[Mr. A.S.]

Mr A.S.
Again, to my eyes the cropped building and cars of the K20 is sharper and more detailed than the K-30 (and the sunsets)? Or is the difference simply in the contrast?. Does it seem the same to you?
George

YES, George. I think too. Some photos on the old camera K20D look attractive.
Because I started this test.
But the ease of use for the new camera K-30 is beyond praise.

Anatol.

---

Last edited by Mr. A.S.; 08-24-2012 at 03:37 AM.

[audiobomber]

I downloaded a couple of images so I could see the camera settings, but all the exif data has been stripped. How did you process them?

I think something is strange with the settings. The K30D again looks to me like shadow correction has been enabled, and there's no way a K20 should have such a cool white balance compared to a K-30. Can you post a couple of samples with exif intact?

[audiobomber]

To me, the autofocus is quicker and much more assured and responsive than the K20D. There is speedy autofocus using live view. Try that using the sadly antiquated live view on the K20D.

The K20D doesn't have AF in Live View. I agree LV AF on the K-30 is the best yet. That's not what I was talking about though. I don't doubt the K-30 has better PDAF than the K20D and every other Pentax, but your statement that the K20D "autofocusses terribly" is an exaggeration that does not jibe with my experience, after having taken tens of thousands of photos with it.

[loco]

I am not sure what we are supposed to get from these shots if we don't know the exif or how they were processed. Perhaps the K20D photos look better SOOC? I have never held a K20D in my hands, much less shot with one, so I have no basis to compare. However, I am extremely happy and pleased with my K-30 and the photos look much better than these. Then again, I shoot RAW and post process my shots. If I posted them SOOC with the very same settings the OP is using, they may well look the same.

[Mr. A.S.]

I don't edit pictures. Only change size.
Maybe I wanted edit in PS first shot from Jan' 24, 2012 at K20D seven month ago.
It's RAW + JPEG. You see JPEG 16MP.
It's pictures and short EXIF you can see in my Galery on the pentaxforums.com
Later today I put two or more pictures full size to another site and you can see everything.

[loco]

I don't edit pictures. Only change size.
Maybe I wanted edit in PS first shot from Jan' 24, 2012 at K20D seven month ago.
It's RAW + JPEG. You see JPEG 16MP.
It's pictures and short EXIF you can see in my Galery on the pentaxforums.com
Later today I put two or more pictures full size to another site and you can see everything.

Thanks for the info! Then I'm guessing the K20D JPGs look a bit better SOOC than the K30's. It certainly looks related to processing.

[eddie1960]

How did you set white balance on these. the WB looks different. why would you shoot higher iso on the k30 for the sunset? in essence i see the k30 about a half a stop overexposed compared to the k20, but i actually think the k30 WB is more accurate.
If you want to control it so it is a direct comparison set WB and exposure using a grey card at the same f stop and iso. (shutter may then vary depending on the camera meter)
shoot the k20 at the reading it gave ansd the k 30 reading and do the same with the k30 shoot both readings
make sure highlight and shadow correction are turned off. shoot with them turned on individually (ie highlight correct but no shadow, shadow bu no highlight and both)

right now on these 2 comparisons i think the 20 WB is a little on the cool Side versus the 30 - akin to shooting say velvia versus Kodachrome
I think the k30 looks a littel over exposed and pulling it back half a stop in LR or so may recover some of the contrast (what colour setting is on the k20 and k30)
there are a lot of variables in camera that you need to take into account to do direct comparisons. far more on the K30 than the K20.

EDIT, looked in the gallery on the sunsets for instyance you didn't eve meter the same, k 30 was matrix, k 20 was spot. taht would help account for exposure differences right there, in fact it seems to have been the same on all of them. spot would have affected the AWB on the K20 and matrix the exposure on the K30.
As I said to do a controlled test you need to set the cameras the same. the K30 has an awful lot of additional settings available that sometimes are useful and sometimes aren't

---

Last edited by eddie1960; 08-24-2012 at 09:47 AM.

[audiobomber]

If you want to control it so it is a direct comparison set WB and exposure using a grey card at the same f stop and iso. (shutter may then vary depending on the camera meter)
shoot the k20 at the reading it gave ansd the k 30 reading and do the same with the k30 shoot both readings
make sure highlight and shadow correction are turned off. shoot with them turned on individually (ie highlight correct but no shadow, shadow bu no highlight and both)

I suspect Mr A.S. is inteding to compare OOC shots, so no setting wb etc. If that's what he's trying to show, he should reset both to factory defaults.

[audiobomber]

Thanks for the info! Then I'm guessing the K20D JPGs look a bit better SOOC than the K30's. It certainly looks related to processing.

It is related to processing. The images are processed according to the settings in the camera.

[eddie1960]

I suspect Mr A.S. is inteding to compare OOC shots, so no setting wb etc. If that's what he's trying to show, he should reset both to factory defaults.

Agreed, comparing SOOC it should be all enhancements off same iso and f stop setting (so say AV mode) same metering type AWB. ideally take the exposure reading off a grey card because it eliminates and possible variables caused by the environment. Shooting different sensors really isn't wildly different than shooting different film. in fact film had more variation.
true comparison of course on a tripod, no SR, and eyepiece cover over the eyepiece before shooting to prevent exposure variance caused by light entering from the eyepiece

EDIT - I'll add in many ways if you compared a K10 to the K30 at 100 iso you may actually prefer the K10 because of how the CCD renders. I certainly think my K10 renders better at 100 iso than my K7

[loco]

It is related to processing. The images are processed according to the settings in the camera.

Isn't that what I said?

Since I only shoot RAW, I guess the findings here don't really apply to me.

[audiobomber]

Isn't that what I said?

I guess so, but that's not how I read it. You also said "Then I'm guessing the K20D JPGs look a bit better SOOC than the K30's". In-camera processing can make either one look better or worse than the other. It's clear that there were camera settings that affected these results.

[eddie1960]

Isn't that what I said?

Since I only shoot RAW, I guess the findings here don't really apply to me.

not really, the in camera settings are there in the raw and your PP software might be importing them as the default start point.
But Audiobomber is right the disparity in settings right now is affecting the outcome. a true test would start with them set at defaults with the same conditions (ie metering type iso, F stop and AWB on)

[loco]

not really, the in camera settings are there in the raw and your PP software might be importing them as the default start point.
But Audiobomber is right the disparity in settings right now is affecting the outcome. a true test would start with them set at defaults with the same conditions (ie metering type iso, F stop and AWB on)

Does Lightroom do this? How would one know? I thought the whole point of RAW is that you are getting the data directly from the camera with no processing.

[eddie1960]

Does Lightroom do this? How would one know? I thought the whole point of RAW is that you are getting the data directly from the camera with no processing.

LR can be set to import any number of ways including any of it's presets, or metadata settings. even with a no setting import it still applies a LR generated preview.