RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: K-5 Portrait Samples (Indoor @ Photokina) ISO 800

Sunday, September 26, 2010

K-5 Portrait Samples (Indoor @ Photokina) ISO 800 - 51200

At this Album:-

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fs999/sets/72157625032754982/with/5022379133/
(K-5 Firmware 0.3, Lens: DA*50-135/2.8)

Click on any of the downsized pictures below to download the specific original full-size image in a new Tab/Window (I have edited and added the direct links for easy viewing, the Flickr interface is just too clumsy and troublesome to use! >:=[ Warning: Very Large Files!):-

ISO 800
ISO 1600
ISO 3200
ISO 12800
ISO 51200

via Information on Digital Cameras (Japanese)

P.S. The timestamps in photos are not correct as possibly the camera was not properly set up for the clock.

Update: A DNG RAW file at ISO 51200 is available for download Here.

Comments (20)

Logging you in...

Dashboard | Edit profile | Logout

Logged in as

0 Vote up Vote down

frank d · 754 weeks ago

IMPRESSIVE....maybe full frame for high iso is pointless...Fullframe may only be useful for higher resolution...if

5 replies · active less than 1 minute ago

0 Vote up Vote down

RiceHigh 110p · 754 weeks ago

Not exactly. There are two problems observed. First, there are some slight out-focusing for some shots but anyway this should be a SDM problem, as SDM is not accurate in focusing by itself. Second, the shots of 3200 and above actually had too strong noise reduction such that image sharpness is affected and details are loss, thus causing blur, although noise is suppressed.

0 Vote up Vote down

keithj · 754 weeks ago

I think going to full-frame merely to improve noise performance is indeed pretty pointless - you only will get a reduction of slightly more than about 33%, and the weight and cost of lenses goes up by a VERY significant factor (not to mention the extra cost of the sensor).

Full-frame does have a role to play in getting better resolution, however. Here's an interesting link
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/resol...

The last table of results, just before the conclusions, is quite revealing.

0 Vote up Vote down

Chris · 754 weeks ago

I agree with Keith, and even go a step further - IMO the future is APS-C, not full frame. Just like in the film era, we moved from big to small formats, so why should the future in digital be a bigger format? APS-C allows for very good ISO 6400 (K-x, K-r, K-5)? And small size is a positive feature of a camera!

Full frame is an ingenious marketing trick of Canikon to make the world believe somebody needs their bulky lenses (which are bulky because they are unable to do image stabilization in the body). And the lemmings follow…

(geez, do you know ANY electronics product category where people say "the future is a bigger product"?)

Best,
C

0 Vote up Vote down

Michael A. · 754 weeks ago

APS-C certainly appears the real "sweet spot" for most of us. It's nearly impossible to save most LEMMINGS from falling to their (heavy & bulky FF canikon) pit.....Remember playing it on Amiga 500 in 80's :o))

+1 Vote up Vote down

RiceHigh 110p · 754 weeks ago

Frankly, I think my K-x has the best balance / compromise between size / weight / IQ / portability / usability etc. amongst all my cameras and systems. In fact, the IQ of my 5D is still having an edge to the K-x, despite that both has the same pixel count of 12M. One obvious thing is that the macro and micro contrasts are better with the 5D. Whilst the 5D also has slightly lower noise at high ISOs, the image fidelity and details of those 5D images are still better. But however, owing to its size and weight, in particular when matching lenses are to be brought, the portability of the Canon FF system is really poor. Owing to this big inconvenience, I am not using my 5D as frequent as my K-x and NEX.

As for my NEX, whilst its IQ could be slightly higher than the K-x due to a newer sensor, its usability and ease of operation is not as good as the K-x, which is just a traditional DSLR afterall. The NEX works very well as a P&S that truly gives DSLR image quality, as it has a DSLR imager. But still, for more serious shootings, a DSLR is still required.

As for the GF1 and micro-43, now I seldom use it anymore as it is not much smaller than the NEX but the IQ difference is huge, especially at ISO 400 and above.

0 Vote up Vote down

Dick · 754 weeks ago

I first saw these pictures at pentax forum.

+1 Vote up Vote down

drondrive 21p · 754 weeks ago

i can't see any difference between k-5 and d7000, only the noise structure

0 Vote up Vote down

R.E. · 754 weeks ago

ISO 51200 is almost as good as ISO 102400 on the K7 LOL

0 Vote up Vote down

Michael A. · 754 weeks ago

Gentleman, don't forget the sample is still only Firmware 0.3, nuf said...

+2 Vote up Vote down

Anu · 754 weeks ago

These tests are JPG-tests with plenty of in-camera noise reduction. For me this makes them almostuseless. However, there iis one very positive sign in the images and this is lack of "banding" and other such noise. This makes it possible to push (especially B&W) images extremely without ugly artifacts.

-3 Vote up Vote down

OGL · 754 weeks ago

really bad. it's better than K-7. but it's rubbish.

1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago

+2 Vote up Vote down

ArcticExposure 45p · 754 weeks ago

Really? What's better?

+1 Vote up Vote down

Ronny · 754 weeks ago

Results are already good, newer firmware will only make it better.
Where I normally set my K20 's auto iso from 100-1600, I guess I might set it now to 100-6400, or even 1 stop higher.
Really would love to see some dng's in that ISO range and check what LR3.2 makes out of them.

0 Vote up Vote down

Dan · 754 weeks ago

For my standards, the new camera has usable ISO 800. I wouldn't go above. K20 was also "king" of high ISO but I never use it above ISO 400 or even 200.

1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago

+1 Vote up Vote down

david · 754 weeks ago

I don't know how high your standards are as I use 800 iso on my K10. I have to say I am impressed with these samples (would turn noise reduction down, and well not rely on the auto settings)

0 Vote up Vote down

risinsun · 754 weeks ago

Let's wait and see results on series firmware and in Raw without any NR.

0 Vote up Vote down

Pete-s · 754 weeks ago

From a quick glimpse at this one set of pictures, ISO 3200 looked usable.

0 Vote up Vote down

Marin · 754 weeks ago

From what I see, ISO 3200 will be usable almost without any additional noise reduction. 6400 with just some NR, especially in dark scenes. 12800 and above quite usable when you need some of that extra shots not possible with lower ISO values. Few minutes in some NR program, and you get quite good photo!
To all of you saying that those are bad results (WTF?!) I just have to say: stop measurebate ;)
Maybe you'll become more reasonable when you really start to use your cameras...
Cheers!

0 Vote up Vote down

Aspa · 754 weeks ago

With "normal" firmware and RAW files processed in computer it should be some good results. With k20d/k-7 (same sensor) IMHO 1600 ISO is perfect usable and 3200 if emergency (if shooting RAW). If K-5 can give me easy usable 3200 and emergency 6400 or even step more - I'll happy. Once upon a time, when people used film, ISO 800 was the higher speed I was loaded to my camera and I never needed more...
Focus on samples may be an issue, but it might be a firmware or focus adjusting problem.

Post a new comment

Comment as a Guest, or login:

Tweet this comment

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog

Sunday, September 26, 2010

K-5 Portrait Samples (Indoor @ Photokina) ISO 800 - 51200

Forgot password?

Comments (20)

Post a new comment

Reference Links (by Others)

My Technical Articles (Latest First)