Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
dick graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The ist ds2 ranked dead last in resolution behind 2 8megs ( canon d350 and olympus 500) and 2 other 6 megs ( nikon d-50 and konica/minolta 5d?) I'll bet those resolution tests were done shooting in JPEG mode. Why on earth would someone for whom resolution was critical be shooting in JPEG mode??? -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
George Sinos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For all practical purposes, any of the differences in image quality will be swamped out by whatever you do with photoshop, the paper used to print the image, and all the other steps of the process on the way to the print. Including the lens used. It's probably hard to sell a magazine with headline that says Five cameras tested, they're virtually identical, it won't make much difference which one you pick There's a lot of knowledge shared on this list, but that's not knowledge, it's *wisdom* :) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Mark Roberts wrote: dick graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The ist ds2 ranked dead last in resolution behind 2 8megs ( canon d350 and olympus 500) and 2 other 6 megs ( nikon d-50 and konica/minolta 5d?) I'll bet those resolution tests were done shooting in JPEG mode. Why on earth would someone for whom resolution was critical be shooting in JPEG mode??? Mark, I believe it can make sense. Don't forget that most DLSR's don't go in pro, or semi-pro, or would-be pro hands. The very most of them will end up in amateur hands of any level and skill, where a better in-camera JPEG conversion (or a better lens, or a faster AF, or a wider exposure latitude, or a better tuned meter, or a better whatever) still makes a lot of sense. I know folks who bought the Ds and even don't own a computer, nor they want to buy one just for getting the damn prints. Yes, those folks will hardly print formats larger than A4, but knowing that they can go well beyond that size won't hurt them and won't prevent them from buying a camera with a better reputation. At the end of the day, if it's better, it's better (even if you don't truly need it). Dario
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
There's a lot of knowledge shared on this list, but that's not knowledge, it's *wisdom* :) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com And thats why i follow around like a lost puppy.vbg Dave
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
- Original Message - From: dick graham Subject: Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out The ist ds2 ranked dead last in resolution behind 2 8megs ( canon d350 and olympus 500) and 2 other 6 megs ( nikon d-50 and konica/minolta 5d?) One needs to know whether the test lenses were of equivalent quality, and how the image files were post processed before one can make a fair assessment of whether or not the resolving power of the camera. I was in Lloydminster yesterday looking at purchasing a Gretag Netprinter with a friend. I gave the vendor an in camera JPEG to run as a test file. They run Nikons and Canons in their studio, and have in camera processing set on the high side of neutral, and run the files through Noise Ninja to clean up the resulting artifacts. I gave them a file with the camera set to my default settings, which is minimum contrast, saturation and sharpening, which was shot with my 31mm LTD lens. The guy took the file, and ran it through his post processing routine, and made a spectacularly soft print. While they were making snide comments about garbage Pentax equipment, I was out reshooting the file with the camera set to it's highest settings for sharpness, contrast and saturation. The resulting print made their girlycam files look pretty junior. I thought the resulting image looked overdone, but I also didn't have a lot of use for what they were churning out. The Netprinter turned out to be a dog, BTW. William Robb
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
On Feb 13, 2006, at 11:28 AM, E.R.N. Reed wrote: It also contains BH's phone number ... that can be REALLY useful. The BH phone number is on speed dial in my cell phone... !!! Godfrey
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Jack Davis wrote on 11.02.06 14:44: For those who may be curious, or even care, the March '06 issue of Pop Photo has a performance comparison between Canon XT, Konica Minolta Max. 5D, Nikon D50, Olympus Evolt E-500 and the Pentax *ist DS2. While this listing is alphabetical, the order is a hint at the article's results. I'll skip the tedious details, but forward a final comment in their Bottom Line summary. Pentax needs a hot new rig (say, 8-10MP) in its lineup. Hmmm... Nikon D50 has still 6MPix sensor and KM 5D too... D50 lacks some serious essential functions like DOF preview and it has keyhole type viewfinder, 5D has smaller pentamirror based viewfinder and low resolution (about 11 pixels) but large (2.5) LCD making pixels very visible and getting into view. So it all dpends on tester's mood during test day ;-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
dick graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The main gimmicky feature they found the Pentax lacking was RESOLUTION! I find that pretty damn important. I didn't read the article but if the resolution difference they're talking about is between 6 megapixels and 8 I'd classify it as 95% gimmicky. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
The ist ds2 ranked dead last in resolution behind 2 8megs ( canon d350 and olympus 500) and 2 other 6 megs ( nikon d-50 and konica/minolta 5d?) DG At 10:42 AM 2/13/2006 -0500, you wrote: dick graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The main gimmicky feature they found the Pentax lacking was RESOLUTION! I find that pretty damn important. I didn't read the article but if the resolution difference they're talking about is between 6 megapixels and 8 I'd classify it as 95% gimmicky. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Not a reply specifically to Mark's comment, but to the thread in general. I read the article and remember reading that all of the cameras were judged capable of eaisly making excellent images up to 11x14. For all practical purposes, any of the differences in image quality will be swamped out by whatever you do with photoshop, the paper used to print the image, and all the other steps of the process on the way to the print. It's probably hard to sell a magazine with headline that says Five cameras tested, they're virtually identical, it won't make much difference which one you pick See you later, gs http://georgesphotos.net
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Effective resolution is pretty much identical between the cameras (The 5D even uses the same sensor as the Pentax and the D50 uses a variant of that sensor). The big advantages of the other cameras are in Write Speed, buffer size and AF speed. The DS2 wins on ergonomics, size and viewfinder. The 5D is also an oddball (good viewfinder, Anti-Shake, but otherwise fairly similar in performance to the others). Is PopPhoto still claiming that the XT does 3.2fps? PopPhoto's DSLR tests are not well done, they've repeatedly claimed ludicrous or simply inaccurate results, and seem to pick winners based merely on advertising revenue. I stopped reading them a while back because their reviews were so divorced from reality (the Rebel XT review was the breaking point, really badly done) -Adam dick graham wrote: The main gimmicky feature they found the Pentax lacking was RESOLUTION! I find that pretty damn important. DG At 08:55 PM 2/11/2006 -0500, you wrote: Jack Davis wrote on Sat, 11 Feb 2006 05:48:55: For those who may be curious, or even care, the March '06 issue of Pop Photo has a performance comparison between Canon XT, Konica Minolta Max. 5D, Nikon D50, Olympus Evolt E-500 and the Pentax *ist DS2. While this listing is alphabetical, the order is a hint at the article's results. I'll skip the tedious details, but forward a final comment in their Bottom Line summary. Pentax needs a hot new rig (say, 8-10MP) in its lineup. Well, I agree that Pentax could use a new 8-10MP body in their lineup, but I found their analysis of the DS2 and its competitors somewhat superficial. They didn't seem to note the reasons so many find it attractive - the excellent (for a DSLR) viewfinder, the light but solid construction, and the excellent ergonomics. Instead, they seemed to zero in on some of the gimmicky features that it lacks. These quickie comparos always seem to fall short of getting to the heart of the matter. I suspect that the rankings are driven more by marketplace popularity and advertising revenues than anything else... They did have a favorable review of the DA14 in the same issue, though. Regards, Jim
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
I'd buy that issue, if only for it's historical significance ... Shel [Original Message] From: George Sinos It's probably hard to sell a magazine with headline that says Five cameras tested, they're virtually identical, it won't make much difference which one you pick See you later, gs http://georgesphotos.net
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Careful, I'm about to blaspheme! I warn that even though I'm not faulting the DS2, but just stating my reaction to ergonomic, structural and operational convenience points. To me, the image is everything. If I need fiddle with menu options and become irritated at some irrational design blunder, I could easily overlook it if the image were worth it. Admittedly, said determination is to a large degree subjective with each user having their own unique set of standards. It surprised me somewhat to read a critical admonition of an advertiser's product appearing in an international publication. Jack --- Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jack Davis wrote on 11.02.06 14:44: For those who may be curious, or even care, the March '06 issue of Pop Photo has a performance comparison between Canon XT, Konica Minolta Max. 5D, Nikon D50, Olympus Evolt E-500 and the Pentax *ist DS2. While this listing is alphabetical, the order is a hint at the article's results. I'll skip the tedious details, but forward a final comment in their Bottom Line summary. Pentax needs a hot new rig (say, 8-10MP) in its lineup. Hmmm... Nikon D50 has still 6MPix sensor and KM 5D too... D50 lacks some serious essential functions like DOF preview and it has keyhole type viewfinder, 5D has smaller pentamirror based viewfinder and low resolution (about 11 pixels) but large (2.5) LCD making pixels very visible and getting into view. So it all dpends on tester's mood during test day ;-) -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Why do you people waste your time reading Popular Photography, never mind discussing their findings? That magazine is a waste of paper. Godfrey
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
George Sinos wrote: For all practical purposes, any of the differences in image quality will be swamped out by whatever you do with photoshop, the paper used to print the image, and all the other steps of the process on the way to the print. It's probably hard to sell a magazine with headline that says Five cameras tested, they're virtually identical, it won't make much difference which one you pick Yep... good points. I guess if the user is the kind that doesn't adjust the image post-capture, then the out-of-camera results may be more important. Tom C.
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Godfrey wrote: Why do you people waste your time reading Popular Photography, never mind discussing their findings? That magazine is a waste of paper. Godfrey For the most part yes, but I can still learn something occasionally, even from Pop Photo, or be refreshed on something I've fogotten. I may browse it at the newstand, but wouldn't pay for it.:-) I do agree it's mostly a waste. After years of reading photo magazines, it amazes how the same they are from year-to-year. Same seasonal subjects over and over again. I actually like some of the British photo magazines the best. At least it seems like they try to mix it up to keep it interesting. Tom C.
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Other publications have mentioned that although the ist ds delivers great quality raw images the camera's image processor is not passing on all the information and thus the jpegs turn up soft etc. All of us have heard of the image processor problem and wonder if the new editions,supposedly coming later this year, will have this problem fixed. DG At 10:27 AM 2/13/2006 -0600, you wrote: The ist ds2 ranked dead last in resolution behind 2 8megs ( canon d350 and olympus 500) and 2 other 6 megs ( nikon d-50 and konica/minolta 5d?) DG At 10:42 AM 2/13/2006 -0500, you wrote: dick graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The main gimmicky feature they found the Pentax lacking was RESOLUTION! I find that pretty damn important. I didn't read the article but if the resolution difference they're talking about is between 6 megapixels and 8 I'd classify it as 95% gimmicky. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Godfrey has explained this several times, and being the technodunce that I am in such matters, I cannot say if he's correct or not wrt the technical aspects of his statements. However, I'm real good at interpreting and understanding results, and based on what Godders has said here, and some JPEG comparisons put forth by, I believe, Dario, I just don't see a problem. What I see is a lack of understanding by a number of people who expect to see a JPEG look a certain way. When shooting JPEG with the DS, I reduce contrast, saturation, and sharpness from the standard settings. I found that gives better control and superior results when processing the JPEG inages. If people don't want to fiddle with their JPEGs as much, and feel they are too soft, etc., then all that needs to be done is to adjust the sharpness, contrast, and saturation in the camera. That's why those controls were put there - so the user can fine tune the results to his or her preferences. BTW, no camera passes on all the information when producing a JPEG. Shel [Original Message] From: dick graham Other publications have mentioned that although the ist ds delivers great quality raw images the camera's image processor is not passing on all the information and thus the jpegs turn up soft etc. All of us have heard of the image processor problem and wonder if the new editions,supposedly coming later this year, will have this problem fixed.
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
I was the one pointing out the quality problems of PentaxPhotoLab RAW conversion, posting here some comparisons at the time the D went out: http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm (scroll down a bit to see the enlarged crops) However, things have changed and problems have been solved by third parties. Use Rawshooter Essentials (free), Rawshooter Premium (affordable) or ACR + either Elements or Photoshop ($$$) at your leisure. Quality of Pentax RAW converted files can be OK now. Dario - Original Message - From: dick graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Sent: Monday, February 13, 2006 6:31 PM Subject: Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out Other publications have mentioned that although the ist ds delivers great quality raw images the camera's image processor is not passing on all the information and thus the jpegs turn up soft etc. All of us have heard of the image processor problem and wonder if the new editions,supposedly coming later this year, will have this problem fixed. DG At 10:27 AM 2/13/2006 -0600, you wrote: The ist ds2 ranked dead last in resolution behind 2 8megs ( canon d350 and olympus 500) and 2 other 6 megs ( nikon d-50 and konica/minolta 5d?) DG At 10:42 AM 2/13/2006 -0500, you wrote: dick graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The main gimmicky feature they found the Pentax lacking was RESOLUTION! I find that pretty damn important. I didn't read the article but if the resolution difference they're talking about is between 6 megapixels and 8 I'd classify it as 95% gimmicky. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Shel Belinkoff wrote: Godfrey has explained this several times, and being the technodunce that I am in such matters, I cannot say if he's correct or not wrt the technical aspects of his statements. However, I'm real good at interpreting and understanding results, and based on what Godders has said here, and some JPEG comparisons put forth by, I believe, Dario, I just don't see a problem. What I see is a lack of understanding by a number of people who expect to see a JPEG look a certain way. When shooting JPEG with the DS, I reduce contrast, saturation, and sharpness from the standard settings. I found that gives better control and superior results when processing the JPEG inages. If people don't want to fiddle with their JPEGs as much, and feel they are too soft, etc., then all that needs to be done is to adjust the sharpness, contrast, and saturation in the camera. That's why those controls were put there - so the user can fine tune the results to his or her preferences. BTW, no camera passes on all the information when producing a JPEG. Shel Some in-camera JPEG processors are better than others. Dario
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
On Feb 13, 2006, at 10:11 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: Some in-camera JPEG processors are better than others. Surely true. Although by and large the differences in in-camera JPEG rendering are more a matter of what trade-offs the manufacturer made with respect to their expected audience. Pentax designed the in-camera JPEG rendering defaults of the DS et al to produce very high quality 4x6 prints straight out of the camera, not to be the ultimate settings for image post-processing and large size prints. Canon's defaults on the 10D and 20D JPEGs are much more attuned to the notion of editing, leaving much more overhead for sharpening, and differ from the defaults on the 300D and 350XT which are more like the Pentax. For all of these cameras, you modify the JPEG rendering engine's settings to meet the needs you have if you want to produce better files for editing, or you go to RAW format and do the rendering yourself. It's no surprise that Pentax supplied RAW conversion software uses algorithms similar to what the camera does, just like Canon's RAW conversion software uses algorithms similar to what their cameras do. *ANY* JPEG rendering from [EMAIL PROTECTED] RAW data is tossing 40-60% of the data away. It's in the nature of the conversion process, which does gamma correction, chroma interpolation, and reduction to [EMAIL PROTECTED] RGB color space, then JPEG compression. What parameters you set in the algorithms determine the quality of the final output, and have to be optimized for specific purposes. Godfrey
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
IOW, why worry about lens resolution. Right? Jack --- George Sinos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not a reply specifically to Mark's comment, but to the thread in general. I read the article and remember reading that all of the cameras were judged capable of eaisly making excellent images up to 11x14. For all practical purposes, any of the differences in image quality will be swamped out by whatever you do with photoshop, the paper used to print the image, and all the other steps of the process on the way to the print. It's probably hard to sell a magazine with headline that says Five cameras tested, they're virtually identical, it won't make much difference which one you pick See you later, gs http://georgesphotos.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
The subject is interesting to me even when technical and subjective point generate questions. Their tests reveal their basis and allow me to decide if I care. When I agree with the test results, why does that please me? Jack --- Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd buy that issue, if only for it's historical significance ... Shel [Original Message] From: George Sinos It's probably hard to sell a magazine with headline that says Five cameras tested, they're virtually identical, it won't make much difference which one you pick See you later, gs http://georgesphotos.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Pop Photo D Shoot-out
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: Why do you people waste your time reading Popular Photography, never mind discussing their findings? That magazine is a waste of paper. I haven't read it lately, but back when I did, it sometimes contained pretty pictures. (Especially in the ads.) It also contains BH's phone number ... that can be REALLY useful. :D
Pop Photo D Shoot-out
For those who may be curious, or even care, the March '06 issue of Pop Photo has a performance comparison between Canon XT, Konica Minolta Max. 5D, Nikon D50, Olympus Evolt E-500 and the Pentax *ist DS2. While this listing is alphabetical, the order is a hint at the article's results. I'll skip the tedious details, but forward a final comment in their Bottom Line summary. Pentax needs a hot new rig (say, 8-10MP) in its lineup. Jack __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
