You are correct. I remember how delighted I was some thirty years ago when I took a tripod mounted picture of the rear of my house in Chicago with my 4x5 and discovered that I could crop down on a Coke carton that was on the back step and read the print on it. :-). Wish I still had time to play with sheet film. One of these days... Paul On Dec 16, 2006, at 8:53 AM, J. C. O'Connell wrote:
> With true high resolution imaging, ( like LF film ) you > get both superfine details and no edge "hardness". > i.e. You don't have to sacrifice one to get the other like > your talking about below. > > Like you, I really abhor over sharpened digital > images but I do love superfine details in large prints, this is > why I have still kept and use my LF Gear on occasion. > > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Paul Stenquist > Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 8:41 AM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: K10D review online > > > "Best" is subjective. The review is based on pixel peeping, not prints > that you hang on your wall. I suspect the slightly less crispy look of > the K10D jpeg prints would prove superior to what the others are > turning out. I know I don't go for maximum edge hardness on most of my > RAW conversions. That's for people who are more into trying to read the > fine print on the building across the street. They're into the > hardware, not the aesthetic. > Paul > On Dec 16, 2006, at 1:06 AM, Tom C wrote: > >> Then they misread what MOST people, not myself, MOST people want out >> of the >> camera. That is the best possible result w/o any post-exposure >> manipulation. >> >> I don't know why they refuse to get that simple fact. If we shoot RAW >> it's >> one thing, but people readiing the review thatwant the best possible >> .jpg >> w/o manipulation will likely fail to be impressed. >> >> Tom C. >> >> >> >> >>> From: Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >>> Subject: Re: K10D review online >>> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:02:08 -0800 >>> >>> >>> On Dec 15, 2006, at 5:21 PM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote: >>> >>>> .. In fact now I'm thinking that the jpeg "issue" may be a design >>>> decision. *If* it's tuned for better tonal gradation (I hope I'm >>>> using the correct words), the dynamic range will be lowered (since >>>> you have only 8 bits/channel to store the data). But I have no idea >>>> if this is really the case. .. >>> >>> I am sure that this is the case. >>> >>> There is a thread at DPReview >>> http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp? >>> forum=1036&message=21284539 >>> where someone is calling for a mass request to Pentax for a firmware >>> update. I found this reply interesting. >>> >>>> Forum Pentax SLR Talk >>>> Subject received this reply: >>>> Posted by chrswggl >>>> Date/Time 9:03:20 PM, Friday, December 15, 2006 (GMT) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Dear Sir/Madam, >>>> >>>> Thank you for contacting Pentax. >>>> >>>> Quotes from DPReview: >>>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/page11.asp >>>> >>>> "Sharpness: >>>> As we have seen on previous Pentax digital SLR's the default >>>> sharpness level is a little more conservative than other cameras, >>>> that's not a bad thing and simply means that if you want your images > >>>> a little sharper out of the camera just select +1 or +2. We also >>>> note that Pentax appear to be using a sharpening algorithm which >>>> produces 'undershoot' (a darkening of black side of contrast on an >>>> edge) rather than 'overshoot' (white halos), this can be seen most >>>> obviously on the watch fingers in the +3 crop. Unfortunately this >>>> appears to leave some black edges looking a little soft and >>>> increasing the sharpness setting doesn't help. " >>>> >>>> "When we reviewed the K100D we thought Pentax had got their image >>>> processing just right, however the single element of the entire K10D > >>>> equation which left us scratching our heads was just that. Either a >>>> poorly implemented demosaicing algorithm or a strange choice of >>>> sharpening parameters means that while the K10D's JPEG images have >>>> plenty of 'texture' they can lack the edge sharpness we're used to >>>> seeing from semi-pro digital SLR's. >>>> >>>> Pentax may well have been aiming for a smooth film-like appearance >>>> but I at least feel that the inability to tweak this out by >>>> increasing sharpness is a mistake. That said it's unlikely you'll >>>> see this difference in any print up to A3 size, it's a 100% view >>>> thing so you have to decide if that's important to you or not. To >>>> get that absolute crisp appearance you'll need to shoot RAW, and use > >>>> Adobe Camera RAW or another third party converter (as the supplied >>>> converter produces similar results to the camera). >>>> >>>> With the criticism out of the way we return to the K10D as a >>>> 'photographic tool', something it does very well. It's a camera you >>>> get used to very quickly and never really leaves you searching for >>>> the correct setting or control. It's also a camera you can grow >>>> into, the unique exposure modes are both creatively interesting and >>>> useful, a range of options such as this encourage you to experiment. > >>>> At just under $900 it's a very strong proposition, so despite our >>>> reservations about the slightly soft image processing the K10D just >>>> achieves a Highly Recommended." >>>> >>>> >>>> This is something that we could change with a firmware update, but >>>> to the best of my knowledge the camera is working as intended by our > >>>> designers, so such a firmware update is unlikely. >>>> >>>> If you prefer a sharper shot to a softer feel, then you will >>>> probably wish to shoot in the DNG RAW format instead of PEF RAW or >>>> JPG. >>>> >>>> If you prefer a smoother image, then you will want to shoot in PEF >>>> RAW or JPG. >>>> >>>> >>>> If you are in need of further assistance, please respond to this >>>> email or call our technical support center at 800-877-0155. >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Dorian B. >>>> Pentax Imaging Technical Support >>>> ---- >>> >>> Now the intriguing question, to me, is Dorian's statement: >>> >>>> -- >>>> If you prefer a sharper shot to a softer feel, then you will >>>> probably wish to shoot in the DNG RAW format instead of PEF RAW or >>>> JPG. >>>> >>>> If you prefer a smoother image, then you will want to shoot in PEF >>>> RAW or JPG. >>>> -- >>> >>> This implies one of two things: >>> >>> Either there is some image processing applied to the RAW data in PEF >>> and JPEG output modes that isn't applied to the DNG output mode, or >>> Dorian is assuming Pentax Lab for PEF conversion which performs >>> different smoothing/cleanup compared to when it processes K10D PEFs. >>> It might also be an answer to the comments that Pentax Lab and >>> Silkypix produce different RAW conversion results with PEF vs Camera >>> Raw and Lightroom with DNG. This is an interesting question mark and >>> I'm curious to see what happens when Adobe supports K10D PEF files. >>> Meanwhile I'm going to devise a test to see if I can find subtle >>> differences ... >>> >>>> I don't use jpeg anyway. So I don't really care :) >>> >>> :-) >>> >>> Ach. Someday all this flap will be over and I'll spend more time >>> doing PHOTOGRAPHY again, rather than being an equipment weenie. >>> >>> Godfrey >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
