Rob, Thanks! Very helpful. I'm assigning your response to a folder for future reference. Considerate of you to take the time.
Jack --- Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 24 Sep 2004 at 14:33, Jack Davis wrote: > > > I'm curious about all things photographic > including > > digital. Since I own nine 35mm Pentax lenses, > seems > > logical to check out the *ist D. While several > have > > been playing with the phrase; "*ist D..what a > > wonderful camera", I've also noted the many > serious > > praises. > > Please help me understand what I read under the > (more > > info) Specification tab on the B&H site: > > 10D: Raw+Large=8.0MB Fine. > > 20D: Raw+jpeg(Large)=12.3MB. > > *ist D: Large(Raw)=10.5MB (Tiff)=18.1MB > > All note as "excluding memory". > > The only one which seems to track with its sensor > is > > the 10D. > > Trick wording? Meaningful? ...anyone? > > Hi Jack, > > These file sizes are not really meaningful, beyond > an indication of how many > shots you can expect to cram onto your chosen > storage media. > > RAW files in their most basic form consist of a > transcription of the RAW values > corresponding to each pixel in the array, some of > these are image forming and > some are not. Secondly the bit depth of the ADC may > be 12 bits but the RAW data > may be padded (with zeros) to provide a 2 byte word > or 16 bits per pixel, > obviously these extra 4 bits per pixel are redundant > but it still increases the > RAW file size. > > On top of this some RAW file formats are stored > uncompressed, some are > compressed, most also contain EXIF information which > can vary between camera > models and also some (like the *ist D RAW files) can > include an embedded JPG > file. > > Most cameras offer similar capabilities WRT noise > and exposure latitude and > from my experience far more differences will be seen > between the various post > processing methods. Generally the in camera > processing (TIFF & JPEG) output > really is little indication of the information that > can be extracted from most > camera RAW files in post processing. > > > How does the *ist D's Dynamic Range compare? > > The capture latitude of the *ist D is very similar > to most other cameras of the > same age (better than most slide film but poorer > than the most forgiving colour > neg film) but you won't really get to see what it > can do if you don't shoot RAW > and use a good post processing tool like PS CS. The > output differences between > the Pentax Photolab program and PC CS RAW is > startling, I didn't realize how > bad the Pentax program was (and it was much better > than the in camera generated > files). > > Cheers, > > > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > _______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com
