[garyk]

Yep all my shots are Photo shopped. There is some excellent reading material on processing bird photos at http://www.digitalbirdphotography.com/construction.html ) this guy is the greatest birding guru around in my opinion. It is very interesting reading. It gets pretty technical but if into birding worth the read.

I looked at your shots. Nice work.

---

Last edited by garyk; 07-06-2011 at 08:32 PM.

[cbaytan]

Yep all my shots are Photo shopped. There is some excellent reading material on processing bird photos at Secrets of Digital Bird Photography ) this guy is the greatest birding guru around in my opinion. It is very interesting reading. It gets pretty technical but if into birding worth the read.

I looked at your shots. Nice work.

But, PP'ed pictures doesn't give enough information for comparing both cameras. You should give us pictures developed with PS ACR with (As shot) saving to be able to compare both cameras IQs, even jpeg samples are heavily rely on cameras jpeg engines algorithms, not the first hand sensor and other camera hardware qualities.

[garyk]

Ok, no problem there. Just for a reference the birds are not touched only the background is de-noised. I will not post un-processed pics on the flickr site but I can add them here for sure. Actually I will post before processing and show the sharpening noise as well with the k-5 and 7D. I only shoot birds. So this is for bird photography only.

[dylansalt]

Why does everyone carry on about Pentax colors being better all the time??

I have the Nikon D7000 with the same sensor as the K5 - how then would the colors be different between these two??

Surely if both shot in raw we would give exactly the same output.

Many of the pro togs who specialize in birding over here use the 1DMKiv and the 7D as backup and what they produce is amazing - I don't see anything "special" with re: "Pentax Color" over the Canon shots

They prefer the Canon due to the more natural rendition of color (closer to seen in life) then Nikon which they feel can get too vibrant.

Lastly - surely with the correct pp one can get an image from any make of camera looking the same in terms of color??

This not a dis on the K5 just a query about the common "no dslr can do Pentax color" statement.

Considering I have shot with the K10D for several years (many on this forum still vouch for it's sharpness & color superiority) it certainly has nothing over the sensor of the Nikon in terms of color rendition.

---

Last edited by dylansalt; 07-07-2011 at 06:41 AM.

[Rondec]

Clearly RAW files are different from one company to another. Even with the same sensor, Sony, Nikon, and Pentax photos do look a little different. Still, I definitely see a bigger difference between Canon and the others.

Canon just doesn't deal as well with reds and seems to have a lot warmer white balance as well.

[Skog]

Yep all my shots are Photo shopped. There is some excellent reading material on processing bird photos at Secrets of Digital Bird Photography ) this guy is the greatest birding guru around in my opinion. It is very interesting reading. It gets pretty technical but if into birding worth the read.

I looked at your shots. Nice work.

Tank you for that link! I will definitely read through it. I admire your bird photography by the way. And I follow you on flickr. I hope you stay with pentax, and keep producing great images. They are an inspiration to a fellow pentaxian, and I look at them to compare and learn. Im ALWAYS curious about what other people do to the images in PP. There are so many choises, and I never seem to agree with myself

[traderdrew]

Hi Gary,

I hope Ricoh steps up their advertising and adding more lenses in time but not cheaping the build quality going into Pentax. Sorry to hear about your K-5 having some problems. I suspected it would have some bugs when it first came out but it was hard to wait and resist buying one.

One of my flickr buddies here in Palm Beach has been complaining about his EOS 7D. He says the autofocus constantly messes up and he has sent it back to Canon twice.

[rawr]

has been complaining about his EOS 7D. He says the autofocus constantly messes up and he has sent it back to Canon twice.

Don't say that! But perhaps Gary should buy a Nikon D7000 to backup his Canon. Then an Olympus to backup the Nikon

Gee, you can begin to see the logic in the old Adaptall mount idea. Swap bodies from different brands, keep one set of lenses.

[nanok]

Why does everyone carry on about Pentax colors being better all the time??

I have the Nikon D7000 with the same sensor as the K5 - how then would the colors be different between these two??

Surely if both shot in raw we would give exactly the same output.

Many of the pro togs who specialize in birding over here use the 1DMKiv and the 7D as backup and what they produce is amazing - I don't see anything "special" with re: "Pentax Color" over the Canon shots

They prefer the Canon due to the more natural rendition of color (closer to seen in life) then Nikon which they feel can get too vibrant.

Lastly - surely with the correct pp one can get an image from any make of camera looking the same in terms of color??

This not a dis on the K5 just a query about the common "no dslr can do Pentax color" statement.

Considering I have shot with the K10D for several years (many on this forum still vouch for it's sharpness & color superiority) it certainly has nothing over the sensor of the Nikon in terms of color rendition.

don't worry, you're not crazy: it's all bullshit. the difference for the most part is due to the default color profiles each manufacturer provides with their software and/or profiles in the software one happens to be using. the differences between sensors are rarely so sever that most people would notice them reliably, what most people notice is "color rendition", which in the digital age is all color profiles, really. in theory, you can achieve pretty much the same with the raw files from different contemporary cameras (note: k5/d7000 are only contemporary with eachother ). but this is in theory, in practice it's quite a bit of trouble to do that. so people talk about the "canon look" and the "nikon look" and so on. what is really funny is that for each photographer you will see a different perception (some will tell me nikon's rendition is "colder", and canon is "warmer", others the opposite, as seen in this thread). but to say "no camera can do colors like x brand", that's simply rubish.

[nanok]

Don't say that! But perhaps Gary should buy a Nikon D7000 to backup his Canon. Then an Olympus to backup the Nikon

Gee, you can begin to see the logic in the old Adaptall mount idea. Swap bodies from different brands, keep one set of lenses.

begin to see? is that sarcasm? you mean it's starting, all of a sudden, to make sense to have industry standards, and not be locked in to this or that manufacturer, to actually have competition, and so on? what a strange idea.. OF COURSE it makes sense! i still can't get why it didn't catch on. adaptall should have been so popular that camera manufacturers should have found themselves forced, by now, to settle on a standard mount, because tamorn was jsut murdering them on lens sales. instead, it just... died. and instead the consumers going crazy with rage and burning the nikon/canon/pentax/<insert favourite manufacturer here> hq's to the ground and making the headlines, ffwd a few decades, they are.. dissing eachother. nikon users fight with canon users, pentax users with everybody else, as to which mount is superior. fascinating if you ask me, talk about mob control..

no, it makes sense, let's look at it like this: you're rooting for the manufacturer you pay big bucks to to be unchallenged and superior, so they can drive prices up.. no, wait, it doesn't sound right, that works for stock holders, not consumers.

/me scratches head in disbelief

rant over

[Rupert]

don't worry, you're not crazy: it's all bullshit. the difference for the most part is due to the default color profiles each manufacturer provides with their software and/or profiles in the software one happens to be using. the differences between sensors are rarely so sever that most people would notice them reliably, what most people notice is "color rendition", which in the digital age is all color profiles, really. in theory, you can achieve pretty much the same with the raw files from different contemporary cameras (note: k5/d7000 are only contemporary with eachother ). but this is in theory, in practice it's quite a bit of trouble to do that. so people talk about the "canon look" and the "nikon look" and so on. what is really funny is that for each photographer you will see a different perception (some will tell me nikon's rendition is "colder", and canon is "warmer", others the opposite, as seen in this thread). but to say "no camera can do colors like x brand", that's simply rubish.

Rubbish....No, I don't think so. Look at the test sites on various cameras/brands and you see a very wide variety of color rendition by the different brands/models. That is not rubbish, that is a fact.

As for the brand difference.....each Mfg has their own processing engine, which includes color processing. You can get many different results from the same sensor...just as you can adjust your monitor while using the same computer processor to obtain wildly varying results.

A short story, and fair or not, one of the reasons I find far too many Canon shooters to be obnoxious and condescending towards other brands.

I joined a camera club a few years ago....if you have never done so and would like to view insanity first hand, it is one of the best choices you could make. The "Ringleader" was a long time Canon shooter, and if there was anything he didn't know, I never heard it. The first thing he made clear at every meeting was that if you didn't shoot Canon, just hang it up, you are only wasting your time. Pretty typical of most Canon people I have run across.......

Anyhow, I suffered through his rants, even the one where he claimed SR was worthless......he had to let that go when I brought my Notebook, K20D , took side by side shots with his big Canon, downloaded the shots at 1/8 through 1/40 and did a comparison there on screen.....out of a dozen shots he got acceptable focus on none of them......I got 10 of 12. A lot of the 25 member group started thinking Pentax that night...in particular the older ladies that were having trouble with camera shake at slow speeds but didn't want to buy that expensive Canon glass.

Color......One night he brought in a 10x12 print of a male Cardinal.....we have a lot of them around here and everyone is familiar with them. Before the meeting started, he just laid it on a table without comment. The old ladies ranted and raved about how wonderful it was.........just fantastic! By sheer coincidence, I had just printed an 8x10 of the Cardinal I posted here, shot previously with my K10D, a fine camera for color rendering, and had it in my folder. I said not a word and laid it out next to his on the table as people milled about and chit chatted. In no time the conversation turned to the natural color of my bird....and the "orange" color of his. He pulled his print and still said not a word, but never played the "Great Canon Color" game again.

So, to sum it up, there is a difference...some in processing, some in printing, some in the cameras processing engine. Is Pentax the best? A matter of opinion, but I like it, and have never seen an Orange Cardinal that preferred being orange...have you?

Best Regards!

[garyk]

LOL, some sharp folks here for sure.... Actually I bought Canon for the lens line up. And I picked now to change because of two things. Canon is comming out with there new super tele lenses and even with the Japan problems. I am seeing many good deals on the old 300mm and 500mm IS teles. 2: I am having problems with my copy's of the K-5.

I considered Nikon, but I personally think the super tele's are over priced. Oly only has an overpriced 300mm f2.8 in my opinion. The same with Sony. So this is where it ends for me. I will post a un-processed pic with the 7D and the K-5 and just see what is done with the shots. And see if there is a difference.

I think Rupert is right but lets see.

[kenyee]

By sheer coincidence, I had just printed an 8x10 of the Cardinal I posted here, shot previously with my K10D, a fine camera for color rendering, and had it in my folder. I said not a word and laid it out next to his on the table as people milled about and chit chatted. In no time the conversation turned to the natural color of my bird....and the "orange" color of his. He pulled his print and still said not a word, but never played the "Great Canon Color" game again.

LOL. Way to go Rupert!

Yep, color mapping tables are still used against the really raw data coming out of the sensor...each manufacturer tweaks it until they think it looks "right" (using their own metrics).
Lenses make a difference too...some lenses render cooler (e.g., the older Nikon lenses) while some are warmer (at the extreme end, Sigma which is warmer than even Pentax).
If you do a camera calibration w/ EyeOne and test charts, you can theoretically map this all back to neutral, but it's a pita...

[Rupert]

LOL. Way to go Rupert!

Yep, color mapping tables are still used against the really raw data coming out of the sensor...each manufacturer tweaks it until they think it looks "right" (using their own metrics).
Lenses make a difference too...some lenses render cooler (e.g., the older Nikon lenses) while some are warmer (at the extreme end, Sigma which is warmer than even Pentax).
If you do a camera calibration w/ EyeOne and test charts, you can theoretically map this all back to neutral, but it's a pita...

Yes, you can map out to get what you want most of the time from Raw, although it does take some effort and time.
Your point on lenses is also well taken, and I agree, the lenses can and do make a difference. I like Pentax colors generally speaking, and they suit me better than most anything else I see....but I also see some fine colors from other camera brands....again, there are so many variables that it is hard to determine what might be the factor in any one shot.

My general point was that claiming color superiority from your camera does not always work out, like it didn't for that Canon guy.....He had some fine shots, I won't deny him that, and he was decent with his camera on many occasions...just not on that one! I am cautious about being too negative on other peoples gear.....and just wish they would be the same. Guys get pretty close to their equipment, and offending them is not a good idea. Sort of like offending a guys wife........she maybe ugly, but she is his....and she may have some hidden attributes that render her looks unimportant. I am blessed with a lovely appearing wife, but after 45 years, she still can't cook.....she can do other things well though...very well...and when it comes to using plastic, she is the absolute best around. Carries her own card reader in case the store's is not operable.

I was waiting for her in my Jeep the other day while she "ran in" to get a pair of hose at Wallyworld....after 25 minutes in the hot sun, I went in "Search Mode" to track her down......there she was in a Shoppers Trance on aisle 11 with a cart full of junk........but does she look good? Yep, she still looks great after all these years.
Canon and Nikon are just fine....some of their shooters are not....I hope Pentax shooters are a little more courteous.....I think most are.

Trying out new lipstick.....must already have 30 shades.......but this one was "on sale".....women do not understand...everything on earth is "on sale"...if it wasn't you couldn't buy it.


Best Regards from a long winded Rupert.....If anyone disagrees with my opinions, send your complaint to Otis, he loves a good argument.

[Rondec]

don't worry, you're not crazy: it's all bullshit. the difference for the most part is due to the default color profiles each manufacturer provides with their software and/or profiles in the software one happens to be using. the differences between sensors are rarely so sever that most people would notice them reliably, what most people notice is "color rendition", which in the digital age is all color profiles, really. in theory, you can achieve pretty much the same with the raw files from different contemporary cameras (note: k5/d7000 are only contemporary with eachother ). but this is in theory, in practice it's quite a bit of trouble to do that. so people talk about the "canon look" and the "nikon look" and so on. what is really funny is that for each photographer you will see a different perception (some will tell me nikon's rendition is "colder", and canon is "warmer", others the opposite, as seen in this thread). but to say "no camera can do colors like x brand", that's simply rubish.

You can get your photos to look like anything you want (within reason), but some manufacturers make it easier to get a specific look than others. Things like white balance can be a bear to get right in certain situations as can certain color casts. I don't think there is a big difference between nikon and pentax colors, but i do see a difference between the way the current canon sensors handle colors and Nikon/Pentax.