Thanks Dario - VERY interesting. BTW your links to the crops on page 9e (studio shots) don't seem to work.
Apart from some excess halo'ing in the TV masts on the 55mm shots, the Genzo has done an exceptional job and shows waaay more detail in the Pentax shots than the Canon ones can manage. The noise is pretty much as I expected - almost everything I have seen points to the *istD being one of, if not THE best in this respect. Don't quite understand how dpreview doesn't match most of the findings in this respect. Were the ist noise shots using Genzo? Must say, I tried Genzo a few weeks back and found it to be pretty unusable, but it does give us a fair amount of hope... > -----Original Message----- > From: Dario Bonazza 2 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 10 November 2003 14:50 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Cc: Ruediger Neumann > Subject: And now: the *ist D vs. the EOS 300D! > > > I had the chance to shoot same pictures with the *ist D and > the EOS 300D, and got interesting stuff to share. Here are > the page links: > http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p7e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p8e.htm http://www.dariobonazza.com/t04p9e.htm Also, many thanks to Ruediger Neumann for the link to the German page discussing Genzo RAW utility. At the end, the main problem with image quality of the *ist D truly looks to be the bad RAW-JPEG conversion done by the Pentax software. If you do a good conversion, the pictures have nothing to envy to Canon's SLR's (and surpass them well at higher ISO settings). Cheers, Dario Bonazza
