I'd disagree, the D's JPEG's were too soft for 8x12/8x10 by default. They were fine for 4x6. Or at least that was the case with the 200 or so JPEG's I shot with my D (I pretty much only shot RAW with that body).
-Adam graywolf wrote: > 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
