Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
And thus ends another tragic period in Ralf's life. ;-) Congrats. 2010/11/7 Ralf R. Radermacher : > > > P.S.: le K-7 est vendu. > > -- > Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany > Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com > Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf > Web : http://www.fotoralf.de > > -- > 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. > -- Steve Desjardins -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On 11/8/2010 2:16 PM, paul stenquist wrote: That would still be somewhat apples to oranges, since they would be different photos. But when I have time, perhaps tonight, I will record the same image with both cameras at high ISO in low light. I'd surely appreciate that, Paul. 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On Nov 8, 2010, at 6:57 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: > On 11/8/2010 1:52 PM, paul stenquist wrote: >> It's good that the K-7 meets your needs. It meets mine as well for >> the most part. But you don't need a 300% enlargement to see the >> advantages on the K-5 in low light. While those are due only in part >> to the dynamic range, they are very real advantages that are easy to >> see even in web sized images. Paul > > Paul, if you can "point your finger" at them by showing a pair of images from > K-7 and K-5 where it will be evident what kind of advantage K-5 has on K-7, > I'd be grateful. > That would still be somewhat apples to oranges, since they would be different photos. But when I have time, perhaps tonight, I will record the same image with both cameras at high ISO in low light. > 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. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On Nov 8, 2010, at 2:03 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Well, the only visible and major difference in spec is DR. May be what I > should do is simply ask Paul and Bob S and others who have K-5 shoot for me a > scene in bright daylight with assortment of shadows and send me the RAW file > (DNG). I then can load it into my LR and play with it to see if this DR > improvement is as valuable as it is said to be. > You won't find a huge improvement in bright light photography over K-7 with the K-5, unless you happen to overexpose or underexpose. Then the advantages become clear, as highlights are more easily recovered and shadows can be brought up without creating much noise. While the metering is at least as good as the K-7, like al meters it can be fooled. And like most photographers, I'm not constantly thinking, and sometimes fail to notice situations where I should have plussed or minused the exposure comp. Of course the improved autofocus is an advantage in all light as well. It's a more significant leap than was that from the K20 to the K-7. Is it now the equal of the best Nikons or Canons? I doubt it, but I've never used those cameras. I do know that it is proving to be advantageous. Paul > On 11/8/2010 8:58 AM, Thibouille wrote: >> I understand pretty well your questioning Boris and this is just a >> little information which may help you understand why your way of >> shooting/post processing has not changed from K10 to K7 (as for DR >> etc.): >> >> http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/676|0/(appareil2)/615|0/(appareil3)/212|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Pentax/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax >> >> (Sorry long URL). This shows one thing, as for DR/Iso response, both >> K10/K7 are extremely similar. >> K5 is a totally kettle of fish though. Will it help you or not, I >> can't answer for you of course. >> >> >> > > > -- > 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On 11/8/2010 1:52 PM, paul stenquist wrote: It's good that the K-7 meets your needs. It meets mine as well for the most part. But you don't need a 300% enlargement to see the advantages on the K-5 in low light. While those are due only in part to the dynamic range, they are very real advantages that are easy to see even in web sized images. Paul Paul, if you can "point your finger" at them by showing a pair of images from K-7 and K-5 where it will be evident what kind of advantage K-5 has on K-7, I'd be grateful. 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
It's good that the K-7 meets your needs. It meets mine as well for the most part. But you don't need a 300% enlargement to see the advantages on the K-5 in low light. While those are due only in part to the dynamic range, they are very real advantages that are easy to see even in web sized images. Paul On Nov 8, 2010, at 12:25 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Thanks, David. > > This has been most enlightening reading. What I gather from these articles is > that 12 bit RAW vs 14 bit RAW is a bit (no pun intended) like JPG vs RAW > comparison, although to smaller extent. What I also understand is that as > dynamic range of sensors becomes wider it becomes necessary to use more > binary bits to effectively record the variation of these tones or brightness > levels that camera can discern. It is possible to squeeze them into narrower > bit width, but it will diminish the returns that electronics provide. > Therefore, although not directly but DR and bit width are related to one > another. > > I also gather that to see the difference between 12 bit and 14 bit RAW one > has to look at 300% enlargements of dark areas of special targets. Naturally, > this difference may be observed in less special conditions but for the time > being K-7 will have to do for me. > > Finally, I am gathering from these articles that for the purpose of /my/ > shooting K10D is absolutely sufficient for bright light and for low light no > camera is good enough as this is exactly the area that is being constantly > developed by camera manufacturers. To that end, due /my/ non-photographic > /constraints/ K-7 will have to do as well. > > Finally, like Miserere said to me on another occasion, I would like to be > shown a print that /really/ illustrates the advantages of K-5 14-bit 14.1 Ev > dynamic range over inferior K-7. Until then, I will see no reason to strain > myself one more time for upgrade purposes... > > Boris > > On 11/7/2010 11:54 PM, David Parsons wrote: >> This may help explain it: >> >> http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/nikon-d300-d3-14-bit-versus-12-bit.html >> http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/14-bit-raw-12-bit-part-two.html >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: >>> Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern >>> 2^so many shades, right? And the dynamic range is about when it goes >>> to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Ok, so tell me >>> then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same >>> picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how >>> do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more >>> BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And >>> how all that translates to actual print? >>> >>> The only thing that comes to my mind is that wider DR and more BPS >>> gives me wider range of corrections in post or RAW development before >>> I start to see things like posterization etc. Anything beside/beyond >>> that? >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Miserere wrote: On 7 November 2010 08:09, Adam Maas wrote: > Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can > discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness > values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to > discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two > shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. > The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a > brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is > no direct correspondence between the two. > > -Adam What Adam said. --M. PS: Thanks for saving me all that writing :-) -- \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >> >> >> > > > -- > 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Idealy, a raw talen by both k7 ans k5 with exact same exposure and if possible Lens would be perfect. 2010/11/8, Boris Liberman : > Well, the only visible and major difference in spec is DR. May be what I > should do is simply ask Paul and Bob S and others who have K-5 shoot for > me a scene in bright daylight with assortment of shadows and send me the > RAW file (DNG). I then can load it into my LR and play with it to see if > this DR improvement is as valuable as it is said to be. > > On 11/8/2010 8:58 AM, Thibouille wrote: >> I understand pretty well your questioning Boris and this is just a >> little information which may help you understand why your way of >> shooting/post processing has not changed from K10 to K7 (as for DR >> etc.): >> >> http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/676|0/(appareil2)/615|0/(appareil3)/212|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Pentax/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax >> >> (Sorry long URL). This shows one thing, as for DR/Iso response, both >> K10/K7 are extremely similar. >> K5 is a totally kettle of fish though. Will it help you or not, I >> can't answer for you of course. >> >> >> > > > -- > 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. > -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs -- Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45, DA50-135, DA50-200, 360FGZ ... Laptop: Macbook 13" Unibody SnowLeo/Win7 Programing: Delphi 2009 -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On 11/8/2010 9:44 AM, Larry Colen wrote: One area where I see increased Dynamic range to be useful for me is photographing bands where one band member will be in bright light, and another will be in shadows. With two more stops of dynamic range, I have a better chance of making both musicians recognizable. I shot band performance exactly once in 6 years (with K10D) and another time it was a theatrical performance that I shot with *istD. I see how DR will come in handy for you and as you can see, I don't shoot in conditions such as these. However, you can be comforted that performance issues that might prompt you to change brands are rapidly being dealt with. This doesn't resolve infrastructure issues, but we can hope that will be addressed soon too. I wasn't suggesting that I am going to change brands. I wasn't suggestion that I am not going to change brand either :-). Especially since the longer you wait the less the K-5 will cost, or in another two years something even better will be available. Slightly more than 1 year passed between K-5 and K-7. Ned Bunnell said it took 12 months or so to develop K-5. I sincerely hope that Pentax is keeping their R&D effort at full pace. 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Thanks! Downloaded it already. Will play with it later today at home... Boris On 11/8/2010 9:45 AM, SV Hovland wrote: You can use this, http://download.heime.org/sfk/IMGP0158.DNG I took it specifically for testing how clipping is handled and to see how much information there is in the dark areas. (The file is deleted from the server on saturday) Stig Vidar Hovland Fra: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [pdml-boun...@pdml.net] på vegne av Boris Liberman [bori...@gmail.com] Sendt: 8. november 2010 08:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question. Well, the only visible and major difference in spec is DR. May be what I should do is simply ask Paul and Bob S and others who have K-5 shoot for me a scene in bright daylight with assortment of shadows and send me the RAW file (DNG). I then can load it into my LR and play with it to see if this DR improvement is as valuable as it is said to be. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
You can use this, http://download.heime.org/sfk/IMGP0158.DNG I took it specifically for testing how clipping is handled and to see how much information there is in the dark areas. (The file is deleted from the server on saturday) Stig Vidar Hovland Fra: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [pdml-boun...@pdml.net] på vegne av Boris Liberman [bori...@gmail.com] Sendt: 8. november 2010 08:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question. Well, the only visible and major difference in spec is DR. May be what I should do is simply ask Paul and Bob S and others who have K-5 shoot for me a scene in bright daylight with assortment of shadows and send me the RAW file (DNG). I then can load it into my LR and play with it to see if this DR improvement is as valuable as it is said to be. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On Nov 7, 2010, at 9:25 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Thanks, David. > ... snip ... > > I also gather that to see the difference between 12 bit and 14 bit RAW one > has to look at 300% enlargements of dark areas of special targets. Naturally, > this difference may be observed in less special conditions but for the time > being K-7 will have to do for me. One area where I see increased Dynamic range to be useful for me is photographing bands where one band member will be in bright light, and another will be in shadows. With two more stops of dynamic range, I have a better chance of making both musicians recognizable. > > Finally, I am gathering from these articles that for the purpose of /my/ > shooting K10D is absolutely sufficient for bright light and for low light no > camera is good enough as this is exactly the area that is being constantly > developed by camera manufacturers. To that end, due /my/ non-photographic > /constraints/ K-7 will have to do as well. However, you can be comforted that performance issues that might prompt you to change brands are rapidly being dealt with. This doesn't resolve infrastructure issues, but we can hope that will be addressed soon too. > > Finally, like Miserere said to me on another occasion, I would like to be > shown a print that /really/ illustrates the advantages of K-5 14-bit 14.1 Ev > dynamic range over inferior K-7. Until then, I will see no reason to strain > myself one more time for upgrade purposes... Especially since the longer you wait the less the K-5 will cost, or in another two years something even better will be available. > -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Well, the only visible and major difference in spec is DR. May be what I should do is simply ask Paul and Bob S and others who have K-5 shoot for me a scene in bright daylight with assortment of shadows and send me the RAW file (DNG). I then can load it into my LR and play with it to see if this DR improvement is as valuable as it is said to be. On 11/8/2010 8:58 AM, Thibouille wrote: I understand pretty well your questioning Boris and this is just a little information which may help you understand why your way of shooting/post processing has not changed from K10 to K7 (as for DR etc.): http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/676|0/(appareil2)/615|0/(appareil3)/212|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Pentax/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax (Sorry long URL). This shows one thing, as for DR/Iso response, both K10/K7 are extremely similar. K5 is a totally kettle of fish though. Will it help you or not, I can't answer for you of course. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
I understand pretty well your questioning Boris and this is just a little information which may help you understand why your way of shooting/post processing has not changed from K10 to K7 (as for DR etc.): http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/676|0/(appareil2)/615|0/(appareil3)/212|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Pentax/(brand2)/Pentax/(brand3)/Pentax (Sorry long URL). This shows one thing, as for DR/Iso response, both K10/K7 are extremely similar. K5 is a totally kettle of fish though. Will it help you or not, I can't answer for you of course. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs -- Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45, DA50-135, DA50-200, 360FGZ ... Laptop: Macbook 13" Unibody SnowLeo/Win7 Programing: Delphi 2009 -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On 11/8/2010 8:28 AM, Thibouille wrote: I think (for what I understand on the subject) that it is exactly something impossible to demonstrate: the print would be unable to prove anything. What DR allows (and 14bit is just a way to package the infos without throwing away part of it) for is to have more exposure latitude. Think of it as making positive film vs. neg film. Neg film is forgiving unless you really screw it up and you can correct for it when 'printing' (lab). The positive is not forgiving at all AND you can't correct it. A RAW with low DR is somehow like a positive film, you can't do much with it in term of exposure corrections: blown highlights are blown and will stay blown,and dark parts will stay o because recovering them will only add noise and nothing else interesting. Thibs, this is what I am struggling with (among other my struggles). It is not the same as it was with negative film - it could sustain good degree of pushing or pulling (over or under exposure) and still yield good image. So, well, in theory 14 bit is better than 12 bit and 14.1 Ev of DR are better than 10.5 Ev of DR. However, moving from K10D to K-7 my photographic process hasn't really changed and the prints and the web images and the book images still look good. I am not saying that K-5 is less advanced than K-7. However I am trying to see if /I really need/ that advantage. So far I haven't been convinced that I do. When K-7 came out, it offered the things that I knew I /might/ use - faster shutter, full viewfinder coverage, smaller body, revised AF. K-7 offered improvements as a camera body compared to K10D. Later on I learned that great deal of these improvements went by me unnoticed, but at least it was something I could comprehend. K-5 does not offer many improvements over K-7 in that department. If offers few, such as yet another round of AF improvements, but they are minor compared to the sensor upgrade. Taking it back to car analogy - my car with its 125 HP motor is competent and I am competent (regular street/highway) driver in that car. Will 'upgrading' to GTI version of similar car be of any use for me? Well, it will make me feel better, you know like - "I own K-5, this is the best APS-C sensor ever, you can commit trying to bite your elbows (*), you inferior Nikon/Canon/Sony being". But beside that - will it help me in any way? In case of my car I know for the fact that it is not going to be of any use, all these additional HPs of GTI motor. I much rather my car had 4x4 drive-train, but that in a sense would be going from APS-C to FF, whereas again there I will not extract all the potential thereof, just drive off-road half a dozen times a year when I feel like going outdoors outtown... Boris (*) "The elbow is close, but you cannot bite it" - old Russian proverb loosely translated by me here for you. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
2010/11/8 Boris Liberman : > Finally, like Miserere said to me on another occasion, I would like to be > shown a print that /really/ illustrates the advantages of K-5 14-bit 14.1 Ev > dynamic range over inferior K-7. Until then, I will see no reason to strain > myself one more time for upgrade purposes... > > Boris I think (for what I understand on the subject) that it is exactly something impossible to demonstrate: the print would be unable to prove anything. What DR allows (and 14bit is just a way to package the infos without throwing away part of it) for is to have more exposure latitude. Think of it as making positive film vs. neg film. Neg film is forgiving unless you really screw it up and you can correct for it when 'printing' (lab). The positive is not forgiving at all AND you can't correct it. A RAW with low DR is somehow like a positive film, you can't do much with it in term of exposure corrections: blown highlights are blown and will stay blown,and dark parts will stay o because recovering them will only add noise and nothing else interesting. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs -- Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45, DA50-135, DA50-200, 360FGZ ... Laptop: Macbook 13" Unibody SnowLeo/Win7 Programing: Delphi 2009 -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
I did not take long... On 11/8/2010 8:22 AM, Thibouille wrote: He meant 'K-7 sold' ;) 2010/11/8 Boris Liberman: P.S.: le K-7 est vendu. Ralf, could you please translate the above to another language? 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. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
He meant 'K-7 sold' ;) 2010/11/8 Boris Liberman : >> P.S.: le K-7 est vendu. > > Ralf, could you please translate the above to another language? > > 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. > -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs -- Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45, DA50-135, DA50-200, 360FGZ ... Laptop: Macbook 13" Unibody SnowLeo/Win7 Programing: Delphi 2009 -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Reply interspersed, Larry. On 11/8/2010 6:04 AM, Larry Colen wrote: To be honest, for the vast majority of shots taken in "reasonable light", most people would not be able to tell prints of photos taken with K-5, a high end point and shoot (like my old lumix FZ50), or even for that matter an Argus C3. It is the special cases, and the question of which special cases that determines when you need the better gear. Yes, the article in Luminous Landscape where I think it was Canon G10 vs medium format digital backs of the same time comes to mind. As to your automotive analogy, I've got out on the racetrack in a Honda Civic station wagon, or even a full size Dodge Van, and had students in sports cars not be able to keep up with me. On the other hand, I've gone out in my Miata (Eunos) race car, and had students that couldn't get within the same Zip code as the apex blow me away in their 400 hp Corvettes, BMWs etc. The question is whether your students could have kept up with your zip code changes a year after you made them fall behind in your dodgy Van. If they still couldn't out drive you, then for all I care, whomever bought them their sports car wasted great deal of money. Most of the time better performance won't be needed, or even noticed, but when it's needed to overcome adverse conditions, or lack of skill, there's no substitute. I agree with everything but lack of skill. In driving it is even more so, as it may result in severe injury or even death. This is, in fact, what is happening every weekend in my country. Young, hormone overfilled individuals are competing for Darwin award and unfortunately getting it time and time again. Different individuals, of course as it is one-time life-time achievement. Pun intended. It is time, Larry, that I openly admitted that I cannot extract full potential of my FA Limited lenses or my K-7. Upgrade to K-5 will be pleasant, but it will not make me catch you in my shiny BMW Z-5 (intentional 5 here, yeah) no matter how old is the car you drive. This realization is tough and it is also challenging and fun because it makes one learn great deal about oneself and others around as well. Photographers have been doing all sorts of things to match the dynamic range of the scene, with the dynamic range of their sensors (or film), and the dynamic range of the print for decades. I believe that this is what Mr. Adams referred to as the zone system. The principle that I use is to set my exposure to capture the most data in the raw file, and then in post processing, decide how to take the captured dynamic range and present it in the final image. There are a lot of times that I'll specifically adjust my processing to get rid of all of the shadow detail, and other times where I'll tweak the curves to try to preserve both shadow and highlight detail. This, by the way, is one reason why I'll frequently bracket my shots, even though I haven't been doing any HDR work yet, so that in the future I'll have the option of going back and recovering some of that data if I wish. Makes sense to me. I'm not going to say that if you aren't going to make the effort to optimize the exposure range at both the time of exposure and post processing, you might as well shoot in jpeg, but I will say that if you don't, you may be missing out on a lot of potential in your final images. Just because using the the full 14 bits in a linear mapping onto your print may look a little flat, doesn't mean that you have to do it that way. You might only want to use 10 of those bits, but it's nice to be able to choose which 10 you use. Well, I am yet to see or hear about a lab here, that can take anything but 8-bit JPG files for print. It is therefore that only 8 bits should be chosen for final award of printing. The same moment a lab that can print 16bit TIFF files opens, the rules of the game will change completely. And no, I don't have a photo printer at home nor do I intend to buy one. In general, I try to optimize my exposure so as to keep maximum useful information in the areas that I want to be bright in my final image. So, I am aware of expose to the right principle. But K-7 seems to be rather prone to saturation when it comes to bright areas so that effectively I gave up/in? to its meter and go with the flow, so to say. I shoot in RAW and I have 4 bits to loose before I convert to final JPG for print. For anything else, methinks, you and I will have to sit in front of the same computer, same set of programs, same photograph to see if you have something to teach me or vice versa. I don't buy the argument that I am going to have to buy a sports version of family hatch just because. Everything is done for the purpose. Presently, like I said before, I am struggling to learn how to extract the best from the gear that I have. Does it make sense to upgrade? Well, like Paul proves constantly by the way he is buying and selling his camera bodies, one has to k
Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
P.S.: le K-7 est vendu. Ralf, could you please translate the above to another language? 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Thanks, David. This has been most enlightening reading. What I gather from these articles is that 12 bit RAW vs 14 bit RAW is a bit (no pun intended) like JPG vs RAW comparison, although to smaller extent. What I also understand is that as dynamic range of sensors becomes wider it becomes necessary to use more binary bits to effectively record the variation of these tones or brightness levels that camera can discern. It is possible to squeeze them into narrower bit width, but it will diminish the returns that electronics provide. Therefore, although not directly but DR and bit width are related to one another. I also gather that to see the difference between 12 bit and 14 bit RAW one has to look at 300% enlargements of dark areas of special targets. Naturally, this difference may be observed in less special conditions but for the time being K-7 will have to do for me. Finally, I am gathering from these articles that for the purpose of /my/ shooting K10D is absolutely sufficient for bright light and for low light no camera is good enough as this is exactly the area that is being constantly developed by camera manufacturers. To that end, due /my/ non-photographic /constraints/ K-7 will have to do as well. Finally, like Miserere said to me on another occasion, I would like to be shown a print that /really/ illustrates the advantages of K-5 14-bit 14.1 Ev dynamic range over inferior K-7. Until then, I will see no reason to strain myself one more time for upgrade purposes... Boris On 11/7/2010 11:54 PM, David Parsons wrote: This may help explain it: http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/nikon-d300-d3-14-bit-versus-12-bit.html http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/14-bit-raw-12-bit-part-two.html On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern 2^so many shades, right? And the dynamic range is about when it goes to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Ok, so tell me then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And how all that translates to actual print? The only thing that comes to my mind is that wider DR and more BPS gives me wider range of corrections in post or RAW development before I start to see things like posterization etc. Anything beside/beyond that? On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Miserere wrote: On 7 November 2010 08:09, Adam Maas wrote: Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is no direct correspondence between the two. -Adam What Adam said. --M. PS: Thanks for saving me all that writing :-) -- \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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. -- 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. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Boris, To be honest, for the vast majority of shots taken in "reasonable light", most people would not be able to tell prints of photos taken with K-5, a high end point and shoot (like my old lumix FZ50), or even for that matter an Argus C3. It is the special cases, and the question of which special cases that determines when you need the better gear. As to your automotive analogy, I've got out on the racetrack in a Honda Civic station wagon, or even a full size Dodge Van, and had students in sports cars not be able to keep up with me. On the other hand, I've gone out in my Miata (Eunos) race car, and had students that couldn't get within the same Zip code as the apex blow me away in their 400 hp Corvettes, BMWs etc. Most of the time better performance won't be needed, or even noticed, but when it's needed to overcome adverse conditions, or lack of skill, there's no substitute. Photographers have been doing all sorts of things to match the dynamic range of the scene, with the dynamic range of their sensors (or film), and the dynamic range of the print for decades. I believe that this is what Mr. Adams referred to as the zone system. The principle that I use is to set my exposure to capture the most data in the raw file, and then in post processing, decide how to take the captured dynamic range and present it in the final image. There are a lot of times that I'll specifically adjust my processing to get rid of all of the shadow detail, and other times where I'll tweak the curves to try to preserve both shadow and highlight detail. This, by the way, is one reason why I'll frequently bracket my shots, even though I haven't been doing any HDR work yet, so that in the future I'll have the option of going back and recovering some of that data if I wish. I'm not going to say that if you aren't going to make the effort to optimize the exposure range at both the time of exposure and post processing, you might as well shoot in jpeg, but I will say that if you don't, you may be missing out on a lot of potential in your final images. Just because using the the full 14 bits in a linear mapping onto your print may look a little flat, doesn't mean that you have to do it that way. You might only want to use 10 of those bits, but it's nice to be able to choose which 10 you use. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On Nov 7, 2010, at 7:31 PM, Adam Maas wrote: Paul, if you adjust the files for maximum dynamic range, the K-5 will have more dynamic range and less contrast than the K-7. Neither file will be usable in that state. As a practical matter more dynamic range moves the choice about what to blow from exposure to post. -Adam That makes sense. I don't think about the technology when I convert pics or process them further after conversion. But I know what I want, and choices are a good thing. I was happy with the K-7 files for the most part, and, while it's early, I'm even more pleased with those from the K-5. If I can wring the pic I want out of the RAW, I'm happy. Paul On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 3:01 PM, paul stenquist > wrote: I see no real difference in contrast levels between K-5 and K-7 raw files. And how flat or contrasty the final image might be can be controlled completely in conversion. It's not an issue. I shot most of yesterday's images in shade with no flash fill, so they were inherently somewhat flatter than what I might generally produce. However, when the sun stepped in, contrast levels were quite high. For example: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=11910635 On Nov 7, 2010, at 2:31 PM, Jack Davis wrote: Don't know if the lack of contrast you reference is so significant as to be obvious in casually examining prints, but I have noted, in what relatively few K-5 images I've viewed, contrast has appeared somewhat low and the image, of course, a bit "flat".(?) Jack --- On Sun, 11/7/10, Adam Maas wrote: From: Adam Maas Subject: Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question. To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Date: Sunday, November 7, 2010, 10:18 AM On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern 2^so many shades, right? Exactly. And the dynamic range is about when it goes to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Pure white and indistinguishable from noise (not pure black). The noise floor determines the actual dynamic range's low end. Ok, so tell me then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And how all that translates to actual print? The bit depth of the RAW files shows up in subtle gradations of colour and in shadow noise. You get more subtle colour/tone resolution and less shadow noise with a higher bit depth ADC than with less (the shadow noise improvement is due to exactly how ADC's work with linear imaging sensors, you lose luminance resolution at low luminance values. Digital delivers superb resolution of bright tones and poor resolution of dark tones). In the real world, shadow noise is the easiest to see, especially on a camera which can shoot in both 12 and 14 bit modes like many Nikons. More dynamic range allows you to make less trade offs in exposure at shooting time. The more DR you have, the more you can hold detail in both the highlights and the shadows at the same time. The downside is the self-same image will be lower contrast when rendered and you usually have to make those trade offs in post instead. -Adam -- 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. -- 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. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Paul, if you adjust the files for maximum dynamic range, the K-5 will have more dynamic range and less contrast than the K-7. Neither file will be usable in that state. As a practical matter more dynamic range moves the choice about what to blow from exposure to post. -Adam On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 3:01 PM, paul stenquist wrote: > I see no real difference in contrast levels between K-5 and K-7 raw files. > And how flat or contrasty the final image might be can be controlled > completely in conversion. It's not an issue. I shot most of yesterday's > images in shade with no flash fill, so they were inherently somewhat flatter > than what I might generally produce. However, when the sun stepped in, > contrast levels were quite high. For example: > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=11910635 > On Nov 7, 2010, at 2:31 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > >> Don't know if the lack of contrast you reference is so significant as to be >> obvious in casually examining prints, but I have noted, in what relatively >> few K-5 images I've viewed, contrast has appeared somewhat low and the >> image, of course, a bit "flat".(?) >> >> Jack >> >> --- On Sun, 11/7/10, Adam Maas wrote: >> >>> From: Adam Maas >>> Subject: Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question. >>> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" >>> Date: Sunday, November 7, 2010, 10:18 AM >>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, >>> Boris Liberman >>> wrote: >>>> Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what >>> then? Discern >>>> 2^so many shades, right? >>> >>> Exactly. >>> >>>> And the dynamic range is about when it goes >>>> to saturation either to pure black and pure white. >>> >>> Pure white and indistinguishable from noise (not pure >>> black). The >>> noise floor determines the actual dynamic range's low end. >>> >>>> Ok, so tell me >>>> then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking >>> at the same >>>> picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or >>> better yet, how >>>> do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other >>> and that more >>>> BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in >>> real life. And >>>> how all that translates to actual print? >>> >>> The bit depth of the RAW files shows up in subtle >>> gradations of colour >>> and in shadow noise. You get more subtle colour/tone >>> resolution and >>> less shadow noise with a higher bit depth ADC than with >>> less (the >>> shadow noise improvement is due to exactly how ADC's work >>> with linear >>> imaging sensors, you lose luminance resolution at low >>> luminance >>> values. Digital delivers superb resolution of bright tones >>> and poor >>> resolution of dark tones). In the real world, shadow noise >>> is the >>> easiest to see, especially on a camera which can shoot in >>> both 12 and >>> 14 bit modes like many Nikons. >>> >>> More dynamic range allows you to make less trade offs in >>> exposure at >>> shooting time. The more DR you have, the more you can hold >>> detail in >>> both the highlights and the shadows at the same time. The >>> downside is >>> the self-same image will be lower contrast when rendered >>> and you >>> usually have to make those trade offs in post instead. >>> >>> >>> -Adam >>> >>> -- >>> 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. > > > -- > 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. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
This may help explain it: http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/nikon-d300-d3-14-bit-versus-12-bit.html http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/14-bit-raw-12-bit-part-two.html On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern > 2^so many shades, right? And the dynamic range is about when it goes > to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Ok, so tell me > then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same > picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how > do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more > BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And > how all that translates to actual print? > > The only thing that comes to my mind is that wider DR and more BPS > gives me wider range of corrections in post or RAW development before > I start to see things like posterization etc. Anything beside/beyond > that? > > On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Miserere wrote: >> On 7 November 2010 08:09, Adam Maas wrote: >>> Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can >>> discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness >>> values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to >>> discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two >>> shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. >>> The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a >>> brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is >>> no direct correspondence between the two. >>> >>> -Adam >> >> What Adam said. >> >> --M. >> >> PS: Thanks for saving me all that writing :-) >> >> >> -- >> >> \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com >> >> http://EnticingTheLight.com >> A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > > > -- > 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. > -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Thibouille wrote: > Boris, on top of opinions already posted, I'm certain Falk Lumo could > have an interesting take on this, if you ask him. :-) Ralf P.S.: le K-7 est vendu. -- Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf Web : http://www.fotoralf.de -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Boris, on top of opinions already posted, I'm certain Falk Lumo could have an interesting take on this, if you ask him. 2010/11/7 Boris Liberman : > Hi! > > DXOMark > (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/All-tested-sensors/Pentax/K5) > publishes that K-5 has 14.1 EV of dynamic range. My understanding thereof is > that its sensor can tell apart 2^14.1 different shades which although close > but slightly bigger than 14 bit RAW as per Pentax own specification. > > I realize that dynamic range is not the same as how many useful bits of data > per pixel RAW format contains. However, given that both are scales of powers > of two, it would seem to be interesting to consider which part of these 14 > bits (or 14 EVs) corresponds linearly to one another. > > As a side remark I think it is very odd that one is bigger than another. Few > examples to point: > > Phase One P65 Plus - 16 bit RAW, 13 EV of DR > Leica M9 - 14 bit RAW, 11.7 EV of DR > Nikon D3S - 14 bit RAW, 12 EV of DR > > What do you think? > > Thanks. > > 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. > -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille/Thibs -- Photo: K-7, Sigma 28/1.8 macro, FA50/1.4, DA40Ltd, K30/2.8, DA16-45, DA50-135, DA50-200, 360FGZ ... Laptop: Macbook 13" Unibody SnowLeo/Win7 Programing: Delphi 2009 -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On Nov 7, 2010, at 3:44 PM, Christine Aguila wrote: > > - Original Message - From: "paul stenquist" > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 2:01 PM > Subject: Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question. > > >> I see no real difference in contrast levels between K-5 and K-7 raw files. >> And how flat or contrasty the final image might be can be controlled >> completely in conversion. > > > And you can influence contrast in-camera as well, by increasing the contrast > control in the shooting/rendering modes: natural, landscape et al. The K7 > has 3 different contrast options. Cheers, Christine > Yes, but those are only applicable when shooting jpegs. I generally shoot only raw, even when I'm just shooting snaps. The only time I shot a lot of jpegs was when I was doing the 400 shot per day real estate virtual tours. Paul > -- > 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
- Original Message - From: "paul stenquist" To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 2:01 PM Subject: Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question. I see no real difference in contrast levels between K-5 and K-7 raw files. And how flat or contrasty the final image might be can be controlled completely in conversion. And you can influence contrast in-camera as well, by increasing the contrast control in the shooting/rendering modes: natural, landscape et al. The K7 has 3 different contrast options. Cheers, Christine -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
I see no real difference in contrast levels between K-5 and K-7 raw files. And how flat or contrasty the final image might be can be controlled completely in conversion. It's not an issue. I shot most of yesterday's images in shade with no flash fill, so they were inherently somewhat flatter than what I might generally produce. However, when the sun stepped in, contrast levels were quite high. For example: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=11910635 On Nov 7, 2010, at 2:31 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > Don't know if the lack of contrast you reference is so significant as to be > obvious in casually examining prints, but I have noted, in what relatively > few K-5 images I've viewed, contrast has appeared somewhat low and the image, > of course, a bit "flat".(?) > > Jack > > --- On Sun, 11/7/10, Adam Maas wrote: > >> From: Adam Maas >> Subject: Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question. >> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" >> Date: Sunday, November 7, 2010, 10:18 AM >> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, >> Boris Liberman >> wrote: >>> Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what >> then? Discern >>> 2^so many shades, right? >> >> Exactly. >> >>> And the dynamic range is about when it goes >>> to saturation either to pure black and pure white. >> >> Pure white and indistinguishable from noise (not pure >> black). The >> noise floor determines the actual dynamic range's low end. >> >>> Ok, so tell me >>> then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking >> at the same >>> picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or >> better yet, how >>> do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other >> and that more >>> BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in >> real life. And >>> how all that translates to actual print? >> >> The bit depth of the RAW files shows up in subtle >> gradations of colour >> and in shadow noise. You get more subtle colour/tone >> resolution and >> less shadow noise with a higher bit depth ADC than with >> less (the >> shadow noise improvement is due to exactly how ADC's work >> with linear >> imaging sensors, you lose luminance resolution at low >> luminance >> values. Digital delivers superb resolution of bright tones >> and poor >> resolution of dark tones). In the real world, shadow noise >> is the >> easiest to see, especially on a camera which can shoot in >> both 12 and >> 14 bit modes like many Nikons. >> >> More dynamic range allows you to make less trade offs in >> exposure at >> shooting time. The more DR you have, the more you can hold >> detail in >> both the highlights and the shadows at the same time. The >> downside is >> the self-same image will be lower contrast when rendered >> and you >> usually have to make those trade offs in post instead. >> >> >> -Adam >> >> -- >> 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. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Don't know if the lack of contrast you reference is so significant as to be obvious in casually examining prints, but I have noted, in what relatively few K-5 images I've viewed, contrast has appeared somewhat low and the image, of course, a bit "flat".(?) Jack --- On Sun, 11/7/10, Adam Maas wrote: > From: Adam Maas > Subject: Re: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question. > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Date: Sunday, November 7, 2010, 10:18 AM > On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, > Boris Liberman > wrote: > > Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what > then? Discern > > 2^so many shades, right? > > Exactly. > > > And the dynamic range is about when it goes > > to saturation either to pure black and pure white. > > Pure white and indistinguishable from noise (not pure > black). The > noise floor determines the actual dynamic range's low end. > > > Ok, so tell me > > then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking > at the same > > picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or > better yet, how > > do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other > and that more > > BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in > real life. And > > how all that translates to actual print? > > The bit depth of the RAW files shows up in subtle > gradations of colour > and in shadow noise. You get more subtle colour/tone > resolution and > less shadow noise with a higher bit depth ADC than with > less (the > shadow noise improvement is due to exactly how ADC's work > with linear > imaging sensors, you lose luminance resolution at low > luminance > values. Digital delivers superb resolution of bright tones > and poor > resolution of dark tones). In the real world, shadow noise > is the > easiest to see, especially on a camera which can shoot in > both 12 and > 14 bit modes like many Nikons. > > More dynamic range allows you to make less trade offs in > exposure at > shooting time. The more DR you have, the more you can hold > detail in > both the highlights and the shadows at the same time. The > downside is > the self-same image will be lower contrast when rendered > and you > usually have to make those trade offs in post instead. > > > -Adam > > -- > 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
I think that point may have been reached with the K-5. I saw the K-7 from K20D upgrade more of technology for technologies sake. The example of the recovered underexposed photo just blew me away. I've tried similar things with the K20D, and failed miserably. Maybe that shot was a special case, but what it implies for the manipulating of raw data files to extract color and detail is astounding. On 11/7/2010 1:35 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Peter, I understand all that. The question then is when the marketing speak far outweighs the real life applicability of technology. I, for one, know that buying highest end audiophile gear will be waste of money on me. The same would probably hold true if I mortgaged my life and bought myself full complement of Leica S camera and lenses... One has to be able to understand when the next upgrade is technology for technology sake, which still has its right to exist, but knowing that will allow better manipulation to get the results one wants to paraphrase what you just wrote. On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:27 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: A large part of photography is mapping from one medium to another. The more levels of data you have them more you have to manipulate to get the results you want in the final displayed image weather that's a video display, a print, or some kind of transparency. We used to do it with light and chemicals. On 11/7/2010 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern 2^so many shades, right? And the dynamic range is about when it goes to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Ok, so tell me then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And how all that translates to actual print? The only thing that comes to my mind is that wider DR and more BPS gives me wider range of corrections in post or RAW development before I start to see things like posterization etc. Anything beside/beyond that? On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Misererewrote: On 7 November 2010 08:09, Adam Maaswrote: Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is no direct correspondence between the two. -Adam What Adam said. --M. PS: Thanks for saving me all that writing :-) -- \/\/o/\/\ -->http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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. -- "His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." -Woody Allen -- 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. -- "His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." -Woody Allen -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Peter, I understand all that. The question then is when the marketing speak far outweighs the real life applicability of technology. I, for one, know that buying highest end audiophile gear will be waste of money on me. The same would probably hold true if I mortgaged my life and bought myself full complement of Leica S camera and lenses... One has to be able to understand when the next upgrade is technology for technology sake, which still has its right to exist, but knowing that will allow better manipulation to get the results one wants to paraphrase what you just wrote. On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:27 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: > A large part of photography is mapping from one medium to another. The > more levels of data you have them more you have to manipulate to get the > results you want in the final displayed image weather that's a video > display, a print, or some kind of transparency. We used to do it with light > and chemicals. > > On 11/7/2010 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: >> >> Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern >> 2^so many shades, right? And the dynamic range is about when it goes >> to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Ok, so tell me >> then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same >> picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how >> do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more >> BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And >> how all that translates to actual print? >> >> The only thing that comes to my mind is that wider DR and more BPS >> gives me wider range of corrections in post or RAW development before >> I start to see things like posterization etc. Anything beside/beyond >> that? >> >> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Miserere wrote: >>> >>> On 7 November 2010 08:09, Adam Maas wrote: Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is no direct correspondence between the two. -Adam >>> >>> What Adam said. >>> >>> --M. >>> >>> PS: Thanks for saving me all that writing :-) >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com >>> >>> http://EnticingTheLight.com >>> A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >> >> > > > -- > "His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed > moral bankruptcy." > -Woody Allen > > > -- > 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. > -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
A large part of photography is mapping from one medium to another. The more levels of data you have them more you have to manipulate to get the results you want in the final displayed image weather that's a video display, a print, or some kind of transparency. We used to do it with light and chemicals. On 11/7/2010 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern 2^so many shades, right? And the dynamic range is about when it goes to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Ok, so tell me then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And how all that translates to actual print? The only thing that comes to my mind is that wider DR and more BPS gives me wider range of corrections in post or RAW development before I start to see things like posterization etc. Anything beside/beyond that? On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Miserere wrote: On 7 November 2010 08:09, Adam Maas wrote: Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is no direct correspondence between the two. -Adam What Adam said. --M. PS: Thanks for saving me all that writing :-) -- \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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. -- "His lack of education is more than compensated for by his keenly developed moral bankruptcy." -Woody Allen -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
The question is - how much DR has such a landscape scene as you describe and how much DR is really useful/necessary for real life applications. To give you a driving analogy - my car has 125 HP engine and it serves all my needs. Evidently the hot hatch with twice that power will be fun to drive but will it be useful/necessary? Likely there will be cases when 250 HP will have its uses, but just as likely it will negligible number of times, unless one is doing some extreme driving or racing, whereas while we talk daily commute cars, 125 HP is more than enough. On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > At low ISO's yes to some extent. It depends on what you photograph. > Ralf's work is a DR torture test but even a normal landscape scene can > easily exceed 14 stops of DR if sunlit and having any deep shade. > > -Adam > > On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: >> So, Adam, /in principle/ or /in general/ what you say is that unless >> one is doing some very special kind of photography such as what Ralf >> is doing with so much success, the difference between K-5 and K-7 will >> be (very?) subtle and hard to see. The difference in DR will be less >> profound due to the specific tuning of the metering of each camera and >> also, as far as I understand, the ultimate test of print or photograph >> on computer display will result in much more similar results than it >> might seem from the mere spec comparison of these cameras. And more so >> if one is doing relatively simple and relatively mild post processing. >> Is that so? >> >> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Adam Maas wrote: >>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern 2^so many shades, right? >>> >>> Exactly. >>> And the dynamic range is about when it goes to saturation either to pure black and pure white. >>> >>> Pure white and indistinguishable from noise (not pure black). The >>> noise floor determines the actual dynamic range's low end. >>> Ok, so tell me then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And how all that translates to actual print? >>> >>> The bit depth of the RAW files shows up in subtle gradations of colour >>> and in shadow noise. You get more subtle colour/tone resolution and >>> less shadow noise with a higher bit depth ADC than with less (the >>> shadow noise improvement is due to exactly how ADC's work with linear >>> imaging sensors, you lose luminance resolution at low luminance >>> values. Digital delivers superb resolution of bright tones and poor >>> resolution of dark tones). In the real world, shadow noise is the >>> easiest to see, especially on a camera which can shoot in both 12 and >>> 14 bit modes like many Nikons. >>> >>> More dynamic range allows you to make less trade offs in exposure at >>> shooting time. The more DR you have, the more you can hold detail in >>> both the highlights and the shadows at the same time. The downside is >>> the self-same image will be lower contrast when rendered and you >>> usually have to make those trade offs in post instead. >>> >>> >>> -Adam >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > > > -- > M. Adam Maas > http://www.mawz.ca > Explorations of the City Around Us. > > -- > 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. > -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
At low ISO's yes to some extent. It depends on what you photograph. Ralf's work is a DR torture test but even a normal landscape scene can easily exceed 14 stops of DR if sunlit and having any deep shade. -Adam On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: > So, Adam, /in principle/ or /in general/ what you say is that unless > one is doing some very special kind of photography such as what Ralf > is doing with so much success, the difference between K-5 and K-7 will > be (very?) subtle and hard to see. The difference in DR will be less > profound due to the specific tuning of the metering of each camera and > also, as far as I understand, the ultimate test of print or photograph > on computer display will result in much more similar results than it > might seem from the mere spec comparison of these cameras. And more so > if one is doing relatively simple and relatively mild post processing. > Is that so? > > On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Adam Maas wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: >>> Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern >>> 2^so many shades, right? >> >> Exactly. >> >>> And the dynamic range is about when it goes >>> to saturation either to pure black and pure white. >> >> Pure white and indistinguishable from noise (not pure black). The >> noise floor determines the actual dynamic range's low end. >> >>> Ok, so tell me >>> then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same >>> picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how >>> do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more >>> BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And >>> how all that translates to actual print? >> >> The bit depth of the RAW files shows up in subtle gradations of colour >> and in shadow noise. You get more subtle colour/tone resolution and >> less shadow noise with a higher bit depth ADC than with less (the >> shadow noise improvement is due to exactly how ADC's work with linear >> imaging sensors, you lose luminance resolution at low luminance >> values. Digital delivers superb resolution of bright tones and poor >> resolution of dark tones). In the real world, shadow noise is the >> easiest to see, especially on a camera which can shoot in both 12 and >> 14 bit modes like many Nikons. >> >> More dynamic range allows you to make less trade offs in exposure at >> shooting time. The more DR you have, the more you can hold detail in >> both the highlights and the shadows at the same time. The downside is >> the self-same image will be lower contrast when rendered and you >> usually have to make those trade offs in post instead. >> >> >> -Adam >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > > > -- > 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. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
So, Adam, /in principle/ or /in general/ what you say is that unless one is doing some very special kind of photography such as what Ralf is doing with so much success, the difference between K-5 and K-7 will be (very?) subtle and hard to see. The difference in DR will be less profound due to the specific tuning of the metering of each camera and also, as far as I understand, the ultimate test of print or photograph on computer display will result in much more similar results than it might seem from the mere spec comparison of these cameras. And more so if one is doing relatively simple and relatively mild post processing. Is that so? On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Adam Maas wrote: > On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: >> Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern >> 2^so many shades, right? > > Exactly. > >> And the dynamic range is about when it goes >> to saturation either to pure black and pure white. > > Pure white and indistinguishable from noise (not pure black). The > noise floor determines the actual dynamic range's low end. > >> Ok, so tell me >> then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same >> picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how >> do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more >> BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And >> how all that translates to actual print? > > The bit depth of the RAW files shows up in subtle gradations of colour > and in shadow noise. You get more subtle colour/tone resolution and > less shadow noise with a higher bit depth ADC than with less (the > shadow noise improvement is due to exactly how ADC's work with linear > imaging sensors, you lose luminance resolution at low luminance > values. Digital delivers superb resolution of bright tones and poor > resolution of dark tones). In the real world, shadow noise is the > easiest to see, especially on a camera which can shoot in both 12 and > 14 bit modes like many Nikons. > > More dynamic range allows you to make less trade offs in exposure at > shooting time. The more DR you have, the more you can hold detail in > both the highlights and the shadows at the same time. The downside is > the self-same image will be lower contrast when rendered and you > usually have to make those trade offs in post instead. > > > -Adam > > -- > 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. > -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern > 2^so many shades, right? Exactly. > And the dynamic range is about when it goes > to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Pure white and indistinguishable from noise (not pure black). The noise floor determines the actual dynamic range's low end. > Ok, so tell me > then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same > picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how > do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more > BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And > how all that translates to actual print? The bit depth of the RAW files shows up in subtle gradations of colour and in shadow noise. You get more subtle colour/tone resolution and less shadow noise with a higher bit depth ADC than with less (the shadow noise improvement is due to exactly how ADC's work with linear imaging sensors, you lose luminance resolution at low luminance values. Digital delivers superb resolution of bright tones and poor resolution of dark tones). In the real world, shadow noise is the easiest to see, especially on a camera which can shoot in both 12 and 14 bit modes like many Nikons. More dynamic range allows you to make less trade offs in exposure at shooting time. The more DR you have, the more you can hold detail in both the highlights and the shadows at the same time. The downside is the self-same image will be lower contrast when rendered and you usually have to make those trade offs in post instead. -Adam -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Hmmm, so a camera with so many bits of RAW can do what then? Discern 2^so many shades, right? And the dynamic range is about when it goes to saturation either to pure black and pure white. Ok, so tell me then, the wise people of PDML, is there a way looking at the same picture shot with K-7 and K-5 to tell them apart? Or better yet, how do I /see/ that one camera has wider DR than the other and that more BPS in RAW are more beneficial than less BPS in RAW in real life. And how all that translates to actual print? The only thing that comes to my mind is that wider DR and more BPS gives me wider range of corrections in post or RAW development before I start to see things like posterization etc. Anything beside/beyond that? On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 6:23 PM, Miserere wrote: > On 7 November 2010 08:09, Adam Maas wrote: >> Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can >> discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness >> values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to >> discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two >> shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. >> The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a >> brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is >> no direct correspondence between the two. >> >> -Adam > > What Adam said. > > --M. > > PS: Thanks for saving me all that writing :-) > > > -- > > \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com > > http://EnticingTheLight.com > A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment > > -- > 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. > -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
On 7 November 2010 08:09, Adam Maas wrote: > Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can > discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness > values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to > discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two > shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. > The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a > brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is > no direct correspondence between the two. > > -Adam What Adam said. --M. PS: Thanks for saving me all that writing :-) -- \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com http://EnticingTheLight.com A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment -- 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: On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Dynamic Range in EV has no effect on the amount of shades the K-5 can discern, it is merely defines the maximum and minimum brightness values which supply usable data at the same time. The ability to discern individual shades (or more properly differences between two shades) is solely controlled by how many bits wide the ADC system is. The K-5 can discern 2^14 shades maximum across a 14.1 EV ( a brightness range of 2^14.1) range according to the DxO tests. There is no direct correspondence between the two. -Adam On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Boris Liberman wrote: > Hi! > > DXOMark > (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/All-tested-sensors/Pentax/K5) > publishes that K-5 has 14.1 EV of dynamic range. My understanding thereof is > that its sensor can tell apart 2^14.1 different shades which although close > but slightly bigger than 14 bit RAW as per Pentax own specification. > > I realize that dynamic range is not the same as how many useful bits of data > per pixel RAW format contains. However, given that both are scales of powers > of two, it would seem to be interesting to consider which part of these 14 > bits (or 14 EVs) corresponds linearly to one another. > > As a side remark I think it is very odd that one is bigger than another. Few > examples to point: > > Phase One P65 Plus - 16 bit RAW, 13 EV of DR > Leica M9 - 14 bit RAW, 11.7 EV of DR > Nikon D3S - 14 bit RAW, 12 EV of DR > > What do you think? > > Thanks. > > 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. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- 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.
On K-5 dynamic range. Somewhat tangential question.
Hi! DXOMark (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/All-tested-sensors/Pentax/K5) publishes that K-5 has 14.1 EV of dynamic range. My understanding thereof is that its sensor can tell apart 2^14.1 different shades which although close but slightly bigger than 14 bit RAW as per Pentax own specification. I realize that dynamic range is not the same as how many useful bits of data per pixel RAW format contains. However, given that both are scales of powers of two, it would seem to be interesting to consider which part of these 14 bits (or 14 EVs) corresponds linearly to one another. As a side remark I think it is very odd that one is bigger than another. Few examples to point: Phase One P65 Plus - 16 bit RAW, 13 EV of DR Leica M9 - 14 bit RAW, 11.7 EV of DR Nikon D3S - 14 bit RAW, 12 EV of DR What do you think? Thanks. 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.
