Try the Photoshop CS convertor. You can download a trial, but WARNING YOU WILL SUBSEQUENTLY SPEND MONEY!!!
> -----Original Message----- > From: Dario Bonazza [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 May 2004 18:59 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax High End DSLR > > > I still cannot understand why people keep shooting RAW with > the *ist D, as the Pentax RAW converter does a worse job (too > evident pixelation on > outlines) than the in-camera software. Hard to believe, very > hard to justify, but true and repeatedly tested by yours truly. > > Of course, RAW shooting allows extended image tuning, but can > this balance poor outlines and so much reduced storage > capacity (= bigger files for smaller prints)? > > Am I missing something here? Have you found a good RAW > converter, also allowing color balance (unlike the Genzo)? > Joe (and other folks doing the > same) can you explain your thoughts on this? > > Thanks. > > Dario Bonazza > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "jtainter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 7:29 PM > Subject: Pentax High End DSLR > > > > I once wanted one, preferably full frame. Now that one may > appear that > > has > higher resolution than the *ist D, I find that I have > reservations. The primary reason is that higher resolution > will fill up a cf card faster. When I travel, I am already > constrained by storage capacity. On my recent trip to > California I took 3 gb -- enough for 212 raw images. (I shoot > only in raw, so I hope no one responds about how many jpeg > images fit on a card). I came home with space for only 20 > images. I shot 192 images in one full day and two afternoons. > > > > Until the price of compact flash comes down, I am not > certain that I > > would > try to acquire a higher resolution dSLR, even if I could > afford one. As we all know, the camera itself is only the > beginning of the cost. > > > > Joe > > > > > >
