There may be wailing and gnashing of teeth over on DPReview about perceived problems with the K10D, but my initial impressions with my new K10D are that this camera delivers astonishing image quality! Images are much sharper right out of the camera (even with the same lens) than my istDL. The colour balance and rendition are vastly superior to the istDL and the tonal gradations and shadow detail (in fact dynamic range in general) are also vastly superior to the DL.
Every shot from the DL had to be quite drastically tweaked in levels to get rid of the red cast in every shot. Levels, curves, selective colour and slight selective saturation adjustments are part of my regular workflow for images from the DL. Last night, I found that a very quick and subtle tweak of levels and curves were all I needed to get more than satisfactory results from my K10D files. They really do POP! I also did an experiment with the same lens, same settings on the tripod, etc between the two cameras. I shot RAW and converted to JPEG with no adjustments whatsoever. Unfortunately, I resized them a little too small, so I'll redo it with larger files, but the difference between the two was staggering. In isolation the istDL shot looks okay. When compared to the K10D shot, the istDL shot is unacceptably soft, muddy, underexposed and red. The difference really did blow me away. Long story short...even though I had built the K10D up a huge amount, it has certainly met my expectations. The only issue I've had is the shake reduction appears to be a little intermittant. Sometimes it works (you can hear it during exposure) and sometimes it doesn't. Cheeers James -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
