I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one, because in my opinion the smaller the print the more sharpening it needs.
Adam Maas wrote: > 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
