See also: http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/115-pentax-k-5/118892-how-iso-3200-works-your-k-5-technical-2.html
Especially falconeye's comments. On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Zos Xavius <[email protected]> wrote: > Boris, > > http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K5/K5RAW.HTM > > "Here, we can see the Pentax K-5 clearly produces the cleanest looking > RAW files, though it appears to be applying some noise reduction at > higher ISOs (above ISO 1,600), which cannot be turned off. The noise > reduction applied is pretty subtle, though, nothing like the > heavy-handed approach used in earlier Sony SLRs. Still, it's something > we'd rather not see in RAW files, as it does impact fine detail." > > This is noted by many other people as well. The noise reduction > settings are for JPEG only by the way. The only affect how much NR is > applied to a jpeg if your are converting raw or shooting in JPEG. > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 2:00 AM, Boris Liberman <[email protected]> wrote: >> Zos, two points that still keep me wondering: >> >> 1. I couldn't find any mention of RAW noise reduction in Imaging >> resource review after this link: >> http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K5/K5A.HTM >> >> 2. I see what the person on DPReview wrote, but I think there is a >> confusion and (as explained in imaging resource review) the noise >> reduction can be configured per ISO. I don't remember exactly, but it >> stands to reason that ISO 3200 is where it is set to kick in by >> default. >> >> Specifically, once I learned about this setting, I went and configured >> both of my cameras to apply no noise reduction until ISO 12800 or so. >> >> So, I'm yet unconvinced that K5 applies noise reduction at ISO 3200 >> just because. >> >> On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 7:24 PM, Zos Xavius <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Sorry for the delayed reply Boris. >>> >>> http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/36834206 >>> >>> Also read the Imaging Resource and dxomarks reviews of the K-5. Pretty >>> much all the reviews noticed the RAW NR above 1600. Given the K-5's >>> output at 3200, Pentax made a good choice IMO. Their hardware NR is >>> pretty decent, very clean looking, and still retains a lot of detail, >>> especially after the raws are processed gently in lightroom. I never >>> once objected to the engineers' decisions on the K-5 when it came to >>> the sensor. Pentax seems to be very good at massaging maximum >>> performance out of a sensor. The K-3 IMO looks very good too. A 50% >>> increase in density with similar noise and DR over the previous >>> generation is very good IMO. The next round of chips will likely be >>> even better. What's not to like? The K-5 I have is very good in IQ. >>> I'll keep shooting it till it doesn't take pictures anymore. >>> >>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 7:46 AM, Boris Liberman <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> The source of information that indicates that K-5 applies smoothing to >>>> RAW files even if I specifically set its settings not to do so. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Zos Xavius <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> The source for K-5 raw smoothing? The source for resized K3 files? >>>>> What source do you speak of Mr Boris? :P >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Boris Liberman <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> On 11/26/2013 6:38 AM, Zos Xavius wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Also I must add that the k-5 does some definite noise reduction to the >>>>>>> raw files over iso 1600, whether that's in the imaging pipeline or the >>>>>>> firmware is neither hear nor there at this point. At 3200 on the k-5 >>>>>>> you are most certainly trading resolution for image quality. I don't >>>>>>> have any real figures, but I feel that looking at the files from my >>>>>>> k-5, its easily giving up quite a bit of resolution due to noise >>>>>>> smoothing. From what I can gather the K-3 is resolving more fine >>>>>>> detail but yet showing similar amounts of noise when resized to k-5 >>>>>>> resolution. That's what I have seen with my own eyes at least. To be >>>>>>> honest they are pretty close and careful raw processing will result >>>>>>> with more detail in the k-3 files with similar noise levels. I find >>>>>>> pentax's jpeg engine to be not the greatest at noise reduction, but >>>>>>> honestly, its better than some other camera makers too. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Zos, can you please point me to the source of that information? I'm >>>>>> extremely interested to *know*. >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Boris >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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. >> >> >> >> -- >> Boris >> >> -- >> 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.
