Noise Reduction to Auto. I've turned Slow Shutter Speed Noise Reduction to Auto. I never have my camera set to AF-A. I've set my camera to the Custom Image settings suggested by David Tittermary. I never fully believed your assertion about the noise reduction being the problem (or possibly ANY problem) but was hardly in a position to argue a case, but now I'm getting close. Time will tell. In the meantime, have a look at the image below, shot at 6400 ISO with NR set to Auto. Shot in a reasonably dark corner of a shed. I opened it in ACDsee and applied a little NR then resized it for here, otherwise it's as taken. Enlarge it to 100% and see if you'd be happy with it had you taken it?

Can you tell me here what settings to use to replicate the problem you were getting with aggressive NR? I'd like to try it from scratch.

I don't believe anyone has posted a photo that replicates Qwntm's result with the blur from auto ISO noise reduction. Qwntm says that is because only a special kind of flat lighting activates the high level of NR. On the other hand there have been many photos posted that like yours do not exhibit the problem. Turning high NR on and off shows high NR will degrade the image, but apparently no one else has knowingly had auto NR trigger high NR And told us about it.

So there is no doubt that if auto NR activates high NR sharpness will suffer. The question that remains unanswered is exactly when and how often does auto NR actually activate high NR. It is actually a moot point now here at DPR anyway, because everyone within earshot of DPR has turned off auto NR.

By the way, I am glad that high/low key suggestion was helpful.

Yes, indeed, from David's rabbit picture thread? I was already thinking along those general lines after Andrew tossed out the bit about the bright areas clipping. There really are a plethora of controls and fine adjustments to think about and test.

-- hide signature --

Mike McEnaney. (emem)
www.veritasmea.com

 emem's gear list:emem's gear list
Pentax *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Nikon D300S Pentax K-5 IIs +12 more
Joseph Tainter Forum Pro • Posts: 10,254
Re: A breakthrough in K-3 images in shade ......

emem wrote:

Bill Robb wrote:

KL Matt wrote:

Bright Mode!!!! The killer of image quality rears its ugly head.

Also: if you're looking for a weakness of the K3, this may nonetheless still be where you'll find it. With less dynamic range, you're going to have a more difficult time preserving fine highlight detail like white feathers in mixed light without underexposing more than you would need to with a k5. Then again, the finer and purportedly better metering may take care of you better in this case than a k5, safely giving you consistently better results.

I'm sure YRMV.

Reality actually will vary. The K5II has .7 stops more DR than the K3, and both are well over the DR that one is likely to run into in any scene that isn't artificially set up to induce a DR failure.

Don't know where you are Bill, but here in Australia the DR challenge is a major one at times. Shooting in Australian sunshine can be a bummer. The difference here between bright sunshine and shade is generally greater than any digital camera will handle easily.

It is the same in the sunny, bright U.S. Southwest. We need all the dynamic range we can get. Bill lives in Alberta, but I believe he has photographed in the Southwest.

Joe

mistermejia Veteran Member • Posts: 3,340
EMEM...

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

When you were one of the only people having a problem, people were not too thrilled about claims that the K-3 was a bad camera... That was really the only problem.

I would do a complete factory reset and start over. Turn the HIgh ISO noise Reduction off and turn the AFA to AF-s and see where your at.

I bet your photos improve dramatically.

No, they won't. Here's a sample.

I've turned High ISO Noise Reduction to Auto. I've turned Slow Shutter Speed Noise Reduction to Auto. I never have my camera set to AF-A. I've set my camera to the Custom Image settings suggested by David Tittermary. I never fully believed your assertion about the noise reduction being the problem (or possibly ANY problem) but was hardly in a position to argue a case, but now I'm getting close. Time will tell. In the meantime, have a look at the image below, shot at 6400 ISO with NR set to Auto. Shot in a reasonably dark corner of a shed. I opened it in ACDsee and applied a little NR then resized it for here, otherwise it's as taken. Enlarge it to 100% and see if you'd be happy with it had you taken it?

Can you tell me here what settings to use to replicate the problem you were getting with aggressive NR? I'd like to try it from scratch.

...Wait a minute! Am i understanding this correctly? Please correct me if i am wrong, but is Qwntm suggesting to you to turn NR OFF, and you are saying that no you don't want to, or you haven't turned NR to OFF and you preffer to set NR to AUTO???

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +6 more
emem
OP emem Veteran Member • Posts: 4,216
Re: EMEM...

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

When you were one of the only people having a problem, people were not too thrilled about claims that the K-3 was a bad camera... That was really the only problem.

I would do a complete factory reset and start over. Turn the HIgh ISO noise Reduction off and turn the AFA to AF-s and see where your at.

I bet your photos improve dramatically.

No, they won't. Here's a sample.

I've turned High ISO Noise Reduction to Auto. I've turned Slow Shutter Speed Noise Reduction to Auto. I never have my camera set to AF-A. I've set my camera to the Custom Image settings suggested by David Tittermary. I never fully believed your assertion about the noise reduction being the problem (or possibly ANY problem) but was hardly in a position to argue a case, but now I'm getting close. Time will tell. In the meantime, have a look at the image below, shot at 6400 ISO with NR set to Auto. Shot in a reasonably dark corner of a shed. I opened it in ACDsee and applied a little NR then resized it for here, otherwise it's as taken. Enlarge it to 100% and see if you'd be happy with it had you taken it?

Can you tell me here what settings to use to replicate the problem you were getting with aggressive NR? I'd like to try it from scratch.

...Wait a minute! Am i understanding this correctly? Please correct me if i am wrong, but is Qwntm suggesting to you to turn NR OFF, and you are saying that no you don't want to, or you haven't turned NR to OFF and you preffer to set NR to AUTO???

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

-- hide signature --

Mike McEnaney. (emem)
www.veritasmea.com

 emem's gear list:emem's gear list
Pentax *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Nikon D300S Pentax K-5 IIs +12 more
Leandros S Senior Member • Posts: 1,972
Effect on interpretation of previous threads

I take it this affects your comparison thread where I said I preferred the tonality on the K-5 IIs image?

Thanks.

-- hide signature --

No amount of perceived entitlement can replace actual expertise.

mistermejia Veteran Member • Posts: 3,340
Re: EMEM...

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

When you were one of the only people having a problem, people were not too thrilled about claims that the K-3 was a bad camera... That was really the only problem.

I would do a complete factory reset and start over. Turn the HIgh ISO noise Reduction off and turn the AFA to AF-s and see where your at.

I bet your photos improve dramatically.

No, they won't. Here's a sample.

I've turned High ISO Noise Reduction to Auto. I've turned Slow Shutter Speed Noise Reduction to Auto. I never have my camera set to AF-A. I've set my camera to the Custom Image settings suggested by David Tittermary. I never fully believed your assertion about the noise reduction being the problem (or possibly ANY problem) but was hardly in a position to argue a case, but now I'm getting close. Time will tell. In the meantime, have a look at the image below, shot at 6400 ISO with NR set to Auto. Shot in a reasonably dark corner of a shed. I opened it in ACDsee and applied a little NR then resized it for here, otherwise it's as taken. Enlarge it to 100% and see if you'd be happy with it had you taken it?

Can you tell me here what settings to use to replicate the problem you were getting with aggressive NR? I'd like to try it from scratch.

...Wait a minute! Am i understanding this correctly? Please correct me if i am wrong, but is Qwntm suggesting to you to turn NR OFF, and you are saying that no you don't want to, or you haven't turned NR to OFF and you preffer to set NR to AUTO???

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

First: I don't have the camera, so no way to do my own tests. There are explanations and people in youtube videos have confirmed that NR AUTO is very very "aggressive". Up to what ISO, i don't know. Do i believe that? Based on what i have seen i would say yes.

Second: That lens you are using is a kit lens, sir. What do you expect that is going to do on a 24MP sensor?? That lens is for people that only want an "all in one" lens, a "convinient" lens, NOT high performance.

If you want sharp detailed photos you are going to have to get a Sigma 17-50. Trust me, i know what i am telling you. What ever else you do i think is a waste of time.  I am telling you this based on experience

There is nothing else to be said here from me. Good bye, good luck, and enjoy your camera

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +6 more
miles green
miles green Veteran Member • Posts: 6,478
Shoot raw!

Shoot RAW, and all these "problems" disappear...

I use jpg setting to get close to the look that i want when i'm looking at the pics on the camera screen. Highlight & shadow correction are off because they make things slower.

Sharpening, noise reduction, color balance, lens corrections and all the rest are done in post on a PC.

Just don't clip the highlights of any channel!

-- hide signature --

Miles Green
Pentaxian with chronic LBA
Corfu, Greece

 miles green's gear list:miles green's gear list
Pentax K-1 Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG Macro HSM II Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc FA 31mm F1.8 AL Limited Pentax smc FA 43mm F1.9 Limited +8 more
zakaria
zakaria Veteran Member • Posts: 3,999
Re: A breakthrough in K-3 images in shade ......

I have to say that k3 tooke the simplicity of k mount away . Now k3 has a new metring, a new focus and a new Ricoh logo. To me it means that k mount is nearer to Ricoh philosophy than pentax,s spirit . I have both k5 and k5iis . I take good to Exl. photos with out any duoble effort as Iam doing witk k3.
--
pentaxian .

 zakaria's gear list:zakaria's gear list
Pentax K-5 IIs Nikon D750 Pentax K-1
emem
OP emem Veteran Member • Posts: 4,216
Re: EMEM...

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

...Wait a minute! Am i understanding this correctly? Please correct me if i am wrong, but is Qwntm suggesting to you to turn NR OFF, and you are saying that no you don't want to, or you haven't turned NR to OFF and you preffer to set NR to AUTO???

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

First: I don't have the camera, so no way to do my own tests. There are explanations and people in youtube videos have confirmed that NR AUTO is very very "aggressive". Up to what ISO, i don't know. Do i believe that? Based on what i have seen i would say yes.

Second: That lens you are using is a kit lens, sir. What do you expect that is going to do on a 24MP sensor?? That lens is for people that only want an "all in one" lens, a "convinient" lens, NOT high performance.

If you want sharp detailed photos you are going to have to get a Sigma 17-50. Trust me, i know what i am telling you. What ever else you do i think is a waste of time.  I am telling you this based on experience

There is nothing else to be said here from me. Good bye, good luck, and enjoy your camera

Thank you. I tried a Sigma 17-50 a while back but wasn't particularly impressed. I own a Tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon set up - still not greatly impressed. The 18-135 "kit lens" as you call it produces sharp images on my K-3. I'm aware that it's not the greatest lens made but the focal range is hard to beat and the utter convenience makes it hard to take off the camera.

While my credibility with the issues I've been having may be poor, I'm not a complete novice. I've tried many lens/camera combinations over the years and know the difference between good, bad and indifferent lenses. But the standard of this particular lens has little, if anything, to do with my issues here. In fact, it's perfectly capable of producing extremely pleasing and sharp images on the K-3.

Some shots from the "kit lens 18-135" - look at them at 100% to see the true res (of these resized versions - the originals are pin sharp):-

-- hide signature --

Mike McEnaney. (emem)
www.veritasmea.com

 emem's gear list:emem's gear list
Pentax *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Nikon D300S Pentax K-5 IIs +12 more
mistermejia Veteran Member • Posts: 3,340
Re: EMEM...

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

...Wait a minute! Am i understanding this correctly? Please correct me if i am wrong, but is Qwntm suggesting to you to turn NR OFF, and you are saying that no you don't want to, or you haven't turned NR to OFF and you preffer to set NR to AUTO???

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

First: I don't have the camera, so no way to do my own tests. There are explanations and people in youtube videos have confirmed that NR AUTO is very very "aggressive". Up to what ISO, i don't know. Do i believe that? Based on what i have seen i would say yes.

Second: That lens you are using is a kit lens, sir. What do you expect that is going to do on a 24MP sensor?? That lens is for people that only want an "all in one" lens, a "convinient" lens, NOT high performance.

If you want sharp detailed photos you are going to have to get a Sigma 17-50. Trust me, i know what i am telling you. What ever else you do i think is a waste of time. I am telling you this based on experience

There is nothing else to be said here from me. Good bye, good luck, and enjoy your camera

Thank you. I tried a Sigma 17-50 a while back but wasn't particularly impressed. I own a Tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon set up - still not greatly impressed. The 18-135 "kit lens" as you call it produces sharp images on my K-3. I'm aware that it's not the greatest lens made but the focal range is hard to beat and the utter convenience makes it hard to take off the camera.

While my credibility with the issues I've been having may be poor, I'm not a complete novice. I've tried many lens/camera combinations over the years and know the difference between good, bad and indifferent lenses. But the standard of this particular lens has little, if anything, to do with my issues here. In fact, it's perfectly capable of producing extremely pleasing and sharp images on the K-3.

Some shots from the "kit lens 18-135" - look at them at 100% to see the true res (of these resized versions - the originals are pin sharp):-

Nice photos, they are not bad, but at 135mm the horse could be sharper with more detail. My 6MP S5 can give me sharper images of that horse. The baby is not that sharp either. I have used the nikon 18-200 also, very good lens indeed, but it is a "convinience" lens like i said.

When you said I "had" the Sigma a while back, does this mean you sold it before getting the K3? It is possible you had a bad copy. That's not uncommon.

I am going to tell you a secret: I thought my nikon 17-55 2.8 was sharp. This pass weekend my dad lend me his sigma 17-50 and i tried on my S5 PRO. I said to myself "there won't be a difference". I am embarrassed to say that his sigma IS sharper and my photos did come out sharper. My nikon is now for sale

Like i said, your photos don't look bad, but the day i buy this camera, or any other 24MP body i will put the sigma on it. Otherwise to me it would be pointless to buy such cameras.

Is like putting 87 octane gas in a ferrari  

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +6 more
emem
OP emem Veteran Member • Posts: 4,216
Re: EMEM...

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

...Wait a minute! Am i understanding this correctly? Please correct me if i am wrong, but is Qwntm suggesting to you to turn NR OFF, and you are saying that no you don't want to, or you haven't turned NR to OFF and you preffer to set NR to AUTO???

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

First: I don't have the camera, so no way to do my own tests. There are explanations and people in youtube videos have confirmed that NR AUTO is very very "aggressive". Up to what ISO, i don't know. Do i believe that? Based on what i have seen i would say yes.

Second: That lens you are using is a kit lens, sir. What do you expect that is going to do on a 24MP sensor?? That lens is for people that only want an "all in one" lens, a "convinient" lens, NOT high performance.

If you want sharp detailed photos you are going to have to get a Sigma 17-50. Trust me, i know what i am telling you. What ever else you do i think is a waste of time. I am telling you this based on experience

There is nothing else to be said here from me. Good bye, good luck, and enjoy your camera

Thank you. I tried a Sigma 17-50 a while back but wasn't particularly impressed. I own a Tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon set up - still not greatly impressed. The 18-135 "kit lens" as you call it produces sharp images on my K-3. I'm aware that it's not the greatest lens made but the focal range is hard to beat and the utter convenience makes it hard to take off the camera.

While my credibility with the issues I've been having may be poor, I'm not a complete novice. I've tried many lens/camera combinations over the years and know the difference between good, bad and indifferent lenses. But the standard of this particular lens has little, if anything, to do with my issues here. In fact, it's perfectly capable of producing extremely pleasing and sharp images on the K-3.

Some shots from the "kit lens 18-135" - look at them at 100% to see the true res (of these resized versions - the originals are pin sharp):-

Nice photos, they are not bad, but at 135mm the horse could be sharper with more detail. My 6MP S5 can give me sharper images of that horse. The baby is not that sharp either. I have used the nikon 18-200 also, very good lens indeed, but it is a "convinience" lens like i said.

The original image of the horse was so sharp I could clearly see the flies on its face (wings legs heads quite distinct) before I cloned them out. You're always welcome to your own opinion, but I am also entitled to not believe you - unless you want to put up some proof.

When you said I "had" the Sigma a while back, does this mean you sold it before getting the K3? It is possible you had a bad copy. That's not uncommon.

I didn't say "I had", I said "I tried" a Sigma lens.

I am going to tell you a secret: I thought my nikon 17-55 2.8 was sharp. This pass weekend my dad lend me his sigma 17-50 and i tried on my S5 PRO. I said to myself "there won't be a difference". I am embarrassed to say that his sigma IS sharper and my photos did come out sharper. My nikon is now for sale

The copy you have may be particularly good - "sample variation" as they say. All mass produced items fall within a range in their specs and performance. If you're lucky enough to get one at the top of the spec sheet you're lucky indeed. But it doesn't always follow that if I bought a similar lens it would be as stellar.

Like i said, your photos don't look bad, but the day i buy this camera, or any other 24MP body i will put the sigma on it. Otherwise to me it would be pointless to buy such cameras.

Is like putting 87 octane gas in a ferrari  

-- hide signature --

Mike McEnaney. (emem)
www.veritasmea.com

 emem's gear list:emem's gear list
Pentax *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Nikon D300S Pentax K-5 IIs +12 more
mistermejia Veteran Member • Posts: 3,340
Re: EMEM...

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

mistermejia wrote:

emem wrote:

Qwntm wrote:

...Wait a minute! Am i understanding this correctly? Please correct me if i am wrong, but is Qwntm suggesting to you to turn NR OFF, and you are saying that no you don't want to, or you haven't turned NR to OFF and you preffer to set NR to AUTO???

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

First: I don't have the camera, so no way to do my own tests. There are explanations and people in youtube videos have confirmed that NR AUTO is very very "aggressive". Up to what ISO, i don't know. Do i believe that? Based on what i have seen i would say yes.

Second: That lens you are using is a kit lens, sir. What do you expect that is going to do on a 24MP sensor?? That lens is for people that only want an "all in one" lens, a "convinient" lens, NOT high performance.

If you want sharp detailed photos you are going to have to get a Sigma 17-50. Trust me, i know what i am telling you. What ever else you do i think is a waste of time. I am telling you this based on experience

There is nothing else to be said here from me. Good bye, good luck, and enjoy your camera

Thank you. I tried a Sigma 17-50 a while back but wasn't particularly impressed. I own a Tamron 17-50 2.8 for my Nikon set up - still not greatly impressed. The 18-135 "kit lens" as you call it produces sharp images on my K-3. I'm aware that it's not the greatest lens made but the focal range is hard to beat and the utter convenience makes it hard to take off the camera.

While my credibility with the issues I've been having may be poor, I'm not a complete novice. I've tried many lens/camera combinations over the years and know the difference between good, bad and indifferent lenses. But the standard of this particular lens has little, if anything, to do with my issues here. In fact, it's perfectly capable of producing extremely pleasing and sharp images on the K-3.

Some shots from the "kit lens 18-135" - look at them at 100% to see the true res (of these resized versions - the originals are pin sharp):-

Nice photos, they are not bad, but at 135mm the horse could be sharper with more detail. My 6MP S5 can give me sharper images of that horse. The baby is not that sharp either. I have used the nikon 18-200 also, very good lens indeed, but it is a "convinience" lens like i said.

The original image of the horse was so sharp I could clearly see the flies on its face (wings legs heads quite distinct) before I cloned them out. You're always welcome to your own opinion, but I am also entitled to not believe you - unless you want to put up some proof.

When you said I "had" the Sigma a while back, does this mean you sold it before getting the K3? It is possible you had a bad copy. That's not uncommon.

I didn't say "I had", I said "I tried" a Sigma lens.

I am going to tell you a secret: I thought my nikon 17-55 2.8 was sharp. This pass weekend my dad lend me his sigma 17-50 and i tried on my S5 PRO. I said to myself "there won't be a difference". I am embarrassed to say that his sigma IS sharper and my photos did come out sharper. My nikon is now for sale

The copy you have may be particularly good - "sample variation" as they say. All mass produced items fall within a range in their specs and performance. If you're lucky enough to get one at the top of the spec sheet you're lucky indeed. But it doesn't always follow that if I bought a similar lens it would be as stellar.

Like i said, your photos don't look bad, but the day i buy this camera, or any other 24MP body i will put the sigma on it. Otherwise to me it would be pointless to buy such cameras.

Is like putting 87 octane gas in a ferrari

I see.  I am not trying to insult you or anything, just encouraging you to put the best possible glass on it.  I do believe you about the sharpness of your photos.  Is all good.

Take care and keep enjoying your camera

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) MACRO Fujifilm XF 35mm F1.4 R +6 more
Qwntm Veteran Member • Posts: 6,165
Re: EMEM...

emem wrote:

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

Hey Mike,
So you took one shot with Auto ISO reduction on and that proves I'm wrong? LOL.
I have MANY shots with Auto ISO on that are sharp. It's the random soft ones that turning it off eliminates.
Also AFA is a problem you should use AF-s, but maybe you missed that post/video.
And finally, maybe you did get a bad camera with wonky sr. Why are you banging your head against the wall, and claiming I don't know a thing about photography... cuase that's what your trying to say...
A "furphy?" I'm not sure you understand the high iso noise reduction issue well enough to even replicate the test and the logic behind why I am 100% certain the "AUTO" setting is a bad deal. The logic is irrefutable.
But 1 more time:
A.)High ISO NOISE reduction set to HIGH blurs the crap out of your images at 100%
B.)While set to "AUTO," the HIGH selection is an option.
C.)HIGH ISO NR set to AUTO can choose HIGH.
THEREFORE: High iso NR set to AUTO can blur the crap out of your photos without you knowing it.
I never said this was your specific problem. But why are you saying that NO ONE ELSE CAN HAVE THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE I'm stupid?

-- hide signature --

Edward
www.youtube.com/photouniverse
www.edwardthomasart.com
www.pbase.com/edwardthomas

 Qwntm's gear list:Qwntm's gear list
Fujifilm X100S Pentax K-5 IIs Olympus E-M5 II Olympus M.Zuiko Digital ED 9-18mm F4.0-5.6 Tamron SP AF 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) +8 more
jackdan Contributing Member • Posts: 896
Re: EMEM...

Qwntm wrote:

emem wrote:

No, you are obviously not understanding correctly. I am saying that I DO NOT THINK THAT NR IS CAUSING OR HAS CONTRIBUTED IN ANY MEANINGFUL WAY TO MY PROBLEM. However at the moment it is just a thought. The image I took here had NR set to Auto - something Qwntm has said is causing blurred images. I did it intentionally to show it has no effect on the image.

LOTS of people have suggested to you already to turn NR to OFF. emem, have you even tried shooting your K3 with NR OFF at all??

Of course I have - I might be stupid but I'm not an idiot!!

From what i understand, NR set to auto DOES degrade your photo's sharpness and detail dramatically. What exactly is going on here sir?

And how did you come by this understanding? Is it from your own tests and trials or have you been reading what Qwntm wrote?

Also may i ask what lenses or lens, you have been using with all these samples you have posted?

I have been using the DA18-135 and DA*60-250.

Now can I ask you a question? Have you read the opening post of mine? It explains quite clearly what my issue was. Nothing, nil, nada, zilch to do with NR settings. I still have much testing and measuring to do, but I'm confident I now have the solution to MY problem (and I suspect a few others had similar problems). I believe the NR "solution" so widely publicised by Ed (Qwntm) is, in fact, a furphy. My problems, I'm almost certain, stem from clipping highlights because of my Custom Image settings, focusing issues, possibly connected to shooting in shade/low light, and excessive noise as a by-product of the other issues.

Hey Mike,
So you took one shot with Auto ISO reduction on and that proves I'm wrong? LOL.
I have MANY shots with Auto ISO on that are sharp. It's the random soft ones that turning it off eliminates.

You previously said,

"I have observed that in flat light conditions, the AUTO setting will employ VERY HIGH ISO noise reduction even at ISO's as low as 400, resulting in completely blurry images when viewed at 100%. Yet the same scene photographed in more contrasty light will receive little High ISO noise reduction applied by the AUTO setting."

Are you now saying the AUTO setting randomly employs very high ISO noise reduction and not just in flat light conditions? Also, are you now saying the the resulting images are only soft and not completely blurry?

Also AFA is a problem you should use AF-s, but maybe you missed that post/video.
And finally, maybe you did get a bad camera with wonky sr. Why are you banging your head against the wall, and claiming I don't know a thing about photography... cuase that's what your trying to say...
A "furphy?" I'm not sure you understand the high iso noise reduction issue well enough to even replicate the test and the logic behind why I am 100% certain the "AUTO" setting is a bad deal. The logic is irrefutable.
But 1 more time:
A.)High ISO NOISE reduction set to HIGH blurs the crap out of your images at 100%
B.)While set to "AUTO," the HIGH selection is an option.
C.)HIGH ISO NR set to AUTO can choose HIGH.
THEREFORE: High iso NR set to AUTO can blur the crap out of your photos without you knowing it.
I never said this was your specific problem. But why are you saying that NO ONE ELSE CAN HAVE THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE I'm stupid?

-- hide signature --

Edward
www.youtube.com/photouniverse
www.edwardthomasart.com
www.pbase.com/edwardthomas

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads