One correction, the istD's jpegs were optimized for 8x12 prints, which says something about the market they thought they would sell to.
Adam Maas wrote: > It is commonly accepted knowledge, thanks to DPReview. It's also not > accurate in the least, unless you are using the default JPEG settings on > a D or DS and are pixel-peeping. The default settings were optimised for > 4x6 prints on these models and produced soft jpegs. Bumping up the > sharpness solved that problem. > > That said, JPEG output got a lot better with the K100D/K110D, but it > went from good to superb. > > -Adam > > > Jens Bladt wrote: >> A local guy wrote in a mail forum, that Pentax make so bad JPEG's, that one >> has to use RAW! >> Is this "commonly accepted knowledge"? >> >> I did some tests: >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157600220283492/ >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157600220255644/ >> >> Regards >> Jens Bladt >> >> http://www.jensbladt.dk >> +45 56 63 77 11 >> +45 23 43 85 77 >> >> No virus found in this outgoing message. >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. >> Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.1/805 - Release Date: 05/15/2007 >> 10:47 >> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
