Were they RAW files? A RAW file has to be processed and optimized for a valid comparison. They are not meant to be viewed "as shot." Paul On Dec 1, 2006, at 5:56 AM, J and K Messervy wrote:
> Read the post. There's been no processing of either file. > > I'll take the k10d shot over the muddy, red dl shot any day. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <pdml@pdml.net> > Sent: Friday, December 01, 2006 9:47 PM > Subject: RE: K10D image quality > > >> Immediate thing that comes to mind here is that the K10D shot has >> waaay >> too much contrast and the mid range in addition to the shadow areas >> are >> dissapearing into blackness. I think you have also gone too far (on >> my >> monitor) away from the red cast and the K10D shot now has a greenish >> cast. >> >> I have to say that I would be seriously unhappy with the K10 shot >> here - >> unless processing is the cause... >> >> Rob >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >> Of >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: 30 November 2006 23:50 >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: K10D image quality >> >> >> Here's the link to the comparison shots...as I said, they're tiny but >> the difference is >> very noticeable. Both were iso200 with auto whitebalance in aperture >> priority with >> the lens stopped right down. >> >> http://tinyurl.com/y5mqe4 >> >> Another interesting thing is that these files have been resized to >> exactly the same >> number of pixels, however the K10D file is about 25% larger. Clearly >> the K10D >> captures and retains more data. >> >> Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]: >> >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >> > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
