Re: d7100 samples...
No not jpeg, but the raw previews utilize the jpeg engine. I'm pretty sure the k-7 has a stronger correction regardless of the setting. I will try strong and see what happens. Its not a big deal. I can fix WB easily enough in post, but I did like the nice WB the k-7 gave in a variety of situations. It focused better in tungsten too.. On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Charles Robinson wrote: > On Feb 24, 2013, at 10:36 , Zos Xavius wrote: >> the k-7 seemed to nail tungsten WB better too. >> anyone else ever notice that? the k-5 gets pretty warm and hot fast. >> > > Are you shooting JPEG? Custom setting 12 "AWB in Tungsten Light" has the > option of "subtle" or "strong" correction (default is "subtle"), that might > get you in the right direction. > > -Charles > > -- > Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com > Minneapolis, MN > http://charles.robinsontwins.org > http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
On Feb 24, 2013, at 10:36 , Zos Xavius wrote: > the k-7 seemed to nail tungsten WB better too. > anyone else ever notice that? the k-5 gets pretty warm and hot fast. > Are you shooting JPEG? Custom setting 12 "AWB in Tungsten Light" has the option of "subtle" or "strong" correction (default is "subtle"), that might get you in the right direction. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
> From: Boris Liberman > > Oh, absolutely. I couldn't possibly have dreamed that I would be driving > a 125 BHP car every day like 10 years ago... > > And indeed, I have K-5 and every now and then its high ISO capabilities > come in handy. No argument here. > > My point is different. It is that to say that Nikon D7100 is worse than > Pentax K-5 because one does ISO 6400 or ISO 25600 and another does ISO > 51200 is splitting hairs IMHO. It is because unless you have very > specific special type of shooting that requires such a capability, this > difference is rather theoretical. The difference in dynamic range and > color fidelity between K-7 and K-5 is real, even under relatively bright > light. And such a difference can have visible impact on the pictures. > Shooting very close to highest ISO (and having just 1 EV of difference > between cameras) is, well, how to put it (as I most certainly don't mean > to offend Darren or anybody else for that matter) - mostly marketing hype. > > I expect a lot of argument going to happen (unlikely here, but very > likely on other forums that I happen to visit or participate in) as to > whether Pentax really needs this 24 MP sensor and whether the increase > of pixel count is necessary. Further, some would advocate as if their > life would depend on that, that then extra 8 MP is a life saving > circumstance... IMHO - this sensor has 12 MP too many. > > In fact, I much rather Pentax improved their imaging engine (e.g. the > processing and rendering of rightmost part of the histogram or color > fidelity) rather than invest in MP race... > > So, indeed, one would have uses for things such as extra high ISOs or > extra high pixel count. But would these extra high parameters be a deal > breaker? Possibly but very improbably... > You know how it is here for the most part. If Pentax has it, and another manufacturer does not, then Pentax is the best in the world. If another manufacturer has it, and Pentax does not, then why does one need it? As you say Boris, it's all about the end use. One doesn't need the higher ISO capability until one is in a position where their images lack because of not having it. One doesn't need the higher resolution sensor until one wishes to present their images at a larger size, and then finds out it would have been nice to have. Or they could have used the extra resolution when cropping. For the most part, the user of any given system, doesn't truly realize the potential of a new system (be it same brand or otherwise) until they actually use it. When we had 6MP we shot with those, then it was 10, 14, 16... given the ability to obtain one, who would deliberately choose a 6 over 16. I agree, that claiming a camera is better or worse than another based on the highest ISO spec (or merely MP) is pushing it a bit. Those numbers are the extreme limit, and shooting at those ISO's while possibly yielding a 'usable' image, may not yield a 'great' image noise-wise. As regards the 'MP race', Pentax must at least give the appearance of keeping up or become irrelevant. Customer: What about this camera? Camera salesman: That one only has 16MP. That's 8 MP less than a 24MP camera. The more MP the more detail you can capture. Several years ago the top of the line digital cameras a normal person could afford only had 8MP, 16MP is twice that. 24MP is 3 times that. All the other manufacturers are producing cameras with more than 16MP. What will the customer do? Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
Oh, absolutely. I couldn't possibly have dreamed that I would be driving a 125 BHP car every day like 10 years ago... And indeed, I have K-5 and every now and then its high ISO capabilities come in handy. No argument here. My point is different. It is that to say that Nikon D7100 is worse than Pentax K-5 because one does ISO 6400 or ISO 25600 and another does ISO 51200 is splitting hairs IMHO. It is because unless you have very specific special type of shooting that requires such a capability, this difference is rather theoretical. The difference in dynamic range and color fidelity between K-7 and K-5 is real, even under relatively bright light. And such a difference can have visible impact on the pictures. Shooting very close to highest ISO (and having just 1 EV of difference between cameras) is, well, how to put it (as I most certainly don't mean to offend Darren or anybody else for that matter) - mostly marketing hype. I expect a lot of argument going to happen (unlikely here, but very likely on other forums that I happen to visit or participate in) as to whether Pentax really needs this 24 MP sensor and whether the increase of pixel count is necessary. Further, some would advocate as if their life would depend on that, that then extra 8 MP is a life saving circumstance... IMHO - this sensor has 12 MP too many. In fact, I much rather Pentax improved their imaging engine (e.g. the processing and rendering of rightmost part of the histogram or color fidelity) rather than invest in MP race... So, indeed, one would have uses for things such as extra high ISOs or extra high pixel count. But would these extra high parameters be a deal breaker? Possibly but very improbably... On 2/24/2013 7:37 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: On 24 February 2013 16:26, Boris Liberman wrote: My most recent experience with late evening shooting with my meager Ricoh (that tops off at ISO 3200, while I shoot at most at ISO 1600) that this discussion of who has the longer... erm, sorry, the bigger top ISO is of utter irrelevance to real life photography. Yes and no Boris, generally the more sensitive the camera the more usable it is at higher ISO. I'm sure that you wouldn't dreamed of shooting regularly at ISO1600 with sensors of two generations ago? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
I used my k-7 regularly at 800, but there was a noticeable loss of quality. I have more than a few that I shot at 1600 that turned out ok, but I don't know if I would try to print them poster sized. For people shots and coverage, 1600 was fine for just web and 8x10s especially. With the k-5, iso 1600 looks amazingly good. Better than iso 800 on the k-7. 3200 has some grain, but in a pleasing way imo and black and white conversions look good...especially with silver efex. I was reluctant to use 6400, but when I started trying some portraits with it more with black and white intent I was surprised. It looks really darn good. I wanted a k-5 for a long time. I bought a used k-7 and took enough pictures to make some cash and I bought a k-5. I'm pretty amazed at that sensor and what it can produce. I use a 5dmk2 for some stuff at work, and the shadow noise is really awful in comparison. The greater DR helps a lot too. You really have to blow the sky pretty hard to make it unrecoverable in raw. Best part is you can just totally expose for the sky and push your shadows 2 or 3 stops pretty easily without hardly any noise near base iso. On the flip side I preferred the k-7's contrasty bite the files it produced had. it was almost film-like in tonality to me. I liked the vibrant colors I got off that sensor too, where the k-5 seems a tad bit more muted, or maybe its just me. the k-7 seemed to nail tungsten WB better too. anyone else ever notice that? the k-5 gets pretty warm and hot fast. On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Bill wrote: > On 23/02/2013 11:43 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >> >> Im still using a *istDS and it sucks at anything over ISO800. >> I rarely take it off ISO200 for that reason. >> > I still have a hard time with that. Up until the K5, I haven't wanted to > take a Pentax DSLR over ISO 640. I keep having to remind myself that I can > spin the ISO to 3200 with no worries, and higher still if I am needing to > and get good results. > If you need higher ISOs a K5 might be a good investment for you. > bill > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
On 23/02/2013 11:43 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: Im still using a *istDS and it sucks at anything over ISO800. I rarely take it off ISO200 for that reason. I still have a hard time with that. Up until the K5, I haven't wanted to take a Pentax DSLR over ISO 640. I keep having to remind myself that I can spin the ISO to 3200 with no worries, and higher still if I am needing to and get good results. If you need higher ISOs a K5 might be a good investment for you. bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: d7100 samples...
Im still using a *istDS and it sucks at anything over ISO800. I rarely take it off ISO200 for that reason. - J.C.O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Rob Studdert Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 12:37 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: d7100 samples... On 24 February 2013 16:26, Boris Liberman wrote: > My most recent experience with late evening shooting with my meager Ricoh > (that tops off at ISO 3200, while I shoot at most at ISO 1600) that this > discussion of who has the longer... erm, sorry, the bigger top ISO is of > utter irrelevance to real life photography. Yes and no Boris, generally the more sensitive the camera the more usable it is at higher ISO. I'm sure that you wouldn't dreamed of shooting regularly at ISO1600 with sensors of two generations ago? -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
On 24 February 2013 16:26, Boris Liberman wrote: > My most recent experience with late evening shooting with my meager Ricoh > (that tops off at ISO 3200, while I shoot at most at ISO 1600) that this > discussion of who has the longer... erm, sorry, the bigger top ISO is of > utter irrelevance to real life photography. Yes and no Boris, generally the more sensitive the camera the more usable it is at higher ISO. I'm sure that you wouldn't dreamed of shooting regularly at ISO1600 with sensors of two generations ago? -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
On 2/22/2013 5:23 PM, Darren Addy wrote: The spec that I was surprised by is that the ISO only goes to 6400. I'm spoiled, I guess. : ) Well, according to this (http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d7100/2) page, D7100's ISO goes all the way up to 25,600 (HI2). There is still a 1Ev difference between K-5's 51,200. Although at LO1 it does ISO 50 while K-5 mins out at ISO 80... My most recent experience with late evening shooting with my meager Ricoh (that tops off at ISO 3200, while I shoot at most at ISO 1600) that this discussion of who has the longer... erm, sorry, the bigger top ISO is of utter irrelevance to real life photography. What really spoils is that little lens that is attached to my Ricoh 50 mm module and the degree of matching between the lensor image processing engine and the lens. I couldn't get images as good as it comes up with from my Pentax gear. And mind you, I am not doing anything special - merely composing, pointing, steadying myself and releasing the shutter... Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
Despite my general feelings about AA filters, that sample image is very nice indeed. I don't think I've ever gone above ISO 12800 on my K-5, and I try very hard not to go above 6400, so I don't think this is a meaningful limitation. I wonder what the Canon 7D's successor will look like. I read a recent quote from a Canon rep that seemed to question the future of crop sensor DSLRs. I thought that was funny/interesting, as (in my completely unobjective opinion) Canon's crop sensor cameras haven't been terribly competitive for quite a while now. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Darren Addy wrote: > The spec that I was surprised by is that the ISO only goes to 6400. > I'm spoiled, I guess. > : ) The D7100 ISO ranges (base and extended) are the same as the D7000 (=K-5 sensor), so I would expect Nikon is just a little more conservative than Pentax in terms of which ISO settings they consider acceptable. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
The spec that I was surprised by is that the ISO only goes to 6400. I'm spoiled, I guess. : ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Charles Robinson wrote: > On Feb 21, 2013, at 23:52 , Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > >> Quite impressive. It does take a loong time to load. >> Dan Matyola >> http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola >> > > 4 seconds is long? Took almost a minute on my ,machine, but very impressive Dave > > -Charles > > -- > Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com > Minneapolis, MN > http://charles.robinsontwins.org > http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
On Feb 21, 2013, at 23:52 , Daniel J. Matyola wrote: > Quite impressive. It does take a loong time to load. > Dan Matyola > http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola > 4 seconds is long? -Charles -- Charles Robinson - charl...@visi.com Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: d7100 samples...
Quite impressive. It does take a loong time to load. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Zos Xavius wrote: > http://4.static.img-dpreview.com/files/news/0834148370/img_06_l.jpeg?v=1955 > > Impressive actually. It looks like 24mp is no problem on APS-C with > diffraction, even with F8 and I'm sure F11-13 looking pretty good. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
