Top ISO on new Pentax KP

Discussion in 'Pentax DSLR Forum' started by drd1135, Jan 25, 2017.

  1. drd1135

    drd1135 SC Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    Lexington, Virginia
    Steve
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 1
  2. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    Steve, I'm not seeing any Pentax news in that interesting Fuji article
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. tonyturley

    tonyturley SC Top Veteran

    584
    Nov 24, 2014
    Scott Depot, WV, USA
    Tony
    Always fun to read the comments on stories like that . . .
     
  4. kyteflyer

    kyteflyer ~@¿@~

    Jan 31, 2011
    Newcastle, Australia
    Sue
    There really isnt anything about the KP that attracts me. ISO is only a number as far as I can see. If its anything like previous, the top ISO will be noisily unuseable. My K5 is supposed to go to 52k or some ridiculous height. I did a comparison series of shots when I got it and even in good light, it was woeful. I never go over 6400 on the K5, never over 400 on the K200 and for most other more recent cameras never over 3200.
     
  5. rayvonn

    rayvonn SC Veteran

    469
    Jan 19, 2015
    I've got to get my head around these high iso cameras, I always like to keep at base iso and even in the middle of the night generally don't like to go over iso 800 (there are exceptions of course). From what I've seen, the Sony A7S and Nikon D500 are exceptional at ridiculously high (20,000, even 40,000) isos so it will be interesting to see if this new Pentax is at that level. It's of interest to me because shooting at night is a wonderful thing.
     
  6. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend Subscribing Member

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    The new sensors are insane - the DF and the RX1R II are both highly usable up to 12,800 and useable at 25,600. The higher res Sony is probably slightly better in that stratosphere in terms of pure noise (once downsampled) but the DF is so good in terms of maintaining color fidelity at those high ISOs that I usually prefer it. I'm not shooting landscapes at those ISOs obviously but I'll shoot candids at 12,800 on either and street shots up to 25,600. Ironically, at this point in my life I'm doing much less shooting (and staying awake!) in low light, but I find really high ISO capability can be quite useful even in marginal light if I want to keep the aperture small and shutter speed high. As for 820,000, I'll believe it when I see it, but no doubt sensors are still getting better at this kind of thing... I've never shot an APS camera that I'd take above 6400, but I've never shot any of the new 24mp APS options either...

    -Ray
     
  7. gryphon1911

    gryphon1911 SC Top Veteran

    582
    Feb 6, 2015
    Central Ohio, USA
    Andrew
    You should see what the D5/D500 sensors can do with Nikon processing! I've gotten usable shots on the D500 at 14,400 and 25,600 that people thought I was lying when I told them...had to show them the EXIF data. Sensors have come a long way, baby!! :D
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. drd1135

    drd1135 SC Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    Lexington, Virginia
    Steve
    Dang. I must have (again) highlighted the link but forgot to hit copy, thus pasting my last copy. Here's another link as well:
    Pentax KP Arrived with New 24MP Sensor, 5-axis IS II, ISO 819200 and Pixel-Shift « NEW CAMERA
    I want to see samples. Anyone can make the dial go to 819200. Still, if it's usable at all maybe 104000 is decent. As a long time Pentax user I always suspect the Catch 22, e.g., it really can shoot at 819000 but it can't focus in that light. I actually wonder if I could either. Put the FA50 on in and shoot at F1.4 and 1/60 at 819000. How dark is that?
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2017
    • Agree Agree x 2
  9. Lightmancer

    Lightmancer Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Aug 13, 2011
    Sunny Frimley
    Bill Palmer
    Funny innit?

    Camera companies always feel the need to sell their wares by expressing competitive superlatives. It's the "my dad's bigger than your dad" argument and just about as mature. Over the years there have been various battlegrounds and bandwagons; off the top of my head I can think of sharpest (lenses) fastest (AF) panoramic capability(!), size (sensor), now it's high ISO performance.

    Personally, in all my years of shooting I have very rarely felt the need to venture above ISO 6400; I prefer the performance of fast lenses to high ISO. But it's nice to know that there are cameras able to capture the fleeting flare of a (waterproof) match being struck 1000 feet away in the abyssal gloom at the bottom of the Marianas Trench...
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator Subscribing Member

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    while high ISO performance keeps getting better, I'd rather see (and wonder if it will ever be possible) a sensor that can gain several stops of dynamic range.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  11. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend Subscribing Member

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    That's happened too - the new 36 and 42 megapickel sensors from Sony have so freaking much dynamic range at base ISO it's really hard to use it all and still come out with a non-cartoonish result. Seriously, the latitude in those files seems endless. And the newest APS sensors are very close as well...

    Up until about 2013 I was always looking for better and better sensors, in terms of both low light and dynamic range. Starting with the 24mp Sony sensors in the A7 and D600/610 and the slightly different tradeoffs with the D4/DF 16mp sensors, improvements beyond these have very little practical benefit for me. The 42mp sensor in the RX1R II is astonishing, but I'd actually rather have the 24mp sensor from the first RX1 if I was designing it from scratch.

    I used to think the mega-pixel derby was silly but always thought the other improvements mattered - now I think the ISO and DR capabilities of today's sensors are as good as I'd ever find any practical need for. The 16mp sensor in the DF is still my favorite set of DR/high ISO tradeoffs of any sensor I've ever used, and I've never felt limited by 16mp.

    As far as ISO advertising claims for the highest ISO on the dial, it's really just a Nigel Tufnel boast - mine goes to ELEVEN!!!

    -Ray
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  12. drd1135

    drd1135 SC Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    Lexington, Virginia
    Steve
    It would be good for nighttime streakers who think they are safe.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. MoonMind

    MoonMind SC Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    755
    Dec 29, 2013
    Switzerland
    Matt
    @Ray Sachs@Ray Sachs How are you finding the Df's sensor when it comes to highlight recovery? The D750's sensor offers all I'll ever need for shadow recovery, and I can get workable files with no major weaknesses down to ISO 6400 - plenty enough for my needs. But even though highlight recovery is quite good with files from that sensor, the 24Mpix APS-C sensor of the D5500 isn't noticeably worse ... there's certainly room for improvement there.

    More on topic: I'm really impressed by the KP. Now if Nikon could give me something similar ... (a "D7500" with - at least - the D7200's tech and mostly the D5500's form factor ...). I've posted about this before, so will spare you the rest ...

    EDIT: Maybe I should have said that I'm not interested in the "super-high ISO" stuff - I mean the camera as a whole, including size and feature set (I.B.I.S., weather sealing etc.).

    M.
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2017
  14. tonyturley

    tonyturley SC Top Veteran

    584
    Nov 24, 2014
    Scott Depot, WV, USA
    Tony
    Well, they say ultra-compact in their announcement, but here it is compared to a Fuji X-T1. The KP is bigger in every dimension and weighs 263g more than the X-T1, if CameraSize.com's dimensions are accurate. I once owned a Pentax K-30, and its IQ was excellent, but I prefer a package about the size of the X-T1. The KP with a lens wouldn't even fit in my small camera bag without taking everything else out.

    Compact Camera Meter

    And here they both are with 14mm/2.8 lenses. I wanted to compare with the XF 23mm WR, but there's nothing equivalent in the Pentax line:

    Compact Camera Meter
     
    Last edited: Jan 26, 2017
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  15. drd1135

    drd1135 SC Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Jul 13, 2011
    Lexington, Virginia
    Steve
    One advantage of high ISO capability might be to to take shots of fast moving subjects like dancers in poor lighting. This is not uncommon and it would be nice to be able to use 1/500 s in outdoor nighttime events.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend Subscribing Member

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    Not quite as good as from the original RX1 and a bit less good yet relative to the new RX1, but still, plenty good! I'm not an ETTR shooter - I don't spend enough time at base ISO to spend the time on that, so I'm not butting up against clipped highlights that often - I'm more often recovering shadows. And, for that the DF isn't as good as the newer Sony sensors at base ISO, but as the ISO goes up, it gets better relative to them. I ultimately find the DF sensor has enough DR, if well short of the most, but it's somehow a more "real" looking sensor - I seem to like the finished products I produce from that camera at least as much as with anything else I've ever shot, and frequently more.

    -Ray
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  17. MoonMind

    MoonMind SC Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    755
    Dec 29, 2013
    Switzerland
    Matt
    Well, of course you're right, but my point of reference in this specific case is the Nikon D5500 - not because I think that it's actually comparable, but because I think that it's the best *compact* DSLR Nikon had made yet (including its successor!). Compared to the D5500, the KP appears impressively small; I've included a camera with a comparable feature set (the D7200) to show what I mean (the D500 is superior - but much bulkier; it's bigger and heavier than the D750, if ever so slightly). And at least around here, the KP is already cheaper than the X-T2 (the fairer comparison if you look at what's on offer). The KP is pretty heavy, though - that's true.

    Compact Camera Meter

    M.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. tonyturley

    tonyturley SC Top Veteran

    584
    Nov 24, 2014
    Scott Depot, WV, USA
    Tony
    I wasn't referring to your post, Matt, just the article linked a bit farther up. It's all relative, as you say. If I was used to carrying a FF DSLR, the KP would seem svelte by comparison. I've been mulling over my lens preferences lately. I really do enjoy using old MF lenses, and I held onto a few from my big gear purge last year. However, despite its IQ, the Rokkor 24mm/2.8 is considerably larger and heavier than the Fuji XF 23mm WR. I've been debating whether it's time to start the switch over to native glass, in order to have the most compact, lightest kit possible.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. tonyturley

    tonyturley SC Top Veteran

    584
    Nov 24, 2014
    Scott Depot, WV, USA
    Tony
    This is weird . . . the forum software is truncating some words from my original post. What I typed in the text field is not what is displayed on the page. Interesting.