Looking at the pictures there does seem to be a larger increase in resolution than I expected. How much that is attributable to the new sensor and how much to AS and the new imaging engine is a question. The camera looks quite desirable except for lacking a couple of features that I would miss, (and I'm not talking about the aperture simulator, I already miss that). I figure at about $150 less than it's current price I'll grab one. Which is what I expect the street price to be once the early demand subsides, say in about 6 months. I wouldn't expect it to sell for much less until it's discontinued.
Tom C wrote: > Funny, a year ago it seemed a number of people here were of the opinion that > a 10MP wasn't that big of a jump in resolution and one would not see a big > increase in picture quality. I guess that's changed now that Pentax has a > higher MP camera on the market. > > > Tom C. > > > > >> From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> >> Subject: Re: K10D image quality >> Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 23:39:00 -0500 >> >> I won't scrap my D. It's a good backup, and it's three years old. I >> expect the K10 will have at least as long a life. It will hopefully >> be the backup to a K1. I used to spend around $2000 a year on film, >> so it's working for me. >> Paul >> On Nov 30, 2006, at 11:26 PM, J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> >> >>> Make you wanna scrap your 6Mp cameras doesn't it? >>> I mean, why would you use them anymore? >>> Be honest, I wouldn't if what your'e saying is >>> correct and I have no reason to believe it >>> isn't. I said this before, at this stage, >>> DSLRS are still short term, almost disposable, >>> cameras as the newer ones keep getting >>> signifigantly better and better...Totally >>> unlike film cameras where all you have to >>> do is install the latest technology films. >>> That doesnt mean they are not good values, >>> they certainly are, its just I would never >>> expect to keep using the same one long term, >>> like 5 yrs or more until they reach the point >>> of recording everything the lens renders, and >>> they haven't yet ( Maybe Canon's 16MP FF >>> is the sole exception to this rule, but maybe not ). >>> jco >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On >>> Behalf Of >>> Paul Stenquist >>> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2006 10:59 PM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: Re: K10D image quality >>> >>> >>> I would say the difference is dramatic in terms of sharpness and >>> detail rendering. But my D cameras were both very good. Excellent >>> color and relatively good exposure control. But the K10 is >>> considerably better in almost every respect and probably equal in >>> noise. >>> Paul On Nov 30, 2006, at 10:40 PM, Markus Maurer wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Hi Paul >>>> you are fast and helpful and a valuable source of information for >>>> me with >>>> your answers, thanks! >>>> >>>> But, did you ever notice such **drastic** difference between your D >>>> and K10D >>>> as James did with the DL? >>>> It does not sound that dramatic from your report.... >>>> greetings >>>> Markus >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> Behalf Of >>>> Paul Stenquist >>>> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 4:20 AM >>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> Subject: Re: K10D image quality >>>> >>>> >>>> I've shot 16,000 images with a D body and about 600 with a K10. I >>>> shoot RAW only with both. I've found that my K10 images are closer to >>>> correct when I first open them in the converter. I don't know what >>>> that means when one is shooting RAW, but I'm certainly pleased. In >>>> regard to sharpness and definition, there is no comparison. The K10D >>>> images are far superior. In regard to noise, I believe it's about a >>>> tossup. I know this goes against prevailing wisdom, but the 1600 >>>> images I've shot with the K10 look quite good. I rarely shoot that >>>> high an IS) with the D, so it's tough to compare. But these seem >>>> better or at least "as good." I might also add that the K10D tends to >>>> deliver a bit more exposure at the same setting as I used on the D. >>>> That could explain the relatively low perceived noise. >>>> Paul >>>> On Nov 30, 2006, at 10:08 PM, Markus Maurer wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi James >>>>> >>>>> I would be interested to see a comparison among all of the digital >>>>> Pentax >>>>> bodies with the same lens. >>>>> Could you possible have got a bad sample of the DL or can anybody >>>>> confirm >>>>> the red cast and other things mentioned? >>>>> Is there indeed a different amount of "photoshopping" required with >>>>> the >>>>> D/DS/DL/K family? >>>>> Since I soon will buy my first digital body.... >>>>> >>>>> greetings >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> Behalf Of >>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>> Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 12:50 AM >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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 >> > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
