From: Malcolm Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sadly, not living in an area of great natural beauty like your good self,
it's very easy to travel a very short distance and see such images which
would easily become photos. What we have here is a photographic conflict of
interest. You've also raised this in
Jens Bladt wrote:
The K10D certainly isn't doing very well in comparison to others, like Sony,
Nikon, Canon.
I wonder why?
because reviewer does not like its JPEG output - it does not have the
same contrasty look as Canons or Nikon JPEGs.
As simple as that.
B.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail
... Peace.
Tom C.
From: Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 10:04:03 -0600
Tom,
Sorry, but I'm just tired of your constant drumbeating
Tom C wrote:
Hi Tom,
I think all levels of photographers should contribute, as I
said back then as well. I personally find the list to be
largely self-congratulatory. In other words the vast
majority of shots are praised whether they possess merit or
not.
I'm glad I didn't say that
On Mon, Dec 18, 2006 at 12:29:55PM -0700, Tom C wrote:
I think all levels of photographers should contribute, as I said back then
as well. I personally find the list to be largely self-congratulatory. In
other words the vast majority of shots are praised whether they possess
merit or
On Mon, 18 Dec 2006 19:29:55 -, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I personally find the list to be largely self-congratulatory.
In
other words the vast majority of shots are praised whether they possess
merit or not.
I disagree. Most photos don't get many comments, and often those
You needn't agree...
I don't asume anything, why do you?
Tom C.
From: John Forbes [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: Snapshots; was K10D review online
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 23:39:18 -
On Mon, 18
John Francis wrote:
To an extent that's because the comments are voluntary, and self-selecting.
I don't post a I think this photograph sucks! message - I just pass it by.
I suspect many others do the same thing. This means that the only comments
you will see are those expressing positive
@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 10:04:03 -0600
Tom,
Sorry, but I'm just tired of your constant drumbeating that there is
something wrong with the K10D. I'm sure it has many faults, but is
also giving many us
-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
I dont follow you, if you have to do this processing
at home with special ACR or Pentax sofware to open and print the
RAW files, then its not as portable or universal
a format as jpeg is which you can print directly
from the media card
Bob W escribió:
Don't spoil my theory with facts!
I'm sorry about that. By the way, you made a beautiful drawing. ;-)
Carlos
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 12/17/06, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't spoil my theory with facts!
Mark!
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
On 17/12/06, Kenneth Waller, discombobulated, unleashed:
I don't agree, as anyone who was @ GFM in 2005 will attest. I had a large
size portfolio of digital captures (13X19) all in JPEG. The response to
the images was satisfying to me. No one questioned the capture mode.
Your experiences
On 17/12/06, Digital Image Studio, discombobulated, unleashed:
I would like to have heard
the consensus if the viewers were also presented with the same well
crafted image which had been captured RAW then post precessed to
maximise the image dynamics and colour gamut and printed on a printer
On 17/12/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Depends on the printer hardware, doesn't it ? If the printer was top of
the range, I would hesitate to say yes.
It's more the colour gamut of the ink, most printers are pretty damed
good these days I just wonder how many are being under-utilized WRT
On 12/17/06, Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/12/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Depends on the printer hardware, doesn't it ? If the printer was top of
the range, I would hesitate to say yes.
It's more the colour gamut of the ink, most printers are pretty damed
On 17/12/06, Digital Image Studio, discombobulated, unleashed:
It's more the colour gamut of the ink, most printers are pretty damed
good these days I just wonder how many are being under-utilized WRT
colour spread though feeding them limited gamut files?
Well, there's an easy test there.
I don't agree, as anyone who was @ GFM in 2005 will attest. I had a large
size portfolio of digital captures (13X19) all in JPEG. The response to
the images was satisfying to me. No one questioned the capture mode.
It's not just the size that matters. RAW gives the ability to
, December 17, 2006 3:34 AM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
it can all be done in the camera using predefined settings in exactly
the same way as the conversion to jpeg is done in the camera.
--
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL
- Original Message -
From: Digital Image Studio Subject: Re: K10D review online
It's more the colour gamut of the ink, most printers are pretty damed
good these days I just wonder how many are being under-utilized WRT
colour spread though feeding them limited gamut files?
My
: K10D review online
what can be done in the camera? Can you print
Pentax RAW files at a minilab from the media
card without any user processing on a PC
or with the camera or not? (two queations)??
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf
these were yes or no questions, and your first
answer further confuses me.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bob W
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 12:51 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
First answer
I'm not sure about printing direct from a RAW format file to a
printer with the K10D.
But since the K10D supports post-capture RAW conversion to JPEG in
camera, you can always print from it that way, or pull the card and
print the JPEGs that way as well.
Since buying my first modern
review online
these were yes or no questions, and your first
answer further confuses me.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of
Bob W
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 12:51 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review
Bob Sullivan wrote:
I hope you would not feel reluctant to post shots here.
The pdml and PUG do have some very good photographers and
pix, but there has always been an open, welcoming group here.
And people are happy to offer comments on what is right or
wrong with a photo.
Usually,
On 18/12/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My printing method with the K10 is:
Open RAW file in ACR, and optimize as much as possible.
Open in Photoshop (ProPhoto RGB) , and crop/resize for printer.
Send to printer.
The results so far have been outstanding.
When I have my desktop
- Original Message -
From: Digital Image Studio Subject: Re: K10D review online
Sounds like a reasonable process. I assume that you're leaving colour
management to Photoshop? If so do you run a custom or manufacturers
printer/paper specific profile and what rendering intent
Would the shot saved and printed as a JPEG still look as good against a
well
printed RAW shot?
Obviously, without a side by side evaluation, we'll never know.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On 17/12
no issues with what I can get out of JPEG capture.
If you're attending GFM next year, would you mind bringing some prints
along?
Will do.
Kenneth Waller
- Original Message -
From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On 17/12/06, Kenneth Waller, discombobulated
On 17/12/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your experiences mirror mine Ken. That's not to say that I don't think
RAW is good - it is. RAW is excellent at allowing a greater range in the
exposure, sure. But when printing to these sizes, that's it. At 13X19
the quality of the pics is
If you're attending GFM next year, would you mind bringing some prints
along?
On 17/12/06, Kenneth Waller, discombobulated, unleashed:
Will do
As will I. Look forward to meeting you.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
On 18/12/06, Digital Image Studio, discombobulated, unleashed:
I think the benefits of RAW are generally understated and I feel this
particularly when I hear the main benefit being touted as simply that
shooting RAW provides greater exposure range. Sure it's often a
benefit in wide DR situations
Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
Sendt: 15. december 2006 19:04
Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Emne: K10D review online
Hello,
For the few of you who didn't know this yet:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/
Highly recommended (just)
--
Best regards,
Alex Sarbu
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML
Tom C wrote:
A good 50% of the photos displayed here are nothing more than
stinking street shots of homeless people or mere snapshots
with very little if any consideration given to composition.
Sadly, not living in an area of great natural beauty like your good self,
it's very easy to
completely.
Cheers,
Dave
From: David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 15:17:20 +0900
On 12/16/06, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Many of the people
review online
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 03:27:53 -, Richard Bellavance
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, 2006-12-16 at 00:33 +0100, Tim Øsleby wrote:
Phil is not a jamoke half way around the world. He is a jamoke in my
part of
the world. Hrmp, those Americans.
Phil Askey is English.
I
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Sent: 16. desember 2006 07:52
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On Dec 15, 2006, at 10:00 PM, Tom C wrote:
This whole thing is specious nonsense. Who cares what some reviewer/
pundit says about
Hi Ken
but would'nt TIF be the ideal solution then?
greetings
Markus
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
K.Takeshita
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 5:08 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On 12/15/06 11:00 PM
Maybe but in the same order of things, in Belgium (I'm talking about
what I know) people teaching other how to teach usually never had a
foot in a classroom. Stupid isn't it?
Nobody can be an expert in eveything but then if you dunno how to make
a decent picture, please, don't review a camera !
Shel,
From my point of view, you've always been the jamoke.
Tom C.
From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:57:58 -0800
Is this the same
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Tom C
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 1:06 AM
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Then they misread what MOST people, not myself, MOST people want out of
the
camera. That is the best possible result w/o any post-exposure
solution then?
greetings
Markus
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
K.Takeshita
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 5:08 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On 12/15/06 11:00 PM, K.Takeshita, [EMAIL
Tom C wrote:
Yeah it was condescending. True enough. I apologize. :-)
Nothing wrong with well executed snapshots either.
My point is probably multi-fold.
Most people probably will not notice or look for the difference between 4x6
size snapshots of any DSLR. However, they may read a
:
Hi Ken
but would'nt TIF be the ideal solution then?
greetings
Markus
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
K.Takeshita
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 5:08 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On 12/15/06
On 12/16/06 6:50 AM, Markus Maurer, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
but would'nt TIF be the ideal solution then?
Hi Markus,
TIFF file size is atrocious.
For family snaps and casual walkabout/trekking etc, well tuned jpeg is just
fine for me. If and when I find something interesting during shooting,
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Tom C
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 1:06 AM
To: pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Then they misread what MOST people, not myself, MOST people want out of
the
camera. That is the best possible result w/o any post-exposure
Of
Godfrey DiGiorgi
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 1:52 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On Dec 15, 2006, at 10:00 PM, Tom C wrote:
This whole thing is specious nonsense. Who cares what some reviewer/
pundit says about the K10D?
Pentax Marketing might, it's
, December 16, 2006 5:08 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On 12/15/06 11:00 PM, K.Takeshita, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shooting JPEG is
like buying a Ferrari and driving at 30mph.
Not necessarily.
What I meant is that, getting the best possible results from jpeg
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
K.Takeshita
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 5:08 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On 12/15/06 11:00 PM, K.Takeshita, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shooting JPEG is
like buying a Ferrari and driving at 30mph
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 18:02:08 -0800
On Dec 15, 2006, at 5:21 PM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
.. In fact now I'm thinking that the jpeg issue
, December 16, 2006 8:06 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
The irony of this is that for prints, especially small ones like the
4x6's that are the most popular for general use, the Pentax JPEG output
is actually better than a more heavily sharpened print.
Most
List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
Johns assumptions are correct.
But don't worry Richard. No harm done.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John
Forbes
Sent: 16. desember 2006 04:41
To: Pentax
On 12/16/06 8:03 AM, John Forbes, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I suspect that people who don't shoot RAW don't realise that it is not
very time-consuming at all once you get the hang of it, and provided you
use good software.
I think there are many reasons why people shoot jpeg in varying
, this is
why I have still kept and use my LF Gear on occasion.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Paul Stenquist
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 8:41 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Best is subjective
English I believe. Sorry bout that.
Tim
Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Tim
Øsleby
Sent: 16. desember 2006 12:42
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
Johns
, December 16, 2006 8:41 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Best is subjective. The review is based on pixel peeping, not prints
that you hang on your wall. I suspect the slightly less crispy look of
the K10D jpeg prints would prove superior to what the others
Malcolm,
I hope you would not feel reluctant to post shots here.
The pdml and PUG do have some very good photographers and pix,
but there has always been an open, welcoming group here. And
people are happy to offer comments on what is right or wrong with a photo.
Usually, comments are
All thoughts comments a while back, about only submitting images of
the utmost quality to the PUG are a crock IMHO. Post the best you can
do, and await any constructive criticism.
If I relied on the comments of friends and family, I would have
stopped trying to do better 10 years ago.
As a
those not thoughts
Idiot Dave
On 12/17/06, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All thoughts comments a while back, about only submitting images of
the utmost quality to the PUG are a crock IMHO.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:21:23 -0600
Tom,
YOU Haven't GOT the F*cking Camera and all you can say is negative
things based on what you've managed to scrounge up on the internet.
GIVE
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 15:57:53 -, David Savage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
All thoughts comments a while back, about only submitting images of
the utmost quality to the PUG are a crock IMHO. Post the best you can
do, and await any constructive criticism.
If I relied on the comments of
I'm with you Dave. The PUG has taught me how to be better. If you
look at some of my original PUG contributions you will see how much
worse I was. I'm just happy to have crawled up to mediocre! Average
here is a whole lot better than Very Good in a lot of places. (Even
the snapshots are a cut
On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 12:41:40 +0100
Tim Øsleby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
playing music. Same goes for book reviewers. (There are exceptions
from this rule)
ouch! (despite the disclaimer). i guess some body's got to do the
dirty job... :-)
regards, subash
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I still haven't shot a single jpeg with either this camera or my Ds
(which I used for three years) and may never do so.
-
Precisely. In three years of owning the D, I have not shot a single
jpeg, except for the automatic embedded ones.
The review shows that RAW files from the K10D
I think that some of these diehard RAW users may be forgetting that
one of the biggest features of any digtal camera is for instant
results on the output. If you have to go spend a lot of time
tweeking
each one of RAW images in photoshop, that good feature is lost.
jco
You can get perfectly
Ditto!
J
--- Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that some of these diehard RAW users may be forgetting that
one of the biggest features of any digtal camera is for instant
results on the output. If you have to go spend a lot of time
tweeking
each one of RAW images in photoshop, that
: Saturday, December 16, 2006 1:24 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
I think that some of these diehard RAW users may be forgetting that
one of the biggest features of any digtal camera is for instant
results on the output. If you have to go spend a lot of time
tweeking
PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Jack Davis
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 2:15 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: K10D review online
Ditto!
J
--- Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that some of these diehard RAW users may be forgetting that
one of the biggest features of any digtal
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
I wasnt aware that pentax RAW files are portable
non proprietary file formats like jpegs formats are. You can print
them at all minilabs etc, without any digital processing whatsoever?
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bob W
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 2:54 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
Without any digital processing whatsoever? You can't do anything with
anything digital, jpeg
On Sat, Dec 16, 2006 at 10:31:41AM -0600, Bob Sullivan wrote:
I'm with you Dave. The PUG has taught me how to be better. If you
look at some of my original PUG contributions you will see how much
worse I was. I'm just happy to have crawled up to mediocre! Average
here is a whole lot better
Some would-be buyers are already drawing back. You can see the posts at
dpreview.
I know what some people here think of dpreviewers. But from Pentax's
perspective, their money is just as good as anyone else's, and just as
important.
Joe
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
from the same
place, and end up in the same place.
--
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of J. C. O'Connell
Sent: 16 December 2006 20:45
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
But isnt the purpose of using
On 15/12/06, J. C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed:
I have to post something here, what makes someone an instant
photographic
expert by buying a particular camera model or a total photograhic
moron if they dont? NOTHING. I am not saying you dont or cant
learn more about a particular model
On 15/12/06, Bob Sullivan, discombobulated, unleashed:
YOU Haven't GOT the F*cking Camera and all you can say is negative
things based on what you've managed to scrounge up on the internet.
GIVE IT A REST... You're not qualified to say anything about the
K10D.
Bob, I've enrolled you in Anger
in the in-camera
conversions to jpeg, no?
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of
Jack Davis
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 2:15 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: RE: K10D review online
Ditto!
J
--- Bob W [EMAIL
A picture is worth a thousand words, so I've made one to show 3
plausible ways of doing it:
http://www.web-options.com/Drawing1.jpg
No doubt there are other possibilities.
--
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Bob W
[...]
If
Phil Askey is English.
On 16/12/06, John Forbes, discombobulated, unleashed:
You might try lurking for a while before putting your foot in it with
every post.
As you might note, we English are quite adept at pissing people off ;-)
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) |
Bob W escribió:
A picture is worth a thousand words, so I've made one to show 3
plausible ways of doing it:
http://www.web-options.com/Drawing1.jpg
No doubt there are other possibilities.
Bob, I don't know about other DSLRs, but the *ist DS that I have can't
print RAW (PEF in Pentax
On 15/12/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
Do you know what credentials Mr. Askey has as the basis of his
testing science?
He's British, mate - no more need be said ;-)))
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
On 16/12/06, J. C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed:
But isnt the purpose of using the jpeg output
option of the camera so you can just go
straight to a print lab and print the jpegs
without having to do any digital processing
of the images on a PC or laptop? It sounds
like you cant do RAW
On 16/12/06, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed:
A picture is worth a thousand words, so I've made one to show 3
plausible ways of doing it:
http://www.web-options.com/Drawing1.jpg
No doubt there are other possibilities.
Where's the box that says 'bitch about it on the pdml' ? ;-)
--
Don't spoil my theory with facts!
--
Bob
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Carlos Royo
Sent: 16 December 2006 22:55
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Bob W escribió:
A picture is worth a thousand
Help me to focus it? Communicate it more clearly? What...Bob S.
On 12/16/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 15/12/06, Bob Sullivan, discombobulated, unleashed:
YOU Haven't GOT the F*cking Camera and all you can say is negative
things based on what you've managed to scrounge up on the
Quoting Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 15/12/06, J. C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed:
I have to post something here, what makes someone an instant
photographic
expert by buying a particular camera model or a total photograhic
moron if they dont? NOTHING. I am not saying you dont or
PDML@pdml.net
Sent: Sunday, December 17, 2006 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: K10D review online
On 16/12/06, J. C. O'Connell, discombobulated, unleashed:
But isnt the purpose of using the jpeg output
option of the camera so you can just go
straight to a print lab and print the jpegs
without having to do
Yes, I've experienced the same thing. I keep feeling that some of the
prints I made five years ago belong in the trash.
Paul
On Dec 16, 2006, at 4:05 PM, John Francis wrote:
On Sat, Dec 16, 2006 at 10:31:41AM -0600, Bob Sullivan wrote:
I'm with you Dave. The PUG has taught me how to be
On 17/12/06, John Coyle, discombobulated, unleashed:
A little while ago, I posted a PESO of my youngest grandchild which was an
unprocessed JPEG: nobody commented how awful it was, even if they thought
it, so maybe Pentax has got the standards right in camera, for most people.
My own choice
On 17/12/06, John Coyle, discombobulated, unleashed:
I do the same as you Cotty - shoot RAW when I'm doing artsy stuff, and JPG
for snapshots. I've set up an action in PS which does the basic resizing,
re-sampling etc. for me, and I can set it to batch process a bunch of JPEGs
while I do
Jpegs for horse sales.
My D2H D200 aqnd now my K10D are all set on Raw/jpeg
View print from Hamrick can show the jpegs to my masses, and i'll use
the raw for a print,.
Seems simple enough:-)
Dave
Quoting Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I still haven't shot a single jpeg with either this
they do not have the time, ability, or desire
to spend the time
Tom C.
From: Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: K10D review online
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2006 17:21:23 -0600
Tom,
YOU Haven't
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
snip
Now the intriguing question, to me, is Dorian's statement:
--
If you prefer a sharper shot to a softer feel, then you will
probably wish to shoot in the DNG RAW format instead of PEF RAW
or JPG.
If you prefer a smoother image, then you will want to shoot in
PEF
I think the masses that shoot jpegs would mostly print 6x4 prints
anyone interested in printing prints big enough to notice the
difference will probably shoot raw.
Regards
Patrick
On 12/16/06, Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I still haven't shot a single jpeg with either this camera or
Cotty wrote:
On 15/12/06, Bob Sullivan, discombobulated, unleashed:
YOU Haven't GOT the F*cking Camera and all you can say is negative
things based on what you've managed to scrounge up on the internet.
GIVE IT A REST... You're not qualified to say anything about the
K10D.
Bob, I've enrolled
They assume the user will process the files and apply sharpening. And
they're right.
Paul
On Dec 16, 2006, at 6:15 PM, mike wilson wrote:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
snip
Now the intriguing question, to me, is Dorian's statement:
--
If you prefer a sharper shot to a softer feel, then you
On Dec 16, 2006, at 3:15 PM, mike wilson wrote:
If you prefer a sharper shot to a softer feel, then you will
probably wish to shoot in the DNG RAW format instead of PEF RAW
or JPG.
If you prefer a smoother image, then you will want to shoot in
PEF RAW or JPG.
This implies one of two
On 17/12/06, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now I'm confused. As I understand it, Pentax files are generally agreed
to be softer than other manufacturers' - because there is less
processing applied in camera? So I would then assume that sharper DNG
files would have _more_ processing.
On 12/17/06, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 15/12/06, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
Do you know what credentials Mr. Askey has as the basis of his
testing science?
He's British, mate - no more need be said ;-)))
But I'll say it anyway.
He's mad as a cut snake.
Dave
--
of shooting jpeg if thats
all you want or need.
jco
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Bob W
Sent: Saturday, December 16, 2006 4:15 PM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: K10D review online
I don't know what the purpose of the jpeg option
On 17/12/06, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I dont follow you, if you have to do this processing
at home with special ACR or Pentax sofware to open and print the
RAW files, then its not as portable or universal
a format as jpeg is which you can print directly
from the media card at
1 - 100 of 168 matches
Mail list logo
