Re: K20 mojo
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Larry Colenl...@red4est.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 09:41:58PM -0400, paul stenquist wrote: This is an apples to oranges comparison. And it will remain that Same subjects, same light, same lenses, same place, same ISO. regardless of how much processing you do. If you want to compare the cameras, do a controlled test. However, I would be surprised if the I will indeed need to do a controlled test. Prefereably using another K20 also to compare mine with. Hope you find your setting solutions quicker than I have for my D200. Three years and still playing with the dials and settings. Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 5:57 AM, David J Brookspentko...@gmail.com wrote: Hope you find your setting solutions quicker than I have for my D200. Three years and still playing with the dials and settings. Dave Mind you, I normally shoot jpegs, so this could be part of the problem. Dave -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
Note that 1.02 is the latest for k100D (SDHC compatibility Update only but who knows with Pentax). On Tuesday, July 21, 2009, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:35:45PM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote: Stupid question: Are you running the latest firmware? There are no stupid questions, only stupid people. I'm running 1.03 on the K20D and 1.00 on the K100. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- Photo: K10D,Z1,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... Thinkpad: X23+UB,X60+UB Programing: D7 user (trying out D2007) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
That's the latest. It's probably not a firmware problem. Larry Colen wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:35:45PM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote: Stupid question: Are you running the latest firmware? There are no stupid questions, only stupid people. I'm running 1.03 on the K20D and 1.00 on the K100. -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
K20 mojo
I've had the gut feeling that the image quality of my K20 isn't up to par. As a matter of fact, in low light situations, it my not even be as good as my K100. I did an informal test, shooting with both cameras at a dance Friday night. The K20 was shot at 3200, 1600 and 800. The performance shots were taken at 1600 with a flash The K100 was shot at 800, pushing it a stop or two in post processing. The only processing done to the shots was throwing away the totally bad ones and auto tone in lightroom, with a couple of the pre greycard shots white balanced, most of the shots are in camera custom white balance. They were all shot raw and processed to 1000x800 in lightroom. These are the two sets. Comments on the photography are welcome, but would more reflect the lack of editing, comments on the apparent relative performance of the cameras is solicited. I used the same lenses (31, 50, 77 and maybe 40) on both cameras, mostly at f/1.8 or thereabouts. I mostly used the 50 and the 77. If you're curious, check the EXIF for details. k20 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621624892293/ K100 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621749191672/ -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
I can see a difference, and i prefer the K100 series. Dave On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Larry Colenl...@red4est.com wrote: I've had the gut feeling that the image quality of my K20 isn't up to par. As a matter of fact, in low light situations, it my not even be as good as my K100. I did an informal test, shooting with both cameras at a dance Friday night. The K20 was shot at 3200, 1600 and 800. The performance shots were taken at 1600 with a flash The K100 was shot at 800, pushing it a stop or two in post processing. The only processing done to the shots was throwing away the totally bad ones and auto tone in lightroom, with a couple of the pre greycard shots white balanced, most of the shots are in camera custom white balance. They were all shot raw and processed to 1000x800 in lightroom. These are the two sets. Comments on the photography are welcome, but would more reflect the lack of editing, comments on the apparent relative performance of the cameras is solicited. I used the same lenses (31, 50, 77 and maybe 40) on both cameras, mostly at f/1.8 or thereabouts. I mostly used the 50 and the 77. If you're curious, check the EXIF for details. k20 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621624892293/ K100 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621749191672/ -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
If you're shooting JPG, why bother with a grey card??? Kinda like buying a K20 or K7 and never moving the mode dial out off the green zone. The whole point of using a grey card is to correct colors in RAW files. One can't correct JPGs very much, or very accurately. The main difference I see is the sickly green cast in the K100 shots versus very strange colors under various colored lights in the K20 shots. No meaningful comparison possible. (Was that a Wheatfield-toned post, or what??) Cheers, Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Mon, 7/20/09, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: K20 mojo To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: Monday, July 20, 2009, 2:17 PM I've had the gut feeling that the image quality of my K20 isn't up to par. As a matter of fact, in low light situations, it my not even be as good as my K100. I did an informal test, shooting with both cameras at a dance Friday night. The K20 was shot at 3200, 1600 and 800. The performance shots were taken at 1600 with a flash The K100 was shot at 800, pushing it a stop or two in post processing. The only processing done to the shots was throwing away the totally bad ones and auto tone in lightroom, with a couple of the pre greycard shots white balanced, most of the shots are in camera custom white balance. They were all shot raw and processed to 1000x800 in lightroom. These are the two sets. Comments on the photography are welcome, but would more reflect the lack of editing, comments on the apparent relative performance of the cameras is solicited. I used the same lenses (31, 50, 77 and maybe 40) on both cameras, mostly at f/1.8 or thereabouts. I mostly used the 50 and the 77. If you're curious, check the EXIF for details. k20 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621624892293/ K100 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621749191672/ -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen ...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 06:01:45PM -0700, Rick Womer wrote: If you're shooting JPG, why bother with a grey card??? Kinda like buying a K20 or K7 and never moving the mode dial out off the green zone. I don't (deliberately) shoot JPG. The whole point of using a grey card is to correct colors in RAW files. One can't correct JPGs very much, or very accurately. Exactly, whichi is why I almost always shoot RAW. The main difference I see is the sickly green cast in the K100 shots versus very strange colors under various colored lights in the K20 shots. I tried to get a first approximation by using the custom white balance in the camera. Lightroom used that as the default when converting the RAW to JPEG. I wanted a quick sanity check to see if my gut feeling that the K20 wasn't performing up to snuff was accurate, so I Just tossed the really bad photos and did a quick conversion on my way out the door to work this morning. No meaningful comparison possible. I was afraid of that. I hope to get a chance to spend some time on them, and post the more heavily processed shots, likely in black and white. Eventually, I'll have to do some side by side tests, preferably with another K20. (Was that a Wheatfield-toned post, or what??) What is Wheatfieled-toned? Cheers, Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Mon, 7/20/09, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: K20 mojo To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: Monday, July 20, 2009, 2:17 PM I've had the gut feeling that the image quality of my K20 isn't up to par. As a matter of fact, in low light situations, it my not even be as good as my K100. I did an informal test, shooting with both cameras at a dance Friday night. The K20 was shot at 3200, 1600 and 800. The performance shots were taken at 1600 with a flash The K100 was shot at 800, pushing it a stop or two in post processing. The only processing done to the shots was throwing away the totally bad ones and auto tone in lightroom, with a couple of the pre greycard shots white balanced, most of the shots are in camera custom white balance. They were all shot raw and processed to 1000x800 in lightroom. These are the two sets. Comments on the photography are welcome, but would more reflect the lack of editing, comments on the apparent relative performance of the cameras is solicited. I used the same lenses (31, 50, 77 and maybe 40) on both cameras, mostly at f/1.8 or thereabouts. I mostly used the 50 and the 77. If you're curious, check the EXIF for details. k20 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621624892293/ K100 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621749191672/ -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen ...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
This is an apples to oranges comparison. And it will remain that regardless of how much processing you do. If you want to compare the cameras, do a controlled test. However, I would be surprised if the K20 wasn't considerably better. Mine K20D was light years less noisy than my *istD and a lot better at rendering color in AWB mode. Paul On Jul 20, 2009, at 9:16 PM, Larry Colen wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 06:01:45PM -0700, Rick Womer wrote: If you're shooting JPG, why bother with a grey card??? Kinda like buying a K20 or K7 and never moving the mode dial out off the green zone. I don't (deliberately) shoot JPG. The whole point of using a grey card is to correct colors in RAW files. One can't correct JPGs very much, or very accurately. Exactly, whichi is why I almost always shoot RAW. The main difference I see is the sickly green cast in the K100 shots versus very strange colors under various colored lights in the K20 shots. I tried to get a first approximation by using the custom white balance in the camera. Lightroom used that as the default when converting the RAW to JPEG. I wanted a quick sanity check to see if my gut feeling that the K20 wasn't performing up to snuff was accurate, so I Just tossed the really bad photos and did a quick conversion on my way out the door to work this morning. No meaningful comparison possible. I was afraid of that. I hope to get a chance to spend some time on them, and post the more heavily processed shots, likely in black and white. Eventually, I'll have to do some side by side tests, preferably with another K20. (Was that a Wheatfield-toned post, or what??) What is Wheatfieled-toned? Cheers, Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Mon, 7/20/09, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote: From: Larry Colen l...@red4est.com Subject: K20 mojo To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Date: Monday, July 20, 2009, 2:17 PM I've had the gut feeling that the image quality of my K20 isn't up to par. As a matter of fact, in low light situations, it my not even be as good as my K100. I did an informal test, shooting with both cameras at a dance Friday night. The K20 was shot at 3200, 1600 and 800. The performance shots were taken at 1600 with a flash The K100 was shot at 800, pushing it a stop or two in post processing. The only processing done to the shots was throwing away the totally bad ones and auto tone in lightroom, with a couple of the pre greycard shots white balanced, most of the shots are in camera custom white balance. They were all shot raw and processed to 1000x800 in lightroom. These are the two sets. Comments on the photography are welcome, but would more reflect the lack of editing, comments on the apparent relative performance of the cameras is solicited. I used the same lenses (31, 50, 77 and maybe 40) on both cameras, mostly at f/1.8 or thereabouts. I mostly used the 50 and the 77. If you're curious, check the EXIF for details. k20 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621624892293/ K100 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621749191672/ -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 09:41:58PM -0400, paul stenquist wrote: This is an apples to oranges comparison. And it will remain that Same subjects, same light, same lenses, same place, same ISO. regardless of how much processing you do. If you want to compare the cameras, do a controlled test. However, I would be surprised if the I will indeed need to do a controlled test. Prefereably using another K20 also to compare mine with. K20 wasn't considerably better. Mine K20D was light years less noisy than my *istD and a lot better at rendering color in AWB mode. My first K20 was much much better than my K100. On a given night at FNB, I might get 3-6 keepers with the K100, and when I got the K20 I easily got 20 of better quality than I got with the K100. So, it is my belief that the K20 should do much better than the K100, that there shouldn't be any comparison. But, I'm not seeing the tremendous difference in image quality that I expect. Frankly, I think that there is something wrong with this K20, that it isn't performing as well as it should. I see a lot more noise in all of the shots that I take with it than I expect. Unfortunately, that's not something that is easy to test. If it doesn't take photos, I can return it to Pentax and say this camera is broken. But, there are no published specs for SNR (signal to noise ratio), nor any easy way to test and check that on a camera. It's definitely easier to use than my K100. I love the ergonomics, but I think that I should be seeing much better image quality at higher ISOs than I am. For that matter, even on my ISO 100 shots I see a lot more noise in the sky than I expect I should. I could have unrealistic expectations, a K20 may not actually perform any better than a K100, my K20 may not be performing well, or I may just be imagining things and it really does work a lot better than my K100. It's also possible that I am so much better with the K100, that I can make it perform better than the K20. But I wouldn't expect monopod braced shots, aperture priority, to make a huge difference. Granted, with some of the shots, I used a tripod with only one leg extended rather than a monopod, but I expect that the delta between the two of those to be minimal. I figured that shooting the same subjects under the same conditions would be a case where I should see a lot of much better quality shots from the K20 than with the K100, and that would convince me that I was, indeed, imagining the poor performance of the K20. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
Stupid question: Are you running the latest firmware? Larry Colen wrote: On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 09:41:58PM -0400, paul stenquist wrote: This is an apples to oranges comparison. And it will remain that Same subjects, same light, same lenses, same place, same ISO. regardless of how much processing you do. If you want to compare the cameras, do a controlled test. However, I would be surprised if the I will indeed need to do a controlled test. Prefereably using another K20 also to compare mine with. K20 wasn't considerably better. Mine K20D was light years less noisy than my *istD and a lot better at rendering color in AWB mode. My first K20 was much much better than my K100. On a given night at FNB, I might get 3-6 keepers with the K100, and when I got the K20 I easily got 20 of better quality than I got with the K100. So, it is my belief that the K20 should do much better than the K100, that there shouldn't be any comparison. But, I'm not seeing the tremendous difference in image quality that I expect. Frankly, I think that there is something wrong with this K20, that it isn't performing as well as it should. I see a lot more noise in all of the shots that I take with it than I expect. Unfortunately, that's not something that is easy to test. If it doesn't take photos, I can return it to Pentax and say this camera is broken. But, there are no published specs for SNR (signal to noise ratio), nor any easy way to test and check that on a camera. It's definitely easier to use than my K100. I love the ergonomics, but I think that I should be seeing much better image quality at higher ISOs than I am. For that matter, even on my ISO 100 shots I see a lot more noise in the sky than I expect I should. I could have unrealistic expectations, a K20 may not actually perform any better than a K100, my K20 may not be performing well, or I may just be imagining things and it really does work a lot better than my K100. It's also possible that I am so much better with the K100, that I can make it perform better than the K20. But I wouldn't expect monopod braced shots, aperture priority, to make a huge difference. Granted, with some of the shots, I used a tripod with only one leg extended rather than a monopod, but I expect that the delta between the two of those to be minimal. I figured that shooting the same subjects under the same conditions would be a case where I should see a lot of much better quality shots from the K20 than with the K100, and that would convince me that I was, indeed, imagining the poor performance of the K20. -- The free man owns himself. He can damage himself with either eating or drinking; he can ruin himself with gambling. If he does he is certainly a damn fool, and he might possibly be a damned soul; but if he may not, he is not a free man any more than a dog. --G. K. Chesterton -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K20 mojo
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:35:45PM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote: Stupid question: Are you running the latest firmware? There are no stupid questions, only stupid people. I'm running 1.03 on the K20D and 1.00 on the K100. -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.comhttp://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
