Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

ricardobeat · 01-13-2008, 10:52 PM

I'm not a great fan of the Olympus E-3 noise performance (look at the dark areas, that is at ISO 100), but this picture has amazing detail:

Marco Frissen : photos : Official Olympus E-3 sample images- powered by SmugMug

Has anyone seen/taken a K10D pic with similar resolution? To my eyes this looks very close to what you'd get from a Sigma!

wlachan · 01-13-2008, 11:07 PM

While a very nice picture, a subject like this is often deceptive. The real test is to shoot some scenery with many fine details down to the corners, then you can tell how good they really are.

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-13-2008, 11:11 PM

Originally posted by ricardobeat

I'm not a great fan of the Olympus E-3 noise performance (look at the dark areas, that is at ISO 100), but this picture has amazing detail:

Marco Frissen : photos : Official Olympus E-3 sample images- powered by SmugMug

Has anyone seen/taken a K10D pic with similar resolution? To my eyes this looks very close to what you'd get from a Sigma!

Here is a quick shot I took of my wife Christmas morning. Direct conversion to jpeg, no post processing otherwise. K10D, 1/60@f/8, DA* 16-50 at 50mm, internal flash.
My beloved Claire with her Christmas Present on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-13-2008, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by wlachan

While a very nice picture, a subject like this is often deceptive. The real test is to shoot some scenery with many fine details down to the corners, then you can tell how good they really are.

And here is a shot I took New Year's Day while on a drive. K10D, DA* 16-50, 1/60 @ f/10, Manfrotto 055B tripod with 0168 ball head. Check the corners, and the ice fishers at the top right thirds point, approximately. Auto defringe and conversion to jpeg in Lightroom - no other processing applied.

Beauvais Lake, Alberta on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

almo · 01-13-2008, 11:53 PM

I don't want to rush to judgement, but the shadows in that look aweful. Hwever I would chalk that up to over processing, unless someone else knows better.

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-14-2008, 12:04 AM

Originally posted by almo

I don't want to rush to judgement, but the shadows in that look aweful. Hwever I would chalk that up to over processing, unless someone else knows better.

If you're talking about Claire - yeah! I actually used a softer shot without flash. No room to move Christmas day - but it is clear!

almo · 01-14-2008, 12:14 AM

Originally posted by Canada_Rockies

If you're talking about Claire - yeah! I actually used a softer shot without flash. No room to move Christmas day - but it is clear!

No Sir! Claire was beautiful. And, the shot looked great. The first shot at the top of the thread, that was aweful.

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-14-2008, 12:39 AM

Originally posted by almo

No Sir! Claire was beautiful. And, the shot looked great. The first shot at the top of the thread, that was aweful.

I thought you were talking about the shadow on the drapes behind Claire. On camera flash stinks, but I am still playing with all the gizmos on my new K10D. The thread was on sharpness and detail, so I put up two photos on Flickr that demonstrated that the K10D can be sharp, too.

I think the original shot was meant to be "moody", which it was.

almo · 01-14-2008, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Canada_Rockies

I thought you were talking about the shadow on the drapes behind Claire. On camera flash stinks, but I am still playing with all the gizmos on my new K10D. The thread was on sharpness and detail, so I put up two photos on Flickr that demonstrated that the K10D can be sharp, too.

I think the original shot was meant to be "moody", which it was.

Ah, I see. Hard shadows are not great, but as far as the go yours looks fine. I was keying off of what Ricardo said about the dark areas in that original image. Look at them at full res. They are terrible. For ISO 100 to have that kind of noise, and noise banding. That is pretty bad.

Your pics were great. I particularly enjoyed looking over that frozen lake in photoshop. That's a really great image.

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-14-2008, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by almo

Ah, I see. Hard shadows are not great, but as far as the go yours looks fine. I was keying off of what Ricardo said about the dark areas in that original image. Look at them at full res. They are terrible. For ISO 100 to have that kind of noise, and noise banding. That is pretty bad.

Your pics were great. I particularly enjoyed looking over that frozen lake in photoshop. That's a really great image.

Thanks, Almo. Beauvais Lake is one of our favourite places for day drives. Claire and I are very lucky to live where we do. We have no plans to move as long as we can still move ourselves.

01-13-2008, 10:52 PM	#1
ricardobeat Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Brazil Posts: 376	Resolution I'm not a great fan of the Olympus E-3 noise performance (look at the dark areas, that is at ISO 100), but this picture has amazing detail: Marco Frissen : photos : Official Olympus E-3 sample images- powered by SmugMug Has anyone seen/taken a K10D pic with similar resolution? To my eyes this looks very close to what you'd get from a Sigma!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-7 resolution	fulcrumx29	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	10-07-2009 02:25 PM
Minimum resolution?	ytterbium	Photographic Technique	5	08-30-2009 06:57 PM
Resolution, what does it mean?	kevinschoenmakers	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	05-12-2009 12:41 PM
New year resolution Vs camera resolution	Tripod	General Talk	1	01-04-2009 05:10 AM
My New Years resolution. What's yours	Ed in GA	General Talk	24	01-24-2008 04:18 AM

01-13-2008, 11:07 PM	#2
wlachan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 2,625	While a very nice picture, a subject like this is often deceptive. The real test is to shoot some scenery with many fine details down to the corners, then you can tell how good they really are.

01-13-2008, 11:11 PM	#3
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by ricardobeat I'm not a great fan of the Olympus E-3 noise performance (look at the dark areas, that is at ISO 100), but this picture has amazing detail: Marco Frissen : photos : Official Olympus E-3 sample images- powered by SmugMug Has anyone seen/taken a K10D pic with similar resolution? To my eyes this looks very close to what you'd get from a Sigma! Here is a quick shot I took of my wife Christmas morning. Direct conversion to jpeg, no post processing otherwise. K10D, 1/60@f/8, DA* 16-50 at 50mm, internal flash. My beloved Claire with her Christmas Present on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

01-13-2008, 11:27 PM	#4
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by wlachan While a very nice picture, a subject like this is often deceptive. The real test is to shoot some scenery with many fine details down to the corners, then you can tell how good they really are. And here is a shot I took New Year's Day while on a drive. K10D, DA* 16-50, 1/60 @ f/10, Manfrotto 055B tripod with 0168 ball head. Check the corners, and the ice fishers at the top right thirds point, approximately. Auto defringe and conversion to jpeg in Lightroom - no other processing applied. Beauvais Lake, Alberta on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

01-13-2008, 11:53 PM	#5
almo Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Flawda Posts: 101	I don't want to rush to judgement, but the shadows in that look aweful. Hwever I would chalk that up to over processing, unless someone else knows better.

01-14-2008, 12:04 AM	#6
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by almo I don't want to rush to judgement, but the shadows in that look aweful. Hwever I would chalk that up to over processing, unless someone else knows better. If you're talking about Claire - yeah! I actually used a softer shot without flash. No room to move Christmas day - but it is clear!

01-14-2008, 12:14 AM	#7
almo Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Flawda Posts: 101	Originally posted by Canada_Rockies If you're talking about Claire - yeah! I actually used a softer shot without flash. No room to move Christmas day - but it is clear! No Sir! Claire was beautiful. And, the shot looked great. The first shot at the top of the thread, that was aweful.

01-14-2008, 12:39 AM	#8
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by almo No Sir! Claire was beautiful. And, the shot looked great. The first shot at the top of the thread, that was aweful. I thought you were talking about the shadow on the drapes behind Claire. On camera flash stinks, but I am still playing with all the gizmos on my new K10D. The thread was on sharpness and detail, so I put up two photos on Flickr that demonstrated that the K10D can be sharp, too. I think the original shot was meant to be "moody", which it was.

01-14-2008, 01:43 AM	#9
almo Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Flawda Posts: 101	Originally posted by Canada_Rockies I thought you were talking about the shadow on the drapes behind Claire. On camera flash stinks, but I am still playing with all the gizmos on my new K10D. The thread was on sharpness and detail, so I put up two photos on Flickr that demonstrated that the K10D can be sharp, too. I think the original shot was meant to be "moody", which it was. Ah, I see. Hard shadows are not great, but as far as the go yours looks fine. I was keying off of what Ricardo said about the dark areas in that original image. Look at them at full res. They are terrible. For ISO 100 to have that kind of noise, and noise banding. That is pretty bad. Your pics were great. I particularly enjoyed looking over that frozen lake in photoshop. That's a really great image.

01-14-2008, 11:53 AM	#10
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by almo Ah, I see. Hard shadows are not great, but as far as the go yours looks fine. I was keying off of what Ricardo said about the dark areas in that original image. Look at them at full res. They are terrible. For ISO 100 to have that kind of noise, and noise banding. That is pretty bad. Your pics were great. I particularly enjoyed looking over that frozen lake in photoshop. That's a really great image. Thanks, Almo. Beauvais Lake is one of our favourite places for day drives. Claire and I are very lucky to live where we do. We have no plans to move as long as we can still move ourselves.

Resolution

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!