Ed From Photouniverse...

starbase218 · 12-07-2013, 02:18 AM

If it turns out RAWs are sharp but JPEGs are not, then it's obvious what the culprit is: has to be the JPEG engine. But we'll see...

Kunzite · 12-07-2013, 05:32 AM

That would be easy to find out: just shoot RAW+JPEG for a while; if the first is sharp but the latter isn't...
But I doubt JPEGs won't be fine, eventually after tweaking the settings a little bit.

One could also shoot RAW and use the in-camera development options to see what works and what doesn't, regarding JPEG conversion.

robgo2 · 12-07-2013, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

I spend half an hour on Ed...................Where can I get my money for that time?

I agree. A complete waste of time.

Rob

aaalegre · 12-07-2013, 12:19 PM

Jpeg on the left raw on the right What do you think? I had a Toshiba flash car as a jpeg backup No EDITS

Unregistered User · 12-07-2013, 03:07 PM

I for one like to see more of Ed.

starbase218 · 12-07-2013, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by aaalegre

Jpeg on the left raw on the right What do you think? I had a Toshiba flash car as a jpeg backup No EDITS

Err... are these 100% crops?

aaalegre · 12-07-2013, 03:20 PM

Originally posted by starbase218

Err... are these 100% crops?

no crop out of camera

robgo2 · 12-07-2013, 09:10 PM

Originally posted by aaalegre

Jpeg on the left raw on the right What do you think? I had a Toshiba flash car as a jpeg backup No EDITS

Do you actually expect anyone to be able to judge IQ on the basis of small web jpegs? Please be realistic. You have to give us more than that.

Rob

Qwntm · 12-08-2013, 12:23 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Luschnig

I've been a professional photographer for a long time and unlike Ed I shoot mainly hand held. I've come to accept a certain number shaky frames. Some, like Ed's barn, are mysterious but many are not. Two culprits for me are caffeine and cold often when coupled with any lens with "tele" in its name. A long time ago a photo writer called Rothschild claimed hand holding could only be done with near 100 per cent success at three times the focal length if all other conditions were favorable. Ed's barn test certainly met the minimum requirements of Rothschild's shutter speed criterion. But then why the small but persistent differencea between sharpness delivered by the two bodies? It is my feeling that the answer to the blurry barn phenomenon, if one is ever found, is going to lie in something simple rather than complex, something that will produce a palm to the forehead reaction rather than an intellectually befuddled stare. Once I did a shoot on a remote Greek island and when I got back to Athens and developed the film only to find it blank. I swore and worried loudly over my Leica when my non-photographic wife asked about the lens cap. That's why I bought my first Pentax SLR. Because sometimes the problems are simple and the solutions even simpler.

Now that is a professional comment!

And guess what, exactly right. The Sony sensor in the K-3 is the same one as in the A77 and the A77 was a noise monster with a very aggressive High ISO noise reduction. The K-3 High ISO Noise reduction is very aggressive as well and this is much different than the traditional conservative approach Pentax-before-Ricoh took. The default setting is High ISO Noise reduction set to Auto, and in flat light at ISO's as low as 400 it will BLOW your image sharpness to bits. Turn OFF AUTO high iso noise reduction and everything is tack sharp if you get all the other parts right. PROBLEM SOLVED. The K-3 is AWESOME. And I don't think the K-3 is a noise monster like the A77 either, so maybe Pentax/Ricoh did better than Sony on that front. but the Hi ISO Noise reduction is something to control for sure.

Franc · 12-08-2013, 01:13 AM

Originally posted by Qwntm

Now that is a professional comment!

And guess what, exactly right. The Sony sensor in the K-3 is the same one as in the A77 .

based on..? That sensor is at least 2 years old. According to the A77 specs: ISO 100 - 16,000 (25,600 with multi-image combination. Expands down to ISO 50). With the K3 its very different.

aaalegre · 12-08-2013, 05:04 AM

Originally posted by robgo2

Do you actually expect anyone to be able to judge IQ on the basis of small web jpegs? Please be realistic. You have to give us more than that.

Rob

Try this link
http://www.aalegre.com/Other/K-3/n-kNgff

JimmyDranox · 12-08-2013, 09:27 AM

I made a comparison using DPReview ''Image comparison tool''. Going from Sony A7, you can set to see Pentax K-3, Canon 5D M3, Nikon D610, and Sony a7, both in RAW or JPEG, in low light, or daylight simulation. My conclusion:

1. There is a problem with the JPEG engine on K-3. In RAW, K-3 is neck to neck with Nikon D610, and very close to the other 2 cameras.

2. In low light, the difference between K-3 and the other cameras is bigger, which is somehow normal, for an APS-C, facing FF.

PS. I'm still waiting for K-3....

Knotmetoo · 12-08-2013, 08:09 PM

Even if Ed doesn't visit PF, I made my choice to switch to Pentax based somewhat on his reviews. Loving the K-3 and I am not finding the sharpness issues noted except when I use my lenses that I know have CA and sharpness issues (unless I screw up, of course). Slap the Pentax-M 50 1.7 on the front and there are no distortion, CA, or sharpness issues in ANY condition. I am sure the same could be said for any of the other high quality lenses.

Plus, I want to see more of Photo Cat 1 & 2!! Please keep the reviews coming, Ed!!

Steve.Ledger · 12-08-2013, 09:07 PM

Originally posted by Knotmetoo

Even if Ed doesn't visit PF

Ed = Qwntm

sundr · 12-08-2013, 10:27 PM

I appreciate your videos Ed. I've been on the fence; trying to decide whether to take the leap to the K3, take advantage of the low price on a K5iis or just stay with my trusty K5 for another year or so. Still undecided :-)
On a side note, I had the exact same issue when I got my 50-135. The hood was cracked in the same way but I didn't want to let go of the lens. I didn't think to call Pentax(I think you made the more proper choice). I called B&H. And they said yes!:-) I sent back the damaged hood and they replaced it. Great store.

12-08-2013, 09:27 AM	#72
JimmyDranox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Ploiesti, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,632	I made a comparison using DPReview ''Image comparison tool''. Going from Sony A7, you can set to see Pentax K-3, Canon 5D M3, Nikon D610, and Sony a7, both in RAW or JPEG, in low light, or daylight simulation. My conclusion: 1. There is a problem with the JPEG engine on K-3. In RAW, K-3 is neck to neck with Nikon D610, and very close to the other 2 cameras. 2. In low light, the difference between K-3 and the other cameras is bigger, which is somehow normal, for an APS-C, facing FF. PS. I'm still waiting for K-3.... Last edited by JimmyDranox; 12-08-2013 at 09:33 AM.

12-08-2013, 08:09 PM	#73
Knotmetoo New Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Port Orchard, WA Photos: Albums Posts: 10	Photo Cat Even if Ed doesn't visit PF, I made my choice to switch to Pentax based somewhat on his reviews. Loving the K-3 and I am not finding the sharpness issues noted except when I use my lenses that I know have CA and sharpness issues (unless I screw up, of course). Slap the Pentax-M 50 1.7 on the front and there are no distortion, CA, or sharpness issues in ANY condition. I am sure the same could be said for any of the other high quality lenses. Plus, I want to see more of Photo Cat 1 & 2!! Please keep the reviews coming, Ed!!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ed from photouniverse is back :D	Deedee	Photographic Industry and Professionals	17	10-07-2015 01:35 PM
Pentax 300mm f/2.8 SMC FA* IF ED AF Lens FROM KEH on Ebay	dmort	Pentax Price Watch	57	03-10-2013 04:52 PM
different between Pentax 6x7 300 F4 ED(IF) and 645 300 F4 ED(IF)	popkrab	Pentax Medium Format	9	12-17-2011 05:46 PM
Ed says hello from San Francisco	edrabbit	Welcomes and Introductions	5	06-12-2009 10:06 PM

12-07-2013, 02:18 AM	#61
starbase218 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Planet Earth, Sol system, Milky Way galaxy, Universe Posts: 1,119	If it turns out RAWs are sharp but JPEGs are not, then it's obvious what the culprit is: has to be the JPEG engine. But we'll see...

12-07-2013, 05:32 AM	#62
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	That would be easy to find out: just shoot RAW+JPEG for a while; if the first is sharp but the latter isn't... But I doubt JPEGs won't be fine, eventually after tweaking the settings a little bit. One could also shoot RAW and use the in-camera development options to see what works and what doesn't, regarding JPEG conversion.

12-07-2013, 11:23 AM	#63
robgo2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New Mexico Photos: Albums Posts: 1,125	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 I spend half an hour on Ed...................Where can I get my money for that time? I agree. A complete waste of time. Rob

12-07-2013, 12:19 PM	#64
aaalegre Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: new jersey Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 112	Jpeg on the left raw on the right What do you think? I had a Toshiba flash car as a jpeg backup No EDITS

12-07-2013, 03:07 PM	#65
Unregistered User Guest	I for one like to see more of Ed.

12-07-2013, 03:07 PM	#66
starbase218 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Planet Earth, Sol system, Milky Way galaxy, Universe Posts: 1,119	Originally posted by aaalegre Jpeg on the left raw on the right What do you think? I had a Toshiba flash car as a jpeg backup No EDITS Err... are these 100% crops?

12-07-2013, 03:20 PM	#67
aaalegre Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: new jersey Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 112	Originally posted by starbase218 Err... are these 100% crops? no crop out of camera

12-07-2013, 09:10 PM	#68
robgo2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New Mexico Photos: Albums Posts: 1,125	Originally posted by aaalegre Jpeg on the left raw on the right What do you think? I had a Toshiba flash car as a jpeg backup No EDITS Do you actually expect anyone to be able to judge IQ on the basis of small web jpegs? Please be realistic. You have to give us more than that. Rob

12-08-2013, 12:23 AM - 2 Likes	#69
Qwntm Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Eastern Oregon Posts: 856	Originally posted by Luschnig I've been a professional photographer for a long time and unlike Ed I shoot mainly hand held. I've come to accept a certain number shaky frames. Some, like Ed's barn, are mysterious but many are not. Two culprits for me are caffeine and cold often when coupled with any lens with "tele" in its name. A long time ago a photo writer called Rothschild claimed hand holding could only be done with near 100 per cent success at three times the focal length if all other conditions were favorable. Ed's barn test certainly met the minimum requirements of Rothschild's shutter speed criterion. But then why the small but persistent differencea between sharpness delivered by the two bodies? It is my feeling that the answer to the blurry barn phenomenon, if one is ever found, is going to lie in something simple rather than complex, something that will produce a palm to the forehead reaction rather than an intellectually befuddled stare. Once I did a shoot on a remote Greek island and when I got back to Athens and developed the film only to find it blank. I swore and worried loudly over my Leica when my non-photographic wife asked about the lens cap. That's why I bought my first Pentax SLR. Because sometimes the problems are simple and the solutions even simpler. Now that is a professional comment! And guess what, exactly right. The Sony sensor in the K-3 is the same one as in the A77 and the A77 was a noise monster with a very aggressive High ISO noise reduction. The K-3 High ISO Noise reduction is very aggressive as well and this is much different than the traditional conservative approach Pentax-before-Ricoh took. The default setting is High ISO Noise reduction set to Auto, and in flat light at ISO's as low as 400 it will BLOW your image sharpness to bits. Turn OFF AUTO high iso noise reduction and everything is tack sharp if you get all the other parts right. PROBLEM SOLVED. The K-3 is AWESOME. And I don't think the K-3 is a noise monster like the A77 either, so maybe Pentax/Ricoh did better than Sony on that front. but the Hi ISO Noise reduction is something to control for sure.

12-08-2013, 01:13 AM	#70
Franc Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Hoevelaken Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,212	Originally posted by Qwntm Now that is a professional comment! And guess what, exactly right. The Sony sensor in the K-3 is the same one as in the A77 . based on..? That sensor is at least 2 years old. According to the A77 specs: ISO 100 - 16,000 (25,600 with multi-image combination. Expands down to ISO 50). With the K3 its very different.

12-08-2013, 05:04 AM	#71
aaalegre Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: new jersey Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 112	Originally posted by robgo2 Do you actually expect anyone to be able to judge IQ on the basis of small web jpegs? Please be realistic. You have to give us more than that. Rob Try this link http://www.aalegre.com/Other/K-3/n-kNgff

12-08-2013, 09:07 PM	#74
Steve.Ledger Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Far North Qld Posts: 3,301	Originally posted by Knotmetoo Even if Ed doesn't visit PF Ed = Qwntm

12-08-2013, 10:27 PM	#75
sundr Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: St. Paul, Minnesota Photos: Gallery Posts: 123	I appreciate your videos Ed. I've been on the fence; trying to decide whether to take the leap to the K3, take advantage of the low price on a K5iis or just stay with my trusty K5 for another year or so. Still undecided :-) On a side note, I had the exact same issue when I got my 50-135. The hood was cracked in the same way but I didn't want to let go of the lens. I didn't think to call Pentax(I think you made the more proper choice). I called B&H. And they said yes!:-) I sent back the damaged hood and they replaced it. Great store.