• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

VPN...What Gives?

There have been many people on different forums expressing their concerns regarding VPN (Vertical Pattern Noise) in the Pentax K10D. Although I haven't experienced this anomaly, those who have done so feel that Pentax have not addressed these concerns. Can a Firmware Update resolve this issue? Is it exclusive to Pentax or does it come down to understanding the limits of the digital domain. I tend to believe that if ones exposure is correct within reason, that this issue does not crop up.

Ben
 
Last edited:
It does exist. Its not the noise that is the problem, it is the PATTERN. I think that is what most people object to - vertical streaks of noise. I think everyone understands there will be noise, lots of it, at 1600+.

Also, I think there is a small group of individuals who are making a concerted effort to keep this issue alive with the hope that Pentax will feel pressure to fix it.
 
Last edited:
Although i don't have a K10d I have been following the various VPN threads with interest. My conclusions are that it does exist but that it is no different than high ISO noise artefacts from other cameras. D200 banding anyone?

We get so fixated on minutae that we lose sight of the whole picture. Should Pentax fix the problem? Yes. Is it a big deal? Not for me when I upgrade from the K100d.
 
Oh yeah? But what about all the reasons YOU SHOULD buy a K10D - do you so easily forget about those? ;)

The Auto ISO feature helps me match image quality to my subject matter by constraining the ISO to levels I know look good. This way I can avoid having the issue interfere with my image.

As I build my lens collection with the faster lenses, I find myself using ISO 1600 less and less... So I guess thats my solution!
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
Like Ben I have not really seen this myself, I know it exists because I have seen others post images demonstrating it (though not in huge numbers). I know this phenomenon also exists in varying degrees in other cameras by other manufacturers, Nikon eliminated 90% of it in the D200 with a firmware update. All of that aside I see it as a non issue, realistically how many under-exposed images of dark objects shot at ISO 1600 are going to be suitable for printing or publishing? The noise alone, with or without banding, as well as the lack of detail, will make the majority of images that fall into this category as mostly unusable. I also think it is harder to produce on some bodies over others, I have tried pretty hard on 2 different occasions to produce this with my body, and other than an obscene amount of noise I was unable to do so. So there is either an additional factor we're missing, or it varies in degree from body to body.

Kyle
 

Ben Rubinstein

pro member
There are many people seeing it as low as iso 400 well exposed. I'm a pro photographer and looking to buy a tool. I don't want to buy a tool that is compromised in such a significant way, auto iso is worth nothing to me if the picture has banding. The image is the important thing not how you got there, when I have to get the image I don't need problems. I just don't have time to get bad copies, return and swop, be ignored by a clueless pentax service as documented on Dpreview, etc, etc.

The many comments to the effect that 'the picture is good enough to carry the banding' or 'who cares go out and take pictures' are all just so stupid. If I thought like that I would be shooting a disposable camera! The image, the large print for sale is what is important with the quality that fine art demands. I couldn't care less about the system used to get there but I'm damned if I'll put up with any substandard quality just to allow people to carry on their 'hear no evil' or 'if it doesn't bother me then how dare it bother you' mentalities.
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
Don't get me wrong Ben, The problem exists, and I think Pentax will fix it. I don't think it is all the problem some make it out to be. Nearly everyone I know shooting with a K10D has never come across it, and those that have seen it have only experienced it on a handful of occasions. I think the few instances that it happens get so much "air time" it makes the problem appear much worse than it really is. If you do an internet search for banding with Nikon's D200 you will find just as many complaining about similar problems, even after Nikon's firmware update. I also think the Pentax issue gets more attention because it is considered a "challenger" to these other cameras, and when you challenge the leaders you have to pretty much be better in every way in order to gain any acceptance from the "Pros". I know Pentax is taking this seriously, I have spoken with a couple of people at Pentax and they are concerned with fixing it, but keep in mind like any big corporation they aren't going to gather every employee in the company together and update them on every problem and their progress fixing it, so I'm sure some of the customer service people at Pentax won't be aware of all the aspects of the issue at this time. This camera has been out 4 1/2 months and has had 3 firmware updates, including one that added several new features, I think this speaks highly of the effort Pentax is still putting into this camera, I'm absolutely sure they are furiously working on the problem.

Kyle
 
My Responses to this Concern

As I stated in another Forum:

I have specifically addressed this issue with Pentax, France and I am sure to receive a response to my query shortly.

Here is a copy of a memo I sent a couple of days ago.

Hello Amigo;

Will Pentax address the problem of VPN (Vertical Pattern Noise) in their next Firmware Update? Could you ask Hamburg if they are aware of this problem? I am sure they are as many people have voiced their concern. It generally occurs at higher iso use.

Best Wishes...

Benjamin Kanarek

Also:

As I expressed in my original post, I have not experienced this anomaly and if I did, I would be making a HUGE stink about it. However, I sent the above memo to Pentax for those who have expressed their concerns regarding this problem. This is the best I can do under the circumstances. I do know, that most large companies adjust their R&D based on feedback from actual users.

Best Wishes
Ben
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Benjamin,

Have you tried to reproduce this phenomenon.

Could it be older lenses, different firmware, higher dynamic range, different color light?

Asher
 
Yes I Have..

Hi Benjamin,

Have you tried to reproduce this phenomenon.

Could it be older lenses, different firmware, higher dynamic range, different color light?

Asher

Hello Asher;

To be quite frank I have. In fact being that I still have all of my Canon gear, I tested both cameras'. Even though the noise levels at high iso was somewhat cleaner with the Canon, I could not produce VPN. What I did find however was that when under exposing by two to three stops, would produce all kinds of spurious noise in both cameras'. There was random pattern noise in both cameras'.

It is much less apparent when printing to hard copy. My concern is that much of this is often pixel peeping at 100 percent on screen and not translated to real world support. I.e. print in magazines, PLV's, posters, brochures etc.

Best Wishes
Ben
 
Top