[hll]

i was looking at reviews of k10d. (i am already a user of it) i am really shocked and confused after i saw the comparison between k10d and d80... as far as i saw, d80 and 400d are better than k10 in image detail (for dpreview)... is it really true???
or is it only valid for jpeg shots (image processing), so they don't tell us which one's raw shooting is better, hence it is not a good comparison for raw shooters???
halil

[Canada_Rockies]

They review Jpegs only. I shoot RAW only. The only comments I have received on the images I imported into Lightroom were along the lines of "those are really sharp pictures!" Nuff said.

[hll]

that is what i want to believe why don't they compare them with their RAWs? i don't care the jpeg results... do you know another site which has comparison using RAW format???
thanx
halil

[Falcons]

In the DPR reiew of the canon 40D they compare the K10D's Raw agaist the 40D's - Pentax did come out on top.

Having said that I am one (of the supposed minority) who like the default jpegs from the k10Dparticularly when printed and don't forget these 100% crops for pixel peeping mean diddly squat when printed and you would have to be viewing them with a magnifying glass and know what you are looking for to pick them up.

I don't own a K10D but I can pretty accurately pick a K10D photo - it just seems to have a quality about it that makes the shot more realistic. Canon photos are nearly always plasticky looking and everything seems not quite real. Nikon colours seem wrong to me like they are pastel versions of the true colour - I think they must do something different with how Hue is handled.

I will add that I am one (of the quite surprisingly many) colour blind amateur (stress on the amateur) photographers and I see things differently to many of you. One of the advantages I have found in being colour blind is that I often see the shape, shadows and textures easier or on a different level than colour normal photographers I have been out on shooting days with. They seem quite suprised when they see my photos and exclaim they walked right past that and didn't notice it that way.

[Canada_Rockies]

I missed that review.

I do have some French photo magazines, and they exclaim "magnifique!" over the Pentax AA filter that doesn't obscure the details as much as some other cameras' filters do. What I have found, comparing the US and France reviews, is that the Europeans seem to like the Pentax a heck of a lot more than the US reviewers do.

I have the opposite visual accuity. On the 400+ colour discrimination cards the Canadian Forces put in front of me on my entry, I missed one only. That makes me rather sensitive to colour subtlety, and I am constantly bitching about my prints not being just exactly as I want them.

[tux08902]

I think Pentax JPEGs are perfectly fine.

[Eaglerapids]

When I found out early this spring that Pentax had a DSLR that was finally within my budget and I began my research, I read that review and at first I shared your concern. But then I noticed he was talking about the jpeg's at the DEFAULT camera settings. Then I found out that Pentax had set it up this way for a reason and I was sold. I now shoot in raw only, but not because of the jpeg quality, they are fine if you tune the camera's settings to your liking.

[nathancombs]

shot in jpg (this may have been shot with K100D i for got lol i use both cameras interchangeably)

orgnal photo




croped



orgnal (defntly K10D)



croped





i for the most part use jpg becuse RAW for photoj just takes to long to prosses

[SpecialK]

There is so much post-processing done (wheher you just use software default settings or heavily manipulate it) it is nearly impossible to determine how much is the camera, and how much is the software.

There is no significant difference in image quality. Just look through the galleries on mixed-brand forums, such as dcreaseource.com. None says "I have to have THAT camera" or else we all would.

[roentarre]

There is no significant difference in image quality. Just look through the galleries on mixed-brand forums, such as dcreaseource.com. None says "I have to have THAT camera" or else we all would.

That is so true!!

[Deni]

From the review of the 40d, the canon had sharper jpegs, but in raw, imo the k10d was a league of it's own.

[clawhammer]

I like to thing of it like this: RAW is like shooting a slide then printing it yourself with a condensor, messing with the color and brightness until it's just right. Jpeg is like shooting film, dropping it off at a camera lab, and leting their software/tech decide what looks best. If I really want my images to be mine and not adjusted to what someone else thinks best, I shoot raw. If I need to shoot a lot where color and such arn't critical (sports/action comes to mind) then I shoot Jpeg.

[digitaldevo]

I can tell you, after using both, the K10D definitely outdoes the Canon 20/30/40D cameras! The Pentax meters so much better, has far more shadow and highlight detail, better DR, far better/more accurate color reproduction, etc. I mainly shoot RAW. But even in JPEG with a few settings changed from default, the K10D holds its own!

Also, the most important thing IMHO, the K10D files look FAR better in print then the Canons do!!