# Nikon D600 vs. Pentax K-3 Image Comparison: Pentax Sweeps Nikon Hope for 7D mk2



## coreyhkh (Nov 4, 2013)

Found this really interesting in saying how APC sensors can never be good.
Just goes to show 99% of people on this site don't have a clue what they are talking about.
Who knows the 7D mk2 may turn out really good.


http://www.digitalcamerareview.com/default.asp?newsID=5438&news=pentax+K-3+Nikon+D600+head+to+head+comparison+Pentax+wins


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Nov 4, 2013)

Pentax K3 looks very good. Really amazing in ISO 6400. :


----------



## bholliman (Nov 5, 2013)

The Pentax images in this comparison do look sharper with more contrast. But, were the two camera's set-up with similar in-camera jpeg processing settings? 

I'm not familiar with Digitalcamerareview.com, are they reputable?


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 5, 2013)

making a fool out of themselves


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Nov 5, 2013)

is confirmed now if the K3 uses a sony or toshiba sensor?


by the way... does this really belongs in the EOS bodies forum?


----------



## DanielW (Nov 5, 2013)

bholliman said:


> The Pentax images in this comparison do look sharper with more contrast. But, were the two camera's set-up with similar in-camera jpeg processing settings?
> 
> I'm not familiar with Digitalcamerareview.com, are they reputable?



From the website:

"Each image was taken in a RAW format then converted to JPGs through Lightroom. No adjustments were made to the images before publishing this article."



ajfotofilmagem said:


> Pentax K3 looks very good. Really amazing in ISO 6400. :



ISO 6400 is looking real good, indeed!


----------



## horshack (Nov 5, 2013)

FF sensors have 2.25x more area than an APS-C sensor. That means than APS-C sensor must be 2.25x more efficient at converting light in order to even just match a FF sensor's performance let alone exceed it. That's just not possible when both chips benefit from the same technology improvements. It's only possible when comparing a much older FF sensor vs a contemporary APS-C sensor, such as the 5Dc vs D7100/K-3.


----------



## dtaylor (Nov 5, 2013)

From the site: _In fact, others like phototheology on youtube showed the K-5 IIs dominating the Canon 5D Mark III,_

* Go to Imaging Resource comparometer.
* Pull up 5D3 and K52.
* 5D3 shows small advantage at low ISO.
* 5D3 easily beats the K52 at high ISO. (5D3 @ 12800 is better then K52 @ 3200.)

* Pull up 5D3 and K3.
* No advantage at low ISO.
* 5D3 easily beats the K3 at high ISO. (5D3 @ 12800 just edges out K3 @ 3200.)

From the site: _Our testing shows that the Pentax K-3 swept the Nikon D600 in almost every image we took. Even at high ISOs the Pentax held its own against the full frame sensor!_

* Pull up D600 and K3.
* No advantage at low ISO.
* D600 clearly beats the K3 at high ISO. (D600 @ 12800 is better then K3 @ 6400.)

You'll get the same results looking at DPReview tests.

I will say...again...that the FF advantage lies at high ISO. At low ISO there's little or no real world difference.

As for their D600 vs. K3 tests...the two look about 1 to 1.3 stops apart at high ISO. That's close enough to easily screw up the exposure in the tests such that they look the same.

Again from their site: _In our testing, we used various apertures, but did not use the maximum aperture for either lens to account for the variation between the two._

T-stop (i.e. actual light transmission) can vary between lenses at all apertures.

_We set each camera to the aperture priority mode and allowed the cameras to choose the most appropriate shutter speed for the situation._

Camera meters most certainly vary.

_Each image was taken in a RAW format then converted to JPGs through Lightroom. No adjustments were made to the images before publishing this article._

"No adjustments" does not mean "equal" as ACR applies a profile out of the gate.

_In almost every shot, the Pentax K-3 had much better color quality than the Nikon D600._

Color varies with exposure, lenses, and...most importantly...RAW conversion. Again, "no adjustments" != "equal." And even cameras with quirky color given default RAW settings are easily profiled to give whatever you want.

Same with their statements on contrast and sharpness. Tweaking settings is all that's required.

I'll be the first to say that if you don't need large prints at high ISO then get whatever APS-C body you want. But when you push ISO, there's no crop camera on the market that can match current FF cameras. I especially like what I see from Canon's latest FF bodies (even though DxOJoke claims they are worse then the competition). These guys just screwed up their tests.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Nov 5, 2013)

horshack said:


> FF sensors have 2.25x more area than an APS-C sensor. That means than APS-C sensor must be 2.25x more efficient at converting light in order to even just match a FF sensor's performance let alone exceed it. That's just not possible when both chips benefit from the same technology improvements. It's only possible when comparing a much older FF sensor vs a contemporary APS-C sensor, such as the 5Dc vs D7100/K-3.



ok.. thatá what logic tells us.... so how do you explain the results?


----------



## horshack (Nov 6, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> horshack said:
> 
> 
> > FF sensors have 2.25x more area than an APS-C sensor. That means than APS-C sensor must be 2.25x more efficient at converting light in order to even just match a FF sensor's performance let alone exceed it. That's just not possible when both chips benefit from the same technology improvements. It's only possible when comparing a much older FF sensor vs a contemporary APS-C sensor, such as the 5Dc vs D7100/K-3.
> ...



There are an infinite number of ways to perform invalid tests. And another infinite number of ways to misinterpret the results


----------



## sdsr (Nov 6, 2013)

It's impressive that the K3 can do as well as it seems to here, but I don't think these images support their conclusions. Rather, they confirm what anyone who has used fairly recent Nikon cameras probably knows - that for similar settings Nikons tend to overexpose compared to other cameras (I learned that with my first dslr, a D3100, but I've seen the same thing on the D600 and D800e I've rented; my father always has the exposure compensation on his D7000 set at least at -0.3). I suspect that if you reduced the exposure a bit in LR or some other software the Nikon images would look at least as contrasty, colorful etc. as the Pentax ones. And if you look carefully at the photo of the barbed wire fence, you will see that while one of the barbs in the Nikon image is more-or-less in focus (I assumed that's what they focused on), it isn't in the Pentax image (nor is anything else, quite). I have no idea why; maybe it's user error, or maybe it's a reflection of what those of us who have owned Pentax cameras/lenses know - whatever other virtues they may have (remarkable DR being chief among them, probably), focus speed/accuracy isn't one of them. Some of the images also reflect the Pentax tendency to boost blues; look at the spruce tree shot, for instance (I once took a photo of a patch of dark purple petunias with my K5; in the resulting photo they were pure dark blue...).


----------



## Aglet (Nov 6, 2013)

the comparison shows me something else I've discovered, to my chagrin.
Identical exposure settings produce darker images from Pentax than from CaNikons.
I constantly have to +EV my Pentax when shooting in daylight. Not so much indoors.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Nov 6, 2013)

horshack said:


> There are an infinite number of ways to perform invalid tests.



+1 

dtaylor listed several of them above.


----------

