Just remember who puts the butter on Phil Askey's bread. Hint: It ain't Pentax.
And I would think/hope you are wrong about a majority of K10D users shooting JPEG. As Godfrey says, Askey takes nice pictures of equipment. And also watch-faces, and crayons and resolution charts. So if you want to photograph these things, no doubt Askey's tests will prove helpful. John On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:29:00 -0000, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That's good. But, does that mean the competition has greater dynamic > range > in their .jpgs, which cam only be matched by the K10D if one shoots and > adjusts a RAW image? Does it mean that the competition would have even > more > dynamic range if one did the same thing with their raw output? > > I'd bet that the majority of shooters are shooting .jpgs. What this > means > is, that at least in this respect, the models that were compared > apparently, > beat out the Pentax, using the these test methods. > > While I don't have the camera in hand, I'm very disappointed with the > advertising hype regarding both the 22-bit and the PRIME engine. > > > Tom C. > > > >> From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >> Subject: Re: K10D review online >> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 15:16:37 -0500 >> >> They are indeed. Which makes them irrelevant to anyone who shoots RAW. >> >> -Adam >> >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > In regard to dynamic range, he also pointed out that by tweaking a RAW >> he got ten stops. I believe the dynamic range measurements were based on >> jpegs. >> > Paul >> > -------------- Original message ---------------------- >> > From: John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > >> >>In all fairness though, he does point out that this isn't going >> >>to be an issue for anything smaller than an A3 print, and that >> >>if you shoot RAW you don't see any of the problems. >> >> >> >>The one area I was a little concerned about was the seemingly >> >>low dynamic range in comparison to the competition. >> >> >> >>On Fri, Dec 15, 2006 at 07:22:08PM +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> wrote: >> >> >> >>>Once again, Phil gets hung up on Pentax's modest in-camera sharpening >> of >> >> >> >>jpegs. I guess that's because it's easy to see when you pixel peep. I >> still >> >>haven't shot a single jpeg with either this camera or my Ds (which I >> used for >> >>three years) and may never do so. Thus it doesn't affect me. >> >> >> >>>Paul >> >>> -------------- Original message ---------------------- >> >>>From: "Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> >>> >> >>>>Hello, >> >>>> >> >>>>For the few of you who didn't know this yet: >> >>>>http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/ >> >>>> >> >>>>Highly recommended (just) >> >>>> >> >>>>-- >> >>>>Best regards, >> >>>>Alex Sarbu >> >>>> >> >>>>-- >> >>>>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 > > > -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
