I went for a hike today with both my cameras, and tried taking similar shots.
On the Pentax I used the Pentax FA 50mm f2.8 Macro, and on the Sigma I used a 24 - 70mm f2.8, with a macro setting. I tried keeping it around the 50mm mark for for the pic's I'm displaying.

I hand held both cameras, and used AV for everything, and the pop up flash for the closeups. All the data should be in place.

I processed everything like I normally would this time.

Pentax

Sigma


Pentax

bigger version

Sigma

bigger version

Pentax

Sigma


Pentax

bigger version

Sigma

bigger version

I'll probably set up the tripod inside for some low light tests later, but from what I can tell you probably won't want to see them
It appears to be the only place the Pentax can't hold it's own

[Buschmaster]

Interesting to see a couple shots where I like the Pentax better and a couple where I like the Sigma better.

Either one of them are producing great images!

[mtnbearhug]

These are pretty interesting Stu... It definately proves there is a difference.

The sigma seems like it lets in more light ?? The snow pics are brighter (thus drowning out the other aspects of the pictures as in the first picture).. but then bringing out more color in the macros...

but like with Buschmaster I am torn because I like shots from both... but I really hate being a fence sitter... all it does is gives you slivers!! LOL.. sooo.. I would have to say I like the Landscapes fo the pentax due to being able to see more detail and the Macro's from the sigma because of the richness of the colors...

There you have it.. my 2 cents!!

[Mallee Boy]

Hi Stu,
Hard to make a case for 14 mpx on the basis of these. The iso speeds are interesting. in the first two.
Thanks for taking the time to do this.
Grant

[little laker]

I enjoyed taking both cameras out for the hike, and seeing what camera does what. So I'm glad that I could share it with everyone.

From the looks of it I don't think that anyone should be all that worried about upgrading to the new cameras.

The outcome of these tests is actually perfect. My plans were originally to use the Pentax for landscapes, due to my lens collection, and the Sigma for event photography + macro's due to it's color rendering.

I've just shot the low light pictures, and although I haven't downloaded them onto my computer yet it's looking like the Pentax is holding it's own still.
I'll post them sometime tonight, and type up a little report comparing the cameras.

[Marc Langille]

Not any noticeable difference between the K100D and the Sigma, considering the Sigma is around 3x the price!! Great comparisons, and yet the exposures are inconsistent between the cameras - they can vary from image to image...

[daacon]

Interesting Stu I prefer the Pentax on all but the last - then again as Marc suggests there may be differenet exposures. Thanks for posting.

[Peter Zack]

Frankly Stu in this series, if my camera was producing these shots (Sigma), I'd go back to film in a heartbeat. None of the colours looks accurate and it seems to have a lot less dynamic range. Doesn't say much for the Sigma 14Mp sensor but it's not the same sensor the new camera is going to have from my understanding.

Hard to believe this camera is that expensive.

[little laker]

When I start shooting in Manual with it I know that my image quality will improve Peter, so I'm not all that worried. It would be better with the Pentax as well.

I'm trying my best to do real world tests, which most people here can do.

I should mention that there is no Automatic Exposure setting on the Sigma, so I wouldn't recommend it to anyone whom didn't understand exposure.

[-=JoN=-]

interesting. would make for a better test if you had similar sigma lenses for both mounts. at least the only variable would be the bodies.

forgot which mag did it, but they compared the sd14 w/ the 40d, and d200.

the Sigma had greenish look in the shots/prints

they used similar sigma lenses on all 3 bodies...

[little laker]

I can borrow a Sigma 28 - 70 f2.8 in a Pentax mount for a short while.
At least I don't think that Bill's sold it yet.
But that won't happen until mid week, and if I get my new place it won't happen for another week or 2.

Personally I thought that the Pentax would blow away the Sigma with the closeups, with the macro lens.
But then again I thought that the Sigma would blow the Pentax away with the landscapes

[little laker]

I was just using the sigma supplied software for the editing. And I've discovered that it's almost as bad as Pentax's
This was processed in UFRaw

compared to the best I could do with the sigma software.

The UFRaw version looks a lot closer to that frozen berry

ACDSEE Pro #1 doesn't recognize the Sigma's raw files, so I can't use it

I'll try working at them a little tomorrow, and see if I can improve upon everything.

I used ACDSEE to re-size everything.

[channeler]

Interesting comparisons Stu. Are the differences though partly about how the two cameras handle metering? Some of the pentax ones look underexposed on my monitor and the Sigma ones overexposed. It would be interesting if you used your knowledge of both cameras strengths and foibles to get the best shot of the same scene out of each with you in control; but that's asking you for even more work.

Paul

[davemdsn]

Very enlightening tests. Thanks for sharing the results.

[jbrowning]

Hey Stu, it looks like your having fun with these tests. But to tell you the truth from what I'm seeing. I don't see a reason to go out and lay down the money on the Sigma. I'm sure if I was going to try the huge panoramics that you do the extra megapixels would come in handy. But stuff like up to a 13x16 there isn't a real use for it. No I'm not being Pentax biased right now.

Thats what I see with my monitor and my eyeballs. Keep up the tests Stu.

Jim