While sky is where I'll most often see noise, even at relatively high
ISO (my K20 was horrible for that), when I took a look at it under
magnification, that was pixelation noise rather than sensor noise.
I was worried about noise going from the K-5 to the K-3, and while noise
per pixel may be higher, noise per area is at least as good, if not
better. It is only in the most adverse of conditions that even my K-1
shows significant noise advantage over my K-3s.
Granted, I seem to spend most of my time shooting in the most adverse of
lighting conditions, so for me the K-1 is well worth it.
I suspect that some of the newest aps bodies will outperform the K-3 in
raw sensor performance, they may even approach the K-1, being a couple
of years newer. That being said, a used K-3 is likely your best
performance for the dollar in the K-mount world.
jtainter wrote on 6/5/19 1:34 PM:
I am looking at a K-3 image over at dpreview. Here's the image:
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/62749887
Go down to my comment on it. If you enlarge the image (click on it after
opening it) the sky and clouds strike me as very noisy for ISO 100. Some of
that is oversharpening, but even the unsharpened image seems noisy to me.
This level of noise surprises me for ISO 100. Is this characteristic of the K-3
sensor?
I stayed away from the K-3 because I was concerned about high ISO noise. But
ISO 100??
Thanks,
Joe
--
Larry Colen [email protected] http://red4est.com/lrc
https://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157612824732477/
--
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.
