For me, the only thing that makes me really, really want the K-3 is the
improved focusing. Sure, I might get marginally better noise levels in
low light with my K-5 -- if I can get the thing to focus.
As it stands, though, I have to keep the K-5 simply because my computer
will buckle trying to process the 24mp files of a K-3.
But, if Ricoh were to put out a 16mp body with the K-3's focusing system
-- well, now. That would be something.
-- Walt
On 11/14/2013 11:20 AM, Zos Xavius wrote:
I finally read the review. IQ looks very, very good. On par with the
K-5 in terms of high ISO. Highlight recovery looks to be about equal.
The K-5 seems to edge out slightly on shadow recovery. Probably not a
big deal in 99% of shooting situations unless you really need to push
your shots 3 stops, in that case its time to learn how to expose. I
would say from what I've seen the DR and marginally more noise is
going to be a non-issue for most folks out there. So what's the fight
over? Are people with K-5s really suddenly inadequate or something?
For me I am going to stick with my K-5. Its perfect for the type of
shooting I do and I need to focus on getting better glass more than
more megapixels. From what I can tell most of my lenses wouldn't be up
to resolving 24mp from a crop anyways.
On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:42 PM, Boris Liberman <[email protected]> wrote:
What is biting my ass, Bill, is my bloody cumbersome English. Let's see if I
can hit the target from the second try.
The measured DR is useless because it is theoretical. The measurements were
taken in controlled environment by people who specialize in doing such
measurements.
In reality the metering is not always spot on, and not because of a camera,
or actually only partly because of a camera, but also because of a human
error. Human being me here.
Further, in my area of interest :-), contrast is usually extreme. Thus even
a minor error is what it is - an error. Now, the more DR I have - the more
tolerance/leeway for correction I am given.
I don't pretend to be extremely accurate or well versed in terms of using my
camera. I usually set it to P-mode, dial in some -0.7Ev correction and go on
shooting. I try to deal with tonality of my pictures in post.
So, I much rather have wider DR than more MP or more focus points, that all.
Like I said - it is subjective.
Oh, and like Larry pointed out - the more DR I have at base ISO, the more DR
am I going to have at higher ISOs...
Does it make sense now? Do I sound pessimistic?
Boris
On 11/13/2013 9:02 PM, Bill wrote:
On 13/11/2013 9:53 AM, Boris Liberman wrote:
Bill, it is purely subjective. I have suffered enough grief from K-7's
sensor and frankly, the way Pentax treats highlights in their RAW
files seems to be rather unforgiving compared with those of Ricoh GXR
(any module with 12MP sensor). So, I don't want to take any chances.
Boris, it isn't subjective at all. This is one of those areas where DXO
is a good resource.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/874%7C0/(brand)/Ricoh/(appareil2)/676%7C0/(brand2)/Pentax/(appareil3)/615%7C0/(brand3)/Pentax
Look at the DR. The K7 is 10.6 EV, the K5 is 14.1EV, the Ricoh GR is
13.5EV. They don't have the K3 tested yet, but I'm thinking it will
probably place very close to the GR, based on what I've see coming off
the camera.
We know that the Samsung sensors used in the K20 and K7 never performed
the way they were supposed to, if they had, it's doubtful that Pentax
would have moved to Sony sensors in subsequent models.
This is one of those times when being a professional pessimist is biting
your ass.
bill
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
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
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
