Hello Dario, I would also be interested in the quality in regards to being printed on both an inkjet and a digital lab (Agfa, Fuji, Noritsu). I have found in my own digital endeavors, that many times, the printed output is better or worse than what I view on screen.
Thanks, Bruce Monday, October 13, 2003, 12:29:21 PM, you wrote: DB2> I forgot to say that next Thursday I'll get an *ist D to test by myself, so DB2> eventually I'll have the final response to my stomachache. DB2> Dario DB2> ----- Original Message ----- DB2> From: "Dario Bonazza 2" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DB2> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> DB2> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 9:16 PM DB2> Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! >> Dear Alex, >> >> Thanks for the link, but the pictures fully confirm my impressions. >> >> Commenting on IMGP1412 (f/11) and IMGP1418 (f/4.5), the only two I >> downloaded at full resolution for not being too heavy on your DSL line: >> >> Still you cannot tell for sure where the camera was focused (judging by >> what's in focus and what's out). You should see green leaves at a certain >> distance (focused distance) as one-by-one, not always as a whole green >> regardless of the distance. Did you notice that there's practically no >> different depth-of-field between f/4.5 and f/11, like if pictures were DB2> taken >> through haze or fog? I suspect the low-pass filter in front of the CCD to DB2> be >> responsible for that. >> >> Not to speak of the dynamic range: clouds in direct light should look as >> being 3D, not like painted in watercolor as they look. >> And what about the color balance? Greys of distant rocks must be tones of >> grey (not pinkish as they are in IMGP1412), while the sky looks unnatural >> cyan... >> >> Some days ago I stayed for some time at a pre-press service, where the DB2> boss >> made me see several DSLR pictures (downloaded at their full resolution), DB2> and >> we discussed them in deep. >> When you enlarge pics taken with the 10D/300D or the S2 Pro (and also DB2> those >> taken with the best 4/5 MPixel digital compacts around) you can see good >> detail and little USM (as you dub UnSharp Masking, not to be confused with >> UltraSonicMotor :-) >> Despite that, in-focus and out-of-focus areas in picure are easy to spot DB2> and >> you can always find a sharp area somewhere. That has little if anything to >> do with excessive in-camera unsharp mask, which I agree the lower the >> better. In fact, you can apply unsharp mask on those good pics and they >> still take it well. >> That's not the case with the *ist D: when you apply enough USM to let >> pictures look acceptable when smaller than 1:1 on video, when you enalarge >> them 1:1 angled lines such as hair or grass are so much saw-toothed. >> >> I could go ahead with more details and comments, but I feel so bad in DB2> having >> to admit such things... >> >> Dario >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "alex wetmore" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 6:11 PM >> Subject: Re: I got my *ist D and I LOVE IT !!! >> >> >> > On Mon, 13 Oct 2003, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: >> > > Ryan wrote: >> > > > I just got to say I LOVE MY *ist D !!! >> > > > The image quality is sharper than I expected, >> > > >> > > Please forgive me, but maybe you were expecting too little, since all >> *ist D >> > > images I've seen so far look more or less blurred (compared to other >> same >> > > specs DSLR's), with no details in focus, like there's always camera >> shake. >> > > Am I the only one having such an impression? >> > >> > The internal sharpening that the *ist D does is less than any consumer >> > digicam that I've ever seen and less than many digital SLRs. Out of >> > the camera images look much like they are from a scanned slide. I >> > think that this is a good thing -- you can always add sharpness, but >> > you can't always remove it or the noise that it adds at higher ISOs. >> > The camera does have an option to increase sharpness which might make >> > images closer to other D-SLRs. The Canon 300D has the most sharpness >> > of any D-SLR that I've seen. >> > >> > There are some unsharpened full resolution *ist D images at >> > http://phred.org/~alex/pictures/hiking/snow-lake-10-5-03/ from a >> > hiking trip that I went on last week. Please don't go crazy >> > downloading them though, that'll be painful to my DSL line. These >> > were shot using the A 24/2.8 or the A 50/1.4 (most were from the >> > 24/2.8). >> > >> > The resized images do have some USM applied. >> > >> > alex >> > >>
