RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
I think it is two problems. The WB is off, yes, and the shots are overexposed because of extreme contrast. I believe the combination of the two is what makes it so hard to correct the colour afterwards. What is blown is blown, I'm afraid. No highlight details to restore, and therefore hard or impossible to get the WB right, I believe. But I'd be happy, to be proven wrong though ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 15. februar 2007 23:39 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Yeah, I know this too, Tim. But that reddish cast was not exactly what I meant. The problem you discibe is porbably caused by bad WB tuning. This was corrected: http://flickr.com/photos/bladt/25108348/ This was not: http://flickr.com/photos/bladt/25164846/in/set-572671/ HEr name is Nicole (no pun intended) RUSSO! Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Tim Řsleby Sendt: 12. februar 2007 20:32 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) I've noticed this with my DS too. It is a real PITA in difficult light (read concert shooting). If I don't have time to do proper spot metering I tend to end up with reddish skin cast that is impossible to get rid of in processing. I've blown a few gigs doing this. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 11. februar 2007 16:14 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) PPS: I have added a little test to my Flickr pages as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594529582033/ Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 13:36 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... I don't know what the went wrong yesterday, testing exposure of the K10D. Perhaps the FA* 2.8/80-200mm is not working right with the K10D? Perhaps changing leses many times, metering by manually by Green Button etc. did confuse the cameras or me, or the light perhaps changed betewwn switching camera bodies ? I have no idea. Anyway, today I did some new test shots - comparing the K10D and the *ist D, using two samples of the same Pentax lens: The old SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. So, I put one of these lenses on both cameras and did a few test shots. I shot the same scenery twice -using the same shutterspeed, same settings (multi-segnment, WB, contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO 200, RAW). And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. The K10D shots are consistantly the most pleasing shots, despite of the dark scenery/bright sky. Such conditions are very common in our (northern) parts of the world (low sun). Very often our contrasty environment requires manual exposure corrections. It seems the K10D handeled the situation quite well. Much better than the *ist D. I am pleasantly surprised! Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 01:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? No I've done this right a 1000 times. And the strategy for a (too) bright sky sky IS the same as for a backlit scenry. And - so why does the *ist D do the exact scenery right (not over compensating)? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 19:55 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
I think it is two problems. The WB is off, yes, and the shots are overexposed because of extreme contrast. I believe the combination of the two is what makes it so hard to correct the colour afterwards. What is blown is blown, I'm afraid. No highlight details to restore, and therefore hard or impossible to get the WB right, I believe. But I'd be happy, to be proven wrong though ;-) Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 15. februar 2007 23:39 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Yeah, I know this too, Tim. But that reddish cast was not exactly what I meant. The problem you discibe is porbably caused by bad WB tuning. This was corrected: http://flickr.com/photos/bladt/25108348/ This was not: http://flickr.com/photos/bladt/25164846/in/set-572671/ HEr name is Nicole (no pun intended) RUSSO! Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Tim Řsleby Sendt: 12. februar 2007 20:32 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) I've noticed this with my DS too. It is a real PITA in difficult light (read concert shooting). If I don't have time to do proper spot metering I tend to end up with reddish skin cast that is impossible to get rid of in processing. I've blown a few gigs doing this. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 11. februar 2007 16:14 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) PPS: I have added a little test to my Flickr pages as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594529582033/ Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 13:36 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... I don't know what the went wrong yesterday, testing exposure of the K10D. Perhaps the FA* 2.8/80-200mm is not working right with the K10D? Perhaps changing leses many times, metering by manually by Green Button etc. did confuse the cameras or me, or the light perhaps changed betewwn switching camera bodies ? I have no idea. Anyway, today I did some new test shots - comparing the K10D and the *ist D, using two samples of the same Pentax lens: The old SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. So, I put one of these lenses on both cameras and did a few test shots. I shot the same scenery twice -using the same shutterspeed, same settings (multi-segnment, WB, contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO 200, RAW). And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. The K10D shots are consistantly the most pleasing shots, despite of the dark scenery/bright sky. Such conditions are very common in our (northern) parts of the world (low sun). Very often our contrasty environment requires manual exposure corrections. It seems the K10D handeled the situation quite well. Much better than the *ist D. I am pleasantly surprised! Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 01:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? No I've done this right a 1000 times. And the strategy for a (too) bright sky sky IS the same as for a backlit scenry. And - so why does the *ist D do the exact scenery right (not over compensating)? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 19:55 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Yeah, I know this too, Tim. But that reddish cast was not exactly what I meant. The problem you discibe is porbably caused by bad WB tuning. This was corrected: http://flickr.com/photos/bladt/25108348/ This was not: http://flickr.com/photos/bladt/25164846/in/set-572671/ HEr name is Nicole (no pun intended) RUSSO! Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Tim Řsleby Sendt: 12. februar 2007 20:32 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) I've noticed this with my DS too. It is a real PITA in difficult light (read concert shooting). If I don't have time to do proper spot metering I tend to end up with reddish skin cast that is impossible to get rid of in processing. I've blown a few gigs doing this. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 11. februar 2007 16:14 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) PPS: I have added a little test to my Flickr pages as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594529582033/ Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 13:36 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... I don't know what the went wrong yesterday, testing exposure of the K10D. Perhaps the FA* 2.8/80-200mm is not working right with the K10D? Perhaps changing leses many times, metering by manually by Green Button etc. did confuse the cameras or me, or the light perhaps changed betewwn switching camera bodies ? I have no idea. Anyway, today I did some new test shots - comparing the K10D and the *ist D, using two samples of the same Pentax lens: The old SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. So, I put one of these lenses on both cameras and did a few test shots. I shot the same scenery twice -using the same shutterspeed, same settings (multi-segnment, WB, contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO 200, RAW). And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. The K10D shots are consistantly the most pleasing shots, despite of the dark scenery/bright sky. Such conditions are very common in our (northern) parts of the world (low sun). Very often our contrasty environment requires manual exposure corrections. It seems the K10D handeled the situation quite well. Much better than the *ist D. I am pleasantly surprised! Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 01:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? No I've done this right a 1000 times. And the strategy for a (too) bright sky sky IS the same as for a backlit scenry. And - so why does the *ist D do the exact scenery right (not over compensating)? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 19:55 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test tomorrow, evenly lit scenes (walls, grey card etc.) as well ad contraty ones, im order tio figure out if the meter is off or if the matrix metering is over reacting. Surely I can't live with this. When photographing a a scenery with a very bright sky (very common in the northern parts og the world) I must dial in MINUS CORRECTION, when using the K10D. This is the exact opposite of what I have done for the last 30 years! I could never get used to this. My K10D requires reversed backlight compensation. Surely that can't be right! It soulds to me like the metering is compensating the sky as if it was a backlit scene (overexposing to ensure sufficient exposure
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
There it is again, Rob. I'll have to read it sometime... But I don't use the Adobe engine - I use Phase One LE (love it) and - at for the time being - Adobe Lightroom (Beta version), since I'm still waitng for the PH LE up-grade in order to deal with the K10D RAW files. I kinda like Adobe Lightroom too - except for the stupid long file-names it makes. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Digital Image Studio Sendt: 12. februar 2007 21:59 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) On 13/02/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is ACR, Rob? I curious, since I am definitely going to keep my *ist D! Regards Adobe Camera RAW, the import engine, see the following article on calibration of ACR for your camera: http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/AcrCalibration/ -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.37/682 - Release Date: 02/12/2007 13:23 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 02/14/2007 16:17 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Thanks, William. Is this something more sofisticated than just shooting Raw files? http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/ColorCalibration/ Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 12. februar 2007 18:01 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: SV: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) What is ACR, Rob? I curious, since I am definitely going to keep my *ist D! Adobe Camera RAW. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.37/682 - Release Date: 02/12/2007 13:23 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.39/687 - Release Date: 02/14/2007 16:17 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
- Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Thanks, William. Is this something more sofisticated than just shooting Raw files? http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/ColorCalibration/ Oh yes. This is how to calibrate ACR so that your pictures come out the right colour without fiddling. At least, I think thats what it is. Rob S pointed us towards that link, then ran away. At some point, I'm going to have to try to get my head around this stuff. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
On Feb 15, 2007, at 7:59 PM, William Robb wrote: Is this something more sofisticated than just shooting Raw files? http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/ColorCalibration/ Oh yes. This is how to calibrate ACR so that your pictures come out the right colour without fiddling. At least, I think thats what it is. Rob S pointed us towards that link, then ran away. At some point, I'm going to have to try to get my head around this stuff. I believe the technique is documented in Real World Camera Raw with Photoshop CS/CS2 by Bruce Fraser. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
It ain't easy if it's way overexposed. And getting the exposure right at a rock concert ain't easy, with the constant changes in lighting and people running around way faster than my manual focusing capabilities. On second thought; maybe I should have a second look at the photos. I'm better at raw converting now. Some of the pictures are of my youngest son with one of his bands. So it is worth a try. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: 13. februar 2007 00:13 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Caucasian skin tones are apparently a problem for Bayer Matrix sensors because they are within the frequency response curves for both green and red sensor sites, which tends to give an additional red cast to caucasian skin. This can be corrected in post fairly easily if you shoot RAW of course. -Adam Who was just reading about this in a rather good book about photographing and post-processing people shots, a book called Skin by Lee Varis. And no, it's not about nudes. Tim Øsleby wrote: I've noticed this with my DS too. It is a real PITA in difficult light (read concert shooting). If I don't have time to do proper spot metering I tend to end up with reddish skin cast that is impossible to get rid of in processing. I've blown a few gigs doing this. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 11. februar 2007 16:14 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) PPS: I have added a little test to my Flickr pages as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594529582033/ Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 13:36 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... I don't know what the went wrong yesterday, testing exposure of the K10D. Perhaps the FA* 2.8/80-200mm is not working right with the K10D? Perhaps changing leses many times, metering by manually by Green Button etc. did confuse the cameras or me, or the light perhaps changed betewwn switching camera bodies ? I have no idea. Anyway, today I did some new test shots - comparing the K10D and the *ist D, using two samples of the same Pentax lens: The old SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. So, I put one of these lenses on both cameras and did a few test shots. I shot the same scenery twice -using the same shutterspeed, same settings (multi-segnment, WB, contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO 200, RAW). And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. The K10D shots are consistantly the most pleasing shots, despite of the dark scenery/bright sky. Such conditions are very common in our (northern) parts of the world (low sun). Very often our contrasty environment requires manual exposure corrections. It seems the K10D handeled the situation quite well. Much better than the *ist D. I am pleasantly surprised! Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 01:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? No I've done this right a 1000 times. And the strategy for a (too) bright sky sky IS the same as for a backlit scenry. And - so why does the *ist D do the exact scenery right (not over compensating)? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 19:55 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test tomorrow, evenly lit scenes (walls, grey card etc.) as well ad contraty ones, im order tio figure
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
- Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: SV: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) What is ACR, Rob? I curious, since I am definitely going to keep my *ist D! Adobe Camera RAW. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Its always possible to fine tune the highlights color (color correct) any image if you really have to in photoshop using the color correction adjustments, set on hightlights. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: Monday, February 12, 2007 11:09 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: SV: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Funny, you shoud say that JCO'C. I have been thingking the same since I got the K10D. The redish cast in the (over) exposed areas have alwasy sbeen a PITA to me:-) But unlike the K10D, ito's not possible to fine tune the WB. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af J. C. O'Connell Sendt: 12. februar 2007 03:51 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) color casts in highlights could be a white balance issue. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Digital Image Studio Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 4:47 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) On 12/02/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: I want to add, that it have always annoyed me a little, that the D has a tendency of colouring overexposed areas redish - rendering very bright parts with a reddish cast. That's one of the reasons I had a tendency of deliberately underexposing, to totally avoid over exposed parts of the images. Thje K10D does not add a reddish cast to the very bright parts. My conclusion is that the image quality of K10D images are in fact superior, compared to the quality of a similar *ist D image. Lots of issues I had with the *ist D rendering went away after I calibrated ACR to the camera. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- 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 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.37/682 - Release Date: 02/12/2007 13:23 -- 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
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
I've noticed this with my DS too. It is a real PITA in difficult light (read concert shooting). If I don't have time to do proper spot metering I tend to end up with reddish skin cast that is impossible to get rid of in processing. I've blown a few gigs doing this. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 11. februar 2007 16:14 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) PPS: I have added a little test to my Flickr pages as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594529582033/ Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 13:36 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... I don't know what the went wrong yesterday, testing exposure of the K10D. Perhaps the FA* 2.8/80-200mm is not working right with the K10D? Perhaps changing leses many times, metering by manually by Green Button etc. did confuse the cameras or me, or the light perhaps changed betewwn switching camera bodies ? I have no idea. Anyway, today I did some new test shots - comparing the K10D and the *ist D, using two samples of the same Pentax lens: The old SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. So, I put one of these lenses on both cameras and did a few test shots. I shot the same scenery twice -using the same shutterspeed, same settings (multi-segnment, WB, contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO 200, RAW). And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. The K10D shots are consistantly the most pleasing shots, despite of the dark scenery/bright sky. Such conditions are very common in our (northern) parts of the world (low sun). Very often our contrasty environment requires manual exposure corrections. It seems the K10D handeled the situation quite well. Much better than the *ist D. I am pleasantly surprised! Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 01:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? No I've done this right a 1000 times. And the strategy for a (too) bright sky sky IS the same as for a backlit scenry. And - so why does the *ist D do the exact scenery right (not over compensating)? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 19:55 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test tomorrow, evenly lit scenes (walls, grey card etc.) as well ad contraty ones, im order tio figure out if the meter is off or if the matrix metering is over reacting. Surely I can't live with this. When photographing a a scenery with a very bright sky (very common in the northern parts og the world) I must dial in MINUS CORRECTION, when using the K10D. This is the exact opposite of what I have done for the last 30 years! I could never get used to this. My K10D requires reversed backlight compensation. Surely that can't be right! It soulds to me like the metering is compensating the sky as if it was a backlit scene (overexposing to ensure sufficient exposure to the subject). This is what we call subject failure in the industry. I think you will find the meter is behaving normally, and that you will need to adjust your metering strategy for this scene type. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
On 13/02/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What is ACR, Rob? I curious, since I am definitely going to keep my *ist D! Regards Adobe Camera RAW, the import engine, see the following article on calibration of ACR for your camera: http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/AcrCalibration/ -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Caucasian skin tones are apparently a problem for Bayer Matrix sensors because they are within the frequency response curves for both green and red sensor sites, which tends to give an additional red cast to caucasian skin. This can be corrected in post fairly easily if you shoot RAW of course. -Adam Who was just reading about this in a rather good book about photographing and post-processing people shots, a book called Skin by Lee Varis. And no, it's not about nudes. Tim Øsleby wrote: I've noticed this with my DS too. It is a real PITA in difficult light (read concert shooting). If I don't have time to do proper spot metering I tend to end up with reddish skin cast that is impossible to get rid of in processing. I've blown a few gigs doing this. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: 11. februar 2007 16:14 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) PPS: I have added a little test to my Flickr pages as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594529582033/ Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 13:36 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... I don't know what the went wrong yesterday, testing exposure of the K10D. Perhaps the FA* 2.8/80-200mm is not working right with the K10D? Perhaps changing leses many times, metering by manually by Green Button etc. did confuse the cameras or me, or the light perhaps changed betewwn switching camera bodies ? I have no idea. Anyway, today I did some new test shots - comparing the K10D and the *ist D, using two samples of the same Pentax lens: The old SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. So, I put one of these lenses on both cameras and did a few test shots. I shot the same scenery twice -using the same shutterspeed, same settings (multi-segnment, WB, contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO 200, RAW). And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. The K10D shots are consistantly the most pleasing shots, despite of the dark scenery/bright sky. Such conditions are very common in our (northern) parts of the world (low sun). Very often our contrasty environment requires manual exposure corrections. It seems the K10D handeled the situation quite well. Much better than the *ist D. I am pleasantly surprised! Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 01:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? No I've done this right a 1000 times. And the strategy for a (too) bright sky sky IS the same as for a backlit scenry. And - so why does the *ist D do the exact scenery right (not over compensating)? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 19:55 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test tomorrow, evenly lit scenes (walls, grey card etc.) as well ad contraty ones, im order tio figure out if the meter is off or if the matrix metering is over reacting. Surely I can't live with this. When photographing a a scenery with a very bright sky (very common in the northern parts og the world) I must dial in MINUS CORRECTION, when using the K10D. This is the exact opposite of what I have done for the last 30 years! I could never get used to this. My K10D requires reversed backlight compensation. Surely that can't be right! It soulds to me like the metering is compensating the sky as if it was a backlit scene (overexposing to ensure sufficient exposure to the subject). This is what we call subject failure in the industry. I think you will find the meter
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Jens, at al. I did not perform any tests such as this one, however my general impression is that K10D: 1. Has slightly wider dynamic range. 2. Has more consistent auto white balance operation. 3. Renders images in somewhat more faithful way. The colors look more natural. Just my cents. On 2/11/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... ... And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. ... Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. -- Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Your conclusion is most likely correct based on overall experiences with these cameras, but I would question a few things in this specific test procedure. The exact same lens should be used on both cameras and the images should be tweeked on one of the cameras via fine bracketing for exposure value to make up for any variations in camera metering or shutter speeds from camera to camera. It would also be interesting to see what differences remain with both images optimized manually in RAW conversion and photoshop tweeking. I dont know about the K10D, but my istDS doesnt do that great on a bright sunny day scene with lots shadows compared to typical color neg film. Its more like medium speed slide film with regards to handling high contrast scenes like that. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Boris Liberman Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 7:55 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Jens, at al. I did not perform any tests such as this one, however my general impression is that K10D: 1. Has slightly wider dynamic range. 2. Has more consistent auto white balance operation. 3. Renders images in somewhat more faithful way. The colors look more natural. Just my cents. On 2/11/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... ... And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. ... Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. -- Boris -- 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
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
PS: I want to add, that it have always annoyed me a little, that the D has a tendency of colouring overexposed areas redish - rendering very bright parts with a reddish cast. That's one of the reasons I had a tendency of deliberately underexposing, to totally avoid over exposed parts of the images. Thje K10D does not add a reddish cast to the very bright parts. My conclusion is that the image quality of K10D images are in fact superior, compared to the quality of a similar *ist D image. Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 13:36 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... I don't know what the went wrong yesterday, testing exposure of the K10D. Perhaps the FA* 2.8/80-200mm is not working right with the K10D? Perhaps changing leses many times, metering by manually by Green Button etc. did confuse the cameras or me, or the light perhaps changed betewwn switching camera bodies ? I have no idea. Anyway, today I did some new test shots - comparing the K10D and the *ist D, using two samples of the same Pentax lens: The old SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. So, I put one of these lenses on both cameras and did a few test shots. I shot the same scenery twice -using the same shutterspeed, same settings (multi-segnment, WB, contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO 200, RAW). And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. The K10D shots are consistantly the most pleasing shots, despite of the dark scenery/bright sky. Such conditions are very common in our (northern) parts of the world (low sun). Very often our contrasty environment requires manual exposure corrections. It seems the K10D handeled the situation quite well. Much better than the *ist D. I am pleasantly surprised! Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 01:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? No I've done this right a 1000 times. And the strategy for a (too) bright sky sky IS the same as for a backlit scenry. And - so why does the *ist D do the exact scenery right (not over compensating)? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 19:55 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test tomorrow, evenly lit scenes (walls, grey card etc.) as well ad contraty ones, im order tio figure out if the meter is off or if the matrix metering is over reacting. Surely I can't live with this. When photographing a a scenery with a very bright sky (very common in the northern parts og the world) I must dial in MINUS CORRECTION, when using the K10D. This is the exact opposite of what I have done for the last 30 years! I could never get used to this. My K10D requires reversed backlight compensation. Surely that can't be right! It soulds to me like the metering is compensating the sky as if it was a backlit scene (overexposing to ensure sufficient exposure to the subject). This is what we call subject failure in the industry. I think you will find the meter is behaving normally, and that you will need to adjust your metering strategy for this scene type. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- No virus found in this outgoing
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
PPS: I have added a little test to my Flickr pages as well: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bladt/sets/72157594529582033/ Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 13:36 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... I don't know what the went wrong yesterday, testing exposure of the K10D. Perhaps the FA* 2.8/80-200mm is not working right with the K10D? Perhaps changing leses many times, metering by manually by Green Button etc. did confuse the cameras or me, or the light perhaps changed betewwn switching camera bodies ? I have no idea. Anyway, today I did some new test shots - comparing the K10D and the *ist D, using two samples of the same Pentax lens: The old SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6 35-80mm. So, I put one of these lenses on both cameras and did a few test shots. I shot the same scenery twice -using the same shutterspeed, same settings (multi-segnment, WB, contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO 200, RAW). And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. The K10D shots are consistantly the most pleasing shots, despite of the dark scenery/bright sky. Such conditions are very common in our (northern) parts of the world (low sun). Very often our contrasty environment requires manual exposure corrections. It seems the K10D handeled the situation quite well. Much better than the *ist D. I am pleasantly surprised! Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Jens Bladt Sendt: 11. februar 2007 01:03 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? No I've done this right a 1000 times. And the strategy for a (too) bright sky sky IS the same as for a backlit scenry. And - so why does the *ist D do the exact scenery right (not over compensating)? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 19:55 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? - Original Message - From: Jens Bladt Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test tomorrow, evenly lit scenes (walls, grey card etc.) as well ad contraty ones, im order tio figure out if the meter is off or if the matrix metering is over reacting. Surely I can't live with this. When photographing a a scenery with a very bright sky (very common in the northern parts og the world) I must dial in MINUS CORRECTION, when using the K10D. This is the exact opposite of what I have done for the last 30 years! I could never get used to this. My K10D requires reversed backlight compensation. Surely that can't be right! It soulds to me like the metering is compensating the sky as if it was a backlit scene (overexposing to ensure sufficient exposure to the subject). This is what we call subject failure in the industry. I think you will find the meter is behaving normally, and that you will need to adjust your metering strategy for this scene type. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 --
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Whatever the issue was, i'm glad you have sorted it out to your satisfaction. A proper exposure test would mean, to me, using the same lens and repeating the exact same setup/capture with each of the two camera bodies you are comparing. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Godfrey, that's basically what I did! If not the very same lens - just two lenses of the exact same model and make. Two K10D's or two *ist D's may be slightlydifferent too. HAd I used the saqme lens - the time difference woukld have been greater too. My test shots were done just seconds apart. You can't really do the exact same thing twice, can you? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Godfrey DiGiorgi Sendt: 11. februar 2007 16:33 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Whatever the issue was, i'm glad you have sorted it out to your satisfaction. A proper exposure test would mean, to me, using the same lens and repeating the exact same setup/capture with each of the two camera bodies you are comparing. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
JCO, Boris, Godfrey For my purposes I don't really need scientific tests. I'm not a scientist - just a photographer, who wnats to know my tools. I just need to know, if my genral approach to exposure has to change (using a different strategy for exposure corretions). And I wanted to know if my camera meter was off. I believe I have a negative answer to both questions now :-) Except perhaps that the need for exposure corrections (in order to avoid over exposed highlights) has become a some what smaller, when using the K10D. How the K10D will react to sunny sceneries with deep shadows - I have no idea. But I'm sure that the 67% increase of the amount of pixels - and a larger colour depth, will in fact mean improved dynamic range, thus more room for post editing. This may very well be one of the reasons Pentax to choose to let this camera render the images a litle bit darker (this suits me jsut fine). It won't be a huge problem dealing with this later. It would have been much worse having to deal with burned out highlights - believe me, I know :-). Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af J. C. O'Connell Sendt: 11. februar 2007 14:16 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Your conclusion is most likely correct based on overall experiences with these cameras, but I would question a few things in this specific test procedure. The exact same lens should be used on both cameras and the images should be tweeked on one of the cameras via fine bracketing for exposure value to make up for any variations in camera metering or shutter speeds from camera to camera. It would also be interesting to see what differences remain with both images optimized manually in RAW conversion and photoshop tweeking. I dont know about the K10D, but my istDS doesnt do that great on a bright sunny day scene with lots shadows compared to typical color neg film. Its more like medium speed slide film with regards to handling high contrast scenes like that. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Boris Liberman Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 7:55 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Jens, at al. I did not perform any tests such as this one, however my general impression is that K10D: 1. Has slightly wider dynamic range. 2. Has more consistent auto white balance operation. 3. Renders images in somewhat more faithful way. The colors look more natural. Just my cents. On 2/11/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... ... And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. ... Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. -- Boris -- 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 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
yes, but by using two different lenses (even of same model) you may be seeing variations due to the lens both optically and mechanically( fstop variation causing exposure variation). This along with possible shutter speed variations from body to body is why I suggested you should have fine bracketed one of the bodies so you could get an overall exposure (density) that matched the other for sure, and then compare the dynamics. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 10:52 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Godfrey, that's basically what I did! If not the very same lens - just two lenses of the exact same model and make. Two K10D's or two *ist D's may be slightlydifferent too. HAd I used the saqme lens - the time difference woukld have been greater too. My test shots were done just seconds apart. You can't really do the exact same thing twice, can you? Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Godfrey DiGiorgi Sendt: 11. februar 2007 16:33 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Whatever the issue was, i'm glad you have sorted it out to your satisfaction. A proper exposure test would mean, to me, using the same lens and repeating the exact same setup/capture with each of the two camera bodies you are comparing. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- 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
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
I didnt say your conclusions were incorrect, I just stated some ways to improve your tests ( for next time you might try running one like that). If you are running a test, might as well run best one easily possible. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jens Bladt Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 11:12 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) JCO, Boris, Godfrey For my purposes I don't really need scientific tests. I'm not a scientist - just a photographer, who wnats to know my tools. I just need to know, if my genral approach to exposure has to change (using a different strategy for exposure corretions). And I wanted to know if my camera meter was off. I believe I have a negative answer to both questions now :-) Except perhaps that the need for exposure corrections (in order to avoid over exposed highlights) has become a some what smaller, when using the K10D. How the K10D will react to sunny sceneries with deep shadows - I have no idea. But I'm sure that the 67% increase of the amount of pixels - and a larger colour depth, will in fact mean improved dynamic range, thus more room for post editing. This may very well be one of the reasons Pentax to choose to let this camera render the images a litle bit darker (this suits me jsut fine). It won't be a huge problem dealing with this later. It would have been much worse having to deal with burned out highlights - believe me, I know :-). Regards Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af J. C. O'Connell Sendt: 11. februar 2007 14:16 Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' Emne: RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Your conclusion is most likely correct based on overall experiences with these cameras, but I would question a few things in this specific test procedure. The exact same lens should be used on both cameras and the images should be tweeked on one of the cameras via fine bracketing for exposure value to make up for any variations in camera metering or shutter speeds from camera to camera. It would also be interesting to see what differences remain with both images optimized manually in RAW conversion and photoshop tweeking. I dont know about the K10D, but my istDS doesnt do that great on a bright sunny day scene with lots shadows compared to typical color neg film. Its more like medium speed slide film with regards to handling high contrast scenes like that. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Boris Liberman Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 7:55 AM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) Jens, at al. I did not perform any tests such as this one, however my general impression is that K10D: 1. Has slightly wider dynamic range. 2. Has more consistent auto white balance operation. 3. Renders images in somewhat more faithful way. The colors look more natural. Just my cents. On 2/11/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: William, PauI, Godfrey, Rob, Peter, David, John ... ... And guess what? The results are quite surpirsing. It seems to me that the K10D in fact does a better job, dealing with contrast. ... Judge for your selves. What do you think? http://www.jensbladt.dk/Test/K10D-vs-istD/K10D-test-album.html Thanks for looking - comments area welcome. -- Boris -- 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 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.35/680 - Release Date: 02/10/2007 21:15 -- 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
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
Using the same lens will give you more accuracy as lenses vary one to another. Of course, you're testing just one sample of K10D against one sample of *ist D bodies, but I thought that's what you were after. You can make the exact same test regardless of time, if you work with controlled lighting as opposed to outdoor lighting. G On Feb 11, 2007, at 7:52 AM, Jens Bladt wrote: Godfrey, that's basically what I did! If not the very same lens - just two lenses of the exact same model and make. Two K10D's or two *ist D's may be slightlydifferent too. HAd I used the saqme lens - the time difference woukld have been greater too. My test shots were done just seconds apart. You can't really do the exact same thing twice, can you? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
On 12/02/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: I want to add, that it have always annoyed me a little, that the D has a tendency of colouring overexposed areas redish - rendering very bright parts with a reddish cast. That's one of the reasons I had a tendency of deliberately underexposing, to totally avoid over exposed parts of the images. Thje K10D does not add a reddish cast to the very bright parts. My conclusion is that the image quality of K10D images are in fact superior, compared to the quality of a similar *ist D image. Lots of issues I had with the *ist D rendering went away after I calibrated ACR to the camera. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
color casts in highlights could be a white balance issue. jco -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Digital Image Studio Sent: Sunday, February 11, 2007 4:47 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?) On 12/02/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: I want to add, that it have always annoyed me a little, that the D has a tendency of colouring overexposed areas redish - rendering very bright parts with a reddish cast. That's one of the reasons I had a tendency of deliberately underexposing, to totally avoid over exposed parts of the images. Thje K10D does not add a reddish cast to the very bright parts. My conclusion is that the image quality of K10D images are in fact superior, compared to the quality of a similar *ist D image. Lots of issues I had with the *ist D rendering went away after I calibrated ACR to the camera. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- 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
Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
On 12/02/07, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: color casts in highlights could be a white balance issue. It could be but generally if the WB has been made from a reference patch of mid-range exposure and your shadows still show tints then the default Shadow Tint (advanced calibrate tab) may not be appropriate for the camera. The following article is worth a read: http://www.rags-int-inc.com/PhotoTechStuff/AcrCalibration/ -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
