I've used well over 100% many times. With the *istD photos, I generally used 261% at 1.5 pixels and a threshold of 11. With the K10D I'm still experimenting, but I seem to be coming in at about 100%, 1.2 pixels and a threshold of 19. It's all a matter of subjective taste. But I do look for artifacts and dial back if I see anything unhappy. Paul On Nov 24, 2006, at 7:48 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
> Quoting Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> David J Brooks wrote: >> >>> I found my Nikon files needed 70-100% my istD files sometimes >>> close to >> 200% >> >> 200% at what radius and threshold settings? >> I don't think I've ever used over 100% on anything from any camera! > > My settinghs for Nikon are,%70-100, 0.3 and 0 threshold. If i use > those my istD shots print very soft. Espesially with the 16-45, less > with the 50-200 which seems sharper from the camera. If that makes > sense. >> >>> Is this the case. It is/was my biggest complaint for the istD >> >> And why would it be a complaint? Using 200% takes the same effort in >> Photoshop as using 10%! As long as the end result looks good it >> doesn't >> seem significant to me. > > I just seem to have softer shots from the istD. But, the 16-45 > ~seems~ a problem, however saying that using the Nikon settings above, > 200% compared to 70-100% sems the differnce. > > Dave >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > > Equine Photography in York Region > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
