about a year ago I was very interested in the Pentax K10D, but after
comparing the photos
with other cameras, I didn't want it because the photos didn't look so good?
Well, the photos didn't look so good because they were the jpeg photos
created by the camera after taking the photo!
Now, look at the Pentax K10D photos converted from RAW! http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page26.asp
They are better than the Canon 40D which costs twice as much!
Dave <dave2681@verizon.net> wrote:
> about a year ago I was very interested in the Pentax K10D, but after
> comparing the photos with other cameras, I didn't want it because
> the photos didn't look so good? Well, [that was] because they were
> the jpeg photos created by the camera after taking the photo! Now,
> look at the Pentax K10D photos converted from RAW!
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page26.asp
> They are better than the Canon 40D which costs twice as much!
>
> The overall rating of the Canon 40D
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page29.asp
> You will see that they rate the Canon 40D image quality: 9
> Next, go to the rating for the Pentax K10D:
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/page25.asp
> You will see that they rate the Pentax K10D image quality: 7.5
> What's up... they just said Pentax K10D image quality was better...
The 40D review was done much later, perhaps after Adobe started to
support, or improved support for, Pentax RAW mode.
I agree the K10D quality is better, but only by a small margin,
and it could be due to focus plane issues, as we've discussed before
here on r.p.d.
What I like about Pentax DSLR models are AA batteries and SD cards,
which can be shared with lesser digicams. The viewfinders are also
above average for DSLR, especially at that pricepoint.
"Bill Tuthill" <ccreekin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:47424912@news.meer.net...
> Dave <dave2681@verizon.net> wrote:
>> about a year ago I was very interested in the Pentax K10D, but after
>> comparing the photos with other cameras, I didn't want it because
>> the photos didn't look so good? Well, [that was] because they were
>> the jpeg photos created by the camera after taking the photo! Now,
>> look at the Pentax K10D photos converted from RAW!
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page26.asp
>> They are better than the Canon 40D which costs twice as much!
>>
>> The overall rating of the Canon 40D
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page29.asp
>> You will see that they rate the Canon 40D image quality: 9
>> Next, go to the rating for the Pentax K10D:
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/page25.asp
>> You will see that they rate the Pentax K10D image quality: 7.5
>> What's up... they just said Pentax K10D image quality was better...
Phil is a moron that had his back up for some reason and took it out on the
K10D.
> The 40D review was done much later, perhaps after Adobe started to
> support, or improved support for, Pentax RAW mode.
The original K10D review came to stupid conclusions, the Nikon D200 has
similar results for jpeg and they are not soft at all, they are simply not
oversharpened like Phil prefers them, it is easy to set for in camera
sharper jpegs but reading manuals is not part of Phils review process.
> I agree the K10D quality is better, but only by a small margin,
> and it could be due to focus plane issues, as we've discussed before
> here on r.p.d.
This is from a camera that is 12 months older than the 40D, not a good
result for Canon in the IQ stakes but you would buy the 40D for other
reasons.
> What I like about Pentax DSLR models are AA batteries and SD cards,
> which can be shared with lesser digicams. The viewfinders are also
> above average for DSLR, especially at that pricepoint.
>
The K10D does not use AA's, it uses a lithium battery.
It seems like the K10D image quality rating was based on JPEG, or a
combination of RAW and JPEG, rather than on RAW alone. Maybe there
wasn't good software available for the Pentax RAW format at the time.
When there are situations like this on other review sites, they simply
include a statement about how bad the JPEG results are and how good the
RAW results are.
With DP Review, it seems that their recommendations are highly dependent
on the date of the review--everything is graded on a curve.
The K10D is a heck of a deal, if you can live with some of the
performance issues that don't directly affect the image quality.
"SMS ???. ?" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:47434c5e$0$79897$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Dave wrote:
>
>> What's up here, they just said the image quality of the Pentax K10D was
>> better at:
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page26.asp
>
> It seems like the K10D image quality rating was based on JPEG, or a
> combination of RAW and JPEG, rather than on RAW alone. Maybe there wasn't
> good software available for the Pentax RAW format at the time.
>
> When there are situations like this on other review sites, they simply
> include a statement about how bad the JPEG results are and how good the
> RAW results are.
>
> With DP Review, it seems that their recommendations are highly dependent
> on the date of the review--everything is graded on a curve.
>
> The K10D is a heck of a deal, if you can live with some of the performance
> issues that don't directly affect the image quality.
Thanks. Some good points!
"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in message
news:474337e9$0$29801$5a62ac22@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...
>
> "Bill Tuthill" <ccreekin@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:47424912@news.meer.net...
>> Dave <dave2681@verizon.net> wrote:
>>> about a year ago I was very interested in the Pentax K10D, but after
>>> comparing the photos with other cameras, I didn't want it because
>>> the photos didn't look so good? Well, [that was] because they were
>>> the jpeg photos created by the camera after taking the photo! Now,
>>> look at the Pentax K10D photos converted from RAW!
>>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page26.asp
>>> They are better than the Canon 40D which costs twice as much!
>>>
>>> The overall rating of the Canon 40D
>>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page29.asp
>>> You will see that they rate the Canon 40D image quality: 9
>>> Next, go to the rating for the Pentax K10D:
>>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/page25.asp
>>> You will see that they rate the Pentax K10D image quality: 7.5
>>> What's up... they just said Pentax K10D image quality was better...
>
> Phil is a moron that had his back up for some reason and took it out on
> the K10D.
>
>> The 40D review was done much later, perhaps after Adobe started to
>> support, or improved support for, Pentax RAW mode.
>
> The original K10D review came to stupid conclusions, the Nikon D200 has
> similar results for jpeg and they are not soft at all, they are simply not
> oversharpened like Phil prefers them, it is easy to set for in camera
> sharper jpegs but reading manuals is not part of Phils review process.
>
>> I agree the K10D quality is better, but only by a small margin,
>> and it could be due to focus plane issues, as we've discussed before
>> here on r.p.d.
>
> This is from a camera that is 12 months older than the 40D, not a good
> result for Canon in the IQ stakes but you would buy the 40D for other
> reasons.
>
>> What I like about Pentax DSLR models are AA batteries and SD cards,
>> which can be shared with lesser digicams. The viewfinders are also
>> above average for DSLR, especially at that pricepoint.
>>
>
> The K10D does not use AA's, it uses a lithium battery.
>
Pentax K10D vs Canon 40D 
Linear Mode
