Read the post. There's been no processing of either file. I'll take the k10d shot over the muddy, red dl shot any day. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 9:47 PM Subject: RE: K10D image quality
> Immediate thing that comes to mind here is that the K10D shot has waaay > too much contrast and the mid range in addition to the shadow areas are > dissapearing into blackness. I think you have also gone too far (on my > monitor) away from the red cast and the K10D shot now has a greenish > cast. > > I have to say that I would be seriously unhappy with the K10 shot here - > unless processing is the cause... > > Rob > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 30 November 2006 23:50 > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: K10D image quality > > > Here's the link to the comparison shots...as I said, they're tiny but > the difference is > very noticeable. Both were iso200 with auto whitebalance in aperture > priority with > the lens stopped right down. > > http://tinyurl.com/y5mqe4 > > Another interesting thing is that these files have been resized to > exactly the same > number of pixels, however the K10D file is about 25% larger. Clearly > the K10D > captures and retains more data. > > Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: > >> There may be wailing and gnashing of teeth over on DPReview about >> perceived problems with the K10D, but my initial impressions with my >> new K10D are that this camera delivers >> astonishing image quality! Images are much sharper right out of the >> camera (even with >> the same lens) than my istDL. The colour balance and rendition are >> vastly superior to >> the istDL and the tonal gradations and shadow detail (in fact dynamic >> range in general) >> are also vastly superior to the DL. >> >> Every shot from the DL had to be quite drastically tweaked in levels >> to get rid of the red cast in every shot. Levels, curves, selective >> colour and slight selective saturation >> adjustments are part of my regular workflow for images from the DL. >> >> Last night, I found that a very quick and subtle tweak of levels and >> curves were all I needed to get more than satisfactory results from my > >> K10D files. >> >> They really do POP! I also did an experiment with the same lens, same > >> settings on the tripod, etc between the two cameras. I shot RAW and >> converted to JPEG with no >> adjustments whatsoever. Unfortunately, I resized them a little too >> small, so I'll redo it >> with larger files, but the difference between the two was >> staggering. >> >> In isolation the istDL shot looks okay. When compared to the K10D >> shot, the istDL shot is unacceptably soft, muddy, underexposed and >> red. The difference really did blow me >> away. >> >> Long story short...even though I had built the K10D up a huge amount, >> it has certainly met my expectations. >> >> The only issue I've had is the shake reduction appears to be a little >> intermittant. >> Sometimes it works (you can hear it during exposure) and sometimes it >> doesn't. >> >> Cheeers >> James >> >> -- >> 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 > > -- > 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
