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
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
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
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
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
- 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
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
Personally, I've tried several different sets of ACR calibrations
for the *ist DS and K10D that people have posted here and elsewhere
... and all of them produced results as default starting points for
color balance that were farther off the mark than just opening the
DNG file and
On 13/02/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm with Godders on this one. What's more, the ideal color
temperature varies depending on the situation, IMO. For example, when
I shot wedding reception pics in a somewhat dark restaurant with
tungsten lighting, I chose to keep the look
That makes sense. In any case, I do intend to try the calibration. I
bookmarked your reference page.
Paul
On Feb 13, 2007, at 7:01 AM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
On 13/02/07, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm with Godders on this one. What's more, the ideal color
temperature varies
The key to getting a good white balance is to find and sample a light
gray area, not a white area...
G
On Feb 13, 2007, at 2:23 AM, John Whittingham wrote:
It's great when you have a definitive reference for white, but
caused me no
end of trouble with my recent Cormorant cock-up 8)
The key to getting a good white balance is to find and sample a
light gray area, not a white area...
I've tried that at first but it never seemed right, maybe I need to re-
install. BTW which version of ACR are you using?
John
On Feb 13, 2007, at 8:09 AM, John Whittingham wrote:
The key to getting a good white balance is to find and sample a
light gray area, not a white area...
I've tried that at first but it never seemed right, maybe I need to
re-
install. BTW which version of ACR are you using?
Right now
-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
I doubt you have to re-install anything, though. Finding the *right*
gray spot to sample is the trick. ;-)
You mean like using the grey card as we all did with film, yes? I never
considered that *light* grey.
John
On Feb 13, 2007, at 10:40 AM, John Whittingham wrote:
I doubt you have to re-install anything, though. Finding the *right*
gray spot to sample is the trick. ;-)
You mean like using the grey card as we all did with film, yes? I
never
considered that *light* grey.
The old standard
The old standard reference, 18% gray, is a little dark for white
balance use although it does work fine in good light ... that's
supposed to be a Zone V gray. I prefer to use a Zone VIII gray,
about 60% gray reflectance.
OK, now I'm getting somewhere. I've had less than 300 shutter
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Digital
Image Studio
Sendt: 11. februar 2007 22:47
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: 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
(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
Adobe Camera Raw.
Personally, I've tried several different sets of ACR calibrations for
the *ist DS and K10D that people have posted here and elsewhere ...
and all of them produced results as default starting points for color
balance that were farther off the mark than just opening the DNG
- 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
, 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
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
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/
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
77 11
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Digital
Image Studio
Sendt: 11. februar 2007 22:47
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: Better K10D exposure-tests (Was:*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?)
On 12/02
I'm with Godders on this one. What's more, the ideal color
temperature varies depending on the situation, IMO. For example, when
I shot wedding reception pics in a somewhat dark restaurant with
tungsten lighting, I chose to keep the look warm. When I shot ice-
storm pics, I went for a cold,
I found the multi-segment metering in the ist-D to be very good - I
started using it even though I'd been a lifelong
centerweighted-metering photographer up until then.
But I've found the multi-segment metering in the K10D to be even
better. I hardly ever use centerweighted any more.
Jens,
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)?
perhaps you can find the answer here:
://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
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
, 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
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
-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
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
:[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
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
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
] 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
On Sun, Feb 11, 2007 at 12:09:02PM +0100, John Whittingham wrote:
Switched to multi-segment with the MZ-3, found it to be accurate and
consistent although I would occasionally use spot metering fot tricky
lighting situations.
That's what I did, too (except for the fact I had a PZ-1p, not
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
On Feb 11, 2007, at 11:35 AM, John Francis wrote:
As a matter of interest, does anyone know how the spot metering area
of the digital bodies compares to that of the PZ-1p? I believe that
was 2.5% of the area (of a 24x36 frame), so I'd expect the digitals
would be 5% if they were using the
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
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
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)
://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: 3. februar 2007 16:07
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs
On Feb 10, 2007, at 7:31 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:
... However, I never really understood the thing about card speed.
The *ist D, for instance, could only utilze a fast card up to a
certain
point. Cards faster thant this and that would NOT improve the write
speed.
Where would this point
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?
That's a good point, Godfrey.
You are right of course. I alrady had the card, when I got the camera -
and
naturally I will buy a faster card shortly.
However, I never really understood the thing
85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William
Robb
Sendt: 10. februar 2007 18:56
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?
- Original Message -
From: Jens Bladt
Subject: RE: *ist
2007 17:10
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?
On Feb 10, 2007, at 7:31 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:
... However, I never really understood the thing about card speed.
The *ist D, for instance, could only utilze a fast card up to a
certain
point. Cards faster thant
- 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
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Godfrey
DiGiorgi
Sendt: 10. februar 2007 17:10
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?
On Feb 10, 2007, at 7:31 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:
... However, I never
On Feb 10, 2007, at 11:12 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:
I also discovered that I had the contrast set to +1. This may
partly have
caused the burned out sky/the missing clouds.
That's a big help, but for such a scene I actually prefer the K10D's
rendering over the D's ... As WR suggested, it's a
/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
Mail List
Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?
On Feb 10, 2007, at 11:12 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:
I also discovered that I had the contrast set to +1. This may
partly have
caused the burned out sky/the missing clouds.
That's a big help, but for such a scene I actually prefer the K10D's
I found the multi-segment metering in the ist-D to be very good - I
started using it even though I'd been a lifelong
centerweighted-metering photographer up until then.
But I've found the multi-segment metering in the K10D to be even
better. I hardly ever use centerweighted any more.
Old dog.
That mirrors my experience. I was either center weighted TTL or
incident meter hand held. But the D and the K10D have made me a fan
of multi-segment.
Paul
On Feb 10, 2007, at 7:29 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
I found the multi-segment metering in the ist-D to be very good - I
started using it
I was a convert back in the PZ-1p days; it handled tricky
lighting situations with consumate ease (especially when
balancing ambient and flash exposure).
On Sat, Feb 10, 2007 at 08:18:19PM -0500, Paul Stenquist wrote:
That mirrors my experience. I was either center weighted TTL or
incident
Ditto as well.
I was primarily a centre weighted metering user (even with the D) but
I've recently started using the multi-segment metering on the K10D
more more.
Cheers,
Dave
On 2/11/07, John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was a convert back in the PZ-1p days; it handled tricky
On 11/02/07, Mark Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I found the multi-segment metering in the ist-D to be very good - I
started using it even though I'd been a lifelong
centerweighted-metering photographer up until then.
But I've found the multi-segment metering in the K10D to be even
better.
On 03/02/07, Jens Bladt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe the main improvements are the speed issues. No more waiting for
the buffer to clear, as long as I shoot JPG's.
In all everything works faster with the K10D.
What cards are you using with your new camera? Using fast cards like
the
I believe the main improvements are the speed issues. No
more waiting for
the buffer to clear, as long as I shoot JPG's.
In all everything works faster with the K10D.
What cards are you using with your new camera? Using fast cards like
the Sandisk Extreme III means that there is very
+45 23 43 85 77
Skype: jensbladt248
-Oprindelig meddelelse-
Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Bob W
Sendt: 3. februar 2007 12:12
Til: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Emne: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?
I believe the main improvements are the speed issues
Sandisk standard SD cards are 45x rating. Ultra II models (they're
clearly labeled) are 60x and Extreme III models (again clearly
labeled) are 133x.
For someone who who had an issue with camera speed at one time in the
past, it seems a little incongruous that you didn't buy a card to
/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 Mark
Erickson
Sendt: 1. februar 2007 20:00
Til: pdml
Emne: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?
All
All,
After nearly 2 years, I'm still happy with my *ist-Ds (except for the name,
of course). I'm getting results I like (even without Shake Reduction) and
I'm really comfortable with it as a tool. I shoot only raw and have a
post-processing workflow that I find fast and easy.
Soo, for
I have found the K10D offers considerable advantages compared to my D. For one,
I shoot a lot of indoor available light photography. The two extra stops that
SR give me are very valuable for this type of work, ditto for shooting birds
with a handheld 400. The higher resolution has also proved
On Feb 1, 2007, at 10:59 AM, Mark Erickson wrote:
Soo, for all of you *ist-D[x] users out there who have upgraded to
K10D's, can you comment on image quality improvements (or lack
thereof)
between the two camera generations? Does 10 really beat 6 in the real
world? Your thoughts?
Does 10 really beat 6 in the real world? Your thoughts?
A resounding yes!. I was very happy with my DL, still have it. But the
image smoothness is the first thing that grabbed me. I bought an Epson R1800
printer right after ordering the K10. I enter prints for competition in our
camera club.
69 matches
Mail list logo
