Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 32

Thread: Dpreview's review Up..

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Singapore, Punggol
    Posts
    282
    K-1 PENCAKE LIMITED: DA15;; DA 35 Macro; DA70; FA31; F50 f1.7

  2. #2

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    pretty positive, from what i see

  3. #3
    Senior Member creampuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Dover
    Posts
    5,116

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    A pretty fair and balanced report.
    Surprised the K20D has a little more dynamic range.
    Still going thru the thick K-7 manual...

  4. #4

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    that the review turned out well. Hope ppl buy Pentax after reading the review

    IMO, negligible differences compared to the K20 though. I'm surprised that K20D looks a tad bit sharper. In fact compared to the D300 and 50D, differences were largely negligible as well.

    I still don't get it with DP Review. Its obvious to me that Pentax has got it right with low noise reduction at high ISOs. The competition offer nothing more than a smudge of colors at high ISOs. This should not be a con, but rather a footnote on the Pentax approach to NR.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    I was shocked that Pentax raw and noise control looks terrible in DPReview. I have never looked at Pentax review all these while but with the release of K-x caught my interest.

    I may have to reconsider again.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,984

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Quote Originally Posted by spheredome View Post
    I was shocked that Pentax raw and noise control looks terrible in DPReview. I have never looked at Pentax review all these while but with the release of K-x caught my interest.

    I may have to reconsider again.
    This noise issue is a two sided thing that people always bring up in reviews of Pentax DSLRs. To put it simply, the Pentax NR algorithm tries to retain as much details as possible in the image, but this inevitably lead to less noise being removed. If you look carefully at the pictures, you should be able to tell that the Pentax pics look noisier, but the other brands' pics have the fine structures all smudged out. Which evil you prefer, it's up to you.... Or you could just shoot in raw and not have to worry about any of this since in raw all the cameras are more or less on par.

    I'm more surprised that the K20D seem to have better IQ overall in this review compared to the K7, any comments from the K7 users so far?

  7. #7

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Quote Originally Posted by Gengh View Post
    This noise issue is a two sided thing that people always bring up in reviews of Pentax DSLRs. To put it simply, the Pentax NR algorithm tries to retain as much details as possible in the image, but this inevitably lead to less noise being removed. If you look carefully at the pictures, you should be able to tell that the Pentax pics look noisier, but the other brands' pics have the fine structures all smudged out. Which evil you prefer, it's up to you.... Or you could just shoot in raw and not have to worry about any of this since in raw all the cameras are more or less on par.

    I'm more surprised that the K20D seem to have better IQ overall in this review compared to the K7, any comments from the K7 users so far?
    have to ask the person that take the pictures for the review.
    You wont see me much less remember me but i am the guy who makes you look good.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    As to their claim of narrow DR, it's misleading as the values did not factor in "highlight correction" when comparing DR with the competition. By skimming through the DR comparisons, it would seem the K7 is gimped.

    It did feature the dynamic range increase with highlight correction turned on in a separate table "Expanded Dynamic Range Function", but they still compared DR using default "off" setting.

    if highlight correction is turned on it'll have much better range in the highlights, just pay attention to the values (i'm not aware of the competitions relevant DR enhancements tho). Also shadow correction was not tested, which should further extend overall DR.

    From what I gather in DPR's discussion forums, higher noise in RAW seemed more like Pentax has taken an even further hands-off approach to NR, definitely not a popular decision with anyone obsessed over noise control and pic cleanliness.

    As for me I'm still rooting for this philosophy, unless I'm wrong and more noise is actually inferior sensor optimization due to a newly redesigned sensor on the K7
    Last edited by elavan; 3rd October 2009 at 01:43 PM.
    D3|Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8|Samyang 14mm f2.8|K-7|Tamron17-50 f2.8|manfrotto190XproB
    Gallery

  9. #9

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Quote Originally Posted by spheredome View Post
    I was shocked that Pentax raw and noise control looks terrible in DPReview. I have never looked at Pentax review all these while but with the release of K-x caught my interest.

    I may have to reconsider again.
    As I've already mentioned in my previous post and as all 'good pentaxians' will know.
    Pentax opts for lower NR to preserve details. Look at the pictures yourself. Do you want less noise but loss in details as the pictures become a smudge? With Pentax's approach, you can always do NR to your liking during PP (even my free Paint.Net has the function). For the latter, well... you just can't recover the lost details.

    Don't forget that you are not viewing your picts at 100% crops either.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Quote Originally Posted by elavan View Post
    As to their claim of narrow DR, it's misleading as the values did not factor in "highlight correction" when comparing DR with the competition. By skimming through the DR comparisons, it would seem the K7 is gimped.

    It did feature the dynamic range increase with highlight correction turned on in a separate table "Expanded Dynamic Range Function", but they still compared DR using default "off" setting.
    i am not sure if the expand dr function actually adds dr

    or just corrects the picture to look like dr has been added, which you can do with shadow/highlight recovery in photoshop.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    I understand what you mean, just that was suprise to see such situation arise in jpeg from a bayer's dslr. I only see this in Sigma camera.

    From the dpreview gallery I would give it at iso800 max (no more).

    http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/pe...s/imgp0483.jpg
    http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/pe...s/imgp1049.jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by Gengh View Post
    This noise issue is a two sided thing that people always bring up in reviews of Pentax DSLRs. To put it simply, the Pentax NR algorithm tries to retain as much details as possible in the image, but this inevitably lead to less noise being removed. If you look carefully at the pictures, you should be able to tell that the Pentax pics look noisier, but the other brands' pics have the fine structures all smudged out. Which evil you prefer, it's up to you.... Or you could just shoot in raw and not have to worry about any of this since in raw all the cameras are more or less on par.

    I'm more surprised that the K20D seem to have better IQ overall in this review compared to the K7, any comments from the K7 users so far?
    Quote Originally Posted by pinholecam View Post
    As I've already mentioned in my previous post and as all 'good pentaxians' will know.
    Pentax opts for lower NR to preserve details. Look at the pictures yourself. Do you want less noise but loss in details as the pictures become a smudge? With Pentax's approach, you can always do NR to your liking during PP (even my free Paint.Net has the function). For the latter, well... you just can't recover the lost details.

    Don't forget that you are not viewing your picts at 100% crops either.

  12. #12

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    the 2 pictures give me the impression that the underexposure is a major reason for the noise above anything else
    D3|Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8|Samyang 14mm f2.8|K-7|Tamron17-50 f2.8|manfrotto190XproB
    Gallery

  13. #13

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Quote Originally Posted by elavan View Post
    the 2 pictures give me the impression that the underexposure is a major reason for the noise above anything else
    the pictures are not exactly "underexposed" per se..

    it is just that there are dark areas. and noise appears usually only in the shadow areas of a picture. if the lighting is even, and everything is well exposed, noise will be minimal, naturally. at least for modern day cameras

  14. #14

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    I think DPreviews gallery is rather consistent. Here is dcresource.

    http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/pe...review/gallery

  15. #15

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Yeah. In the dpreview shots, must say, there's no extra detail preserved either, since it's. um. featureless.

    But I don't think that the noise ruins the shots either, although that might just because i'm trained

    Ultimately, the K20/K-7 are not great high ISO cameras - but I don't think any of the crop sensor cameras are..

    Of course I'm assuming you're shooting RAW.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Quote Originally Posted by spheredome View Post
    I understand what you mean, just that was suprise to see such situation arise in jpeg from a bayer's dslr. I only see this in Sigma camera.

    From the dpreview gallery I would give it at iso800 max (no more).

    http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/pe...s/imgp0483.jpg
    http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/pe...s/imgp1049.jpg
    By my low standards, ISO1600 is certainly usable. Taken at a recent Getai. I had no fast Tele lens. The DA 55-300 was at f5.8 on the long end. I had to fall back on the K7's ISO1600 or go home empty handed.

    ISO1600 -No NR-No PP
    ----------------------



    ISO1600 -Basic NR using Paint.net-No PP
    ---------------------------------------
    NR adjusted to remove most of the noise from the background canvas.

  17. #17

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Thanks for sharing. Good shot. The 300mm is pretty good.

    You can use NoiseWare Pro, set to Film Grain Effect removal. The final result will be better. Give it a try.

    Quote Originally Posted by pinholecam View Post
    By my low standards, ISO1600 is certainly usable. Taken at a recent Getai. I had no fast Tele lens. The DA 55-300 was at f5.8 on the long end. I had to fall back on the K7's ISO1600 or go home empty handed.

    ISO1600 -No NR-No PP
    ----------------------
    http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2627/3976638941_3afc642f21_o.jpg[/img]


    ISO1600 -Basic NR using Paint.net-No PP
    ---------------------------------------
    NR adjusted to remove most of the noise from the background canvas.
    http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3487/3977402996_192740093d_o.jpg[/img]

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Still wondering where I belong
    Posts
    3,434

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    i only look at dynamic range from dpreview... the rest, i dunno how they judge, maybe my eyes not as good as them...
    Gallery|Baby gallery
    I have become an expert in cleaning poo

  19. #19

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Quote Originally Posted by night86mare View Post
    i am not sure if the expand dr function actually adds dr

    or just corrects the picture to look like dr has been added, which you can do with shadow/highlight recovery in photoshop.
    I believe their DR measurements are also "perceived" in that sense, highlight and shadow correction shouldn't add anything to the sensor, but the perceived effect is "greater dynamic range", the differences were tangible to the eye, can be measured and were recorded on the same graph.

    Quote "With highlight expansion turned on the tone curve is flatter in the highlights and produces an extra stop of highlight range." - something different from others here.

    It would be more logical to think that Pentax has opened up flexibility for shadows/highlights rather than have them hard-coded (then again debatable as there is ADR on another brand etc); as opposed to producing a sensor that seems to be obviously weak against the competition

    It seems like Pentax's offering w/ DPR's review here may cause some confusion/misrepresentation, it gives the bashers a poor excuse to bash Pentax further.

    At the end of the day I don't want my highlights to clip, if highlight correction works, i'm happy (it does btw)
    D3|Tokina 28-70 f2.6-2.8|Samyang 14mm f2.8|K-7|Tamron17-50 f2.8|manfrotto190XproB
    Gallery

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    9,781
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Dpreview's review Up..

    Talk about noise and low DR, I am just waiting for DPR's review of the Sony A850 to be out .........

    Anyway, I feel that the K7 faired very well in these 2 aspects ............. but I still cannot get over the dim VF LED data panel ..... how come nobody addressed this issue in the reviews .....
    Last edited by Zenten; 5th October 2009 at 11:10 AM.
    Nikomi Canpen Zenten :eek:
    Not exactly 100% Natural but definitely the closest you can get to it

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •