JCO, Boris, Godfrey For my purposes I don't really need scientific tests. I'm not a scientist - just a photographer, who wnats to know my tools. I just need to know, if my genral approach to exposure has to change (using a different strategy for exposure corretions). And I wanted to know if my camera meter was off. I believe I have a negative answer to both questions now :-) Except perhaps that the need for exposure corrections (in order to avoid over exposed highlights) has become a some what smaller, when using the K10D.
How the K10D will react to sunny sceneries with deep shadows - I have no idea. But I'm sure that the 67% increase of the amount of pixels - and a larger colour depth, will in fact mean improved dynamic range, thus more room for post editing. This may very well be one of the reasons Pentax to choose to let this camera render the images a litle bit darker (this suits me jsut fine). It won't be a huge problem dealing with this later. It would have been much worse having to deal with burned out highlights - believe me, I know :-). Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af J. C. O'Connell Sendt: 11. februar 2007 14:16 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Your conclusion is most likely correct based on overall experiences with these cameras, but I would question a few things in this specific test procedure. The exact same lens should be used on both cameras and the images should be tweeked on one of the cameras via fine bracketing for exposure value to make up for any variations in camera metering or shutter speeds from camera to camera. It would also be interesting to see what differences remain with both images optimized manually in RAW conversion and photoshop tweeking. I dont know about the K10D, but my istDS doesnt do that great on a bright sunny day scene with lots shadows compared to typical color neg film. Its more like medium speed slide film with regards to handling high contrast scenes like that. jco -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Boris Liberman Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 7:55 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Jens, at al. I did not perform any tests such as this one, however my general impression is that K10D: 1. Has slightly wider dynamic range. 2. Has more consistent auto white balance operation. 3. Renders images in somewhat more faithful way. The colors look more natural. Just my cents. On 2/11/07, Jens Bladt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... > ... > And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. > It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with > contrast. ... > Judge for your selves. What do you think? > > http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html > > Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. -- Boris -- 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 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
