K10 soft JPEGS

SimonMW · 08-16-2007, 05:05 AM

Always judge with your own eyes rather than reviews. But I thought I'd link to this one as it flies in the face of most other K10D reviews out there;

"The K10D goes further still. On the lens flange on the left of the body, there's a RAW button. You press this to take the next shot in RAW mode - perfect for those who normally shoot JPEGs but want to be able to fire off the occasional RAW file without having to trudge through the menus to switch formats. Not that there's much wrong with the K10D's JPEGs. The RAW files are possibly a fraction sharper, but there's nothing like the difference you get with the Canon EOS 400D, whose JPEGs are soft to the point of mushiness."

Pentax K10D - Review - Tech.co.uk

So how come the K10D gets such a bad rap for soft JPEGs while I haven't heard anything about the Canon?

attack11 · 08-16-2007, 06:40 AM

the dpreview review. phil likes canon.

stewart_photo · 08-16-2007, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by SimonMW

(snip) So how come the K10D gets such a bad rap for soft JPEGs while I haven't heard anything about the Canon?

I suspect it may have something to do with the fact that many of those other reviewers are Canon users with a built-in bias which makes them want to see the Canon images as sharper than the K10D's. Some, however, have been very fair to the K10D. For example, Jeff Keller over at the the Digital Camera Resource Page uses a Canon EOS-20D, yet still rates the K10D very highly.

DCRP Review: Pentax K10D

Regardless, while the K10D's unadjusted JPEG files are slightly soft, I like the overall results. When printed, images look very similar to those produced using some of the finer 35mm films. And on those occasions when I want something sharper, tweaking the camera's sharpness and contrast settings gets the job done very nicely (or just shoot RAW).

stewart

fwbigd · 08-16-2007, 07:20 AM

Originally posted by SimonMW

Always judge with your own eyes rather than reviews. But I thought I'd link to this one as it flies in the face of most other K10D reviews out there;

"The K10D goes further still. On the lens flange on the left of the body, there's a RAW button. You press this to take the next shot in RAW mode - perfect for those who normally shoot JPEGs but want to be able to fire off the occasional RAW file without having to trudge through the menus to switch formats. Not that there's much wrong with the K10D's JPEGs. The RAW files are possibly a fraction sharper, but there's nothing like the difference you get with the Canon EOS 400D, whose JPEGs are soft to the point of mushiness."

Pentax K10D - Review - Tech.co.uk

So how come the K10D gets such a bad rap for soft JPEGs while I haven't heard anything about the Canon?

IIt's called marketing. Canon spends a lot of money to promote their products. Those advertising dollars have a way of influencing opinions of not only consumers but also reviewers.

As a test I downloaded the test JEPGs from DP Review for the Canon D5 and K10D, and sharpen them the exact same amount in Photoshop CS3. I printed them in Lightroom 1.1 on a Epson 2400 printer (13X19) you could not tell the difference in sharpness. The print from the K10D was a little more saturated than the Canon D5 print.

Some individuals disagrees with me saying that you cannot evaluate the sharpness of an image by a print. They says the only way to evaluate the sharpness is on a calabrated monitor. How they can tell how sharp an file is on a 72dpi monitor is beyond me.

08-16-2007, 05:05 AM	#1
SimonMW Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: England Posts: 21	K10 soft JPEGS Always judge with your own eyes rather than reviews. But I thought I'd link to this one as it flies in the face of most other K10D reviews out there; "The K10D goes further still. On the lens flange on the left of the body, there's a RAW button. You press this to take the next shot in RAW mode - perfect for those who normally shoot JPEGs but want to be able to fire off the occasional RAW file without having to trudge through the menus to switch formats. Not that there's much wrong with the K10D's JPEGs. The RAW files are possibly a fraction sharper, but there's nothing like the difference you get with the Canon EOS 400D, whose JPEGs are soft to the point of mushiness." Pentax K10D - Review - Tech.co.uk So how come the K10D gets such a bad rap for soft JPEGs while I haven't heard anything about the Canon?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Soft Place: Post Your Soft Focus Images	jeffkpotter	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	64	04-22-2014 05:39 PM
Playback other Jpegs on a K10	stjohndunn	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	5	09-11-2010 12:15 PM
The Soft Place: Post Your Soft Focus Images	jeffkpotter	Post Your Photos!	22	04-23-2009 09:04 PM
Combining two JPEGs into a single one	cosmicap	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	21	04-19-2009 03:08 PM

08-16-2007, 06:40 AM	#2
attack11 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Ottawa, ON - Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 658	the dpreview review. phil likes canon.

08-16-2007, 07:03 AM	#3
stewart_photo Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Heidelberg, Germany Posts: 1,864	Originally posted by SimonMW (snip) So how come the K10D gets such a bad rap for soft JPEGs while I haven't heard anything about the Canon? I suspect it may have something to do with the fact that many of those other reviewers are Canon users with a built-in bias which makes them want to see the Canon images as sharper than the K10D's. Some, however, have been very fair to the K10D. For example, Jeff Keller over at the the Digital Camera Resource Page uses a Canon EOS-20D, yet still rates the K10D very highly. DCRP Review: Pentax K10D Regardless, while the K10D's unadjusted JPEG files are slightly soft, I like the overall results. When printed, images look very similar to those produced using some of the finer 35mm films. And on those occasions when I want something sharper, tweaking the camera's sharpness and contrast settings gets the job done very nicely (or just shoot RAW). stewart

08-16-2007, 07:20 AM	#4
fwbigd Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Fort Worth TX Posts: 339	Originally posted by SimonMW Always judge with your own eyes rather than reviews. But I thought I'd link to this one as it flies in the face of most other K10D reviews out there; "The K10D goes further still. On the lens flange on the left of the body, there's a RAW button. You press this to take the next shot in RAW mode - perfect for those who normally shoot JPEGs but want to be able to fire off the occasional RAW file without having to trudge through the menus to switch formats. Not that there's much wrong with the K10D's JPEGs. The RAW files are possibly a fraction sharper, but there's nothing like the difference you get with the Canon EOS 400D, whose JPEGs are soft to the point of mushiness." Pentax K10D - Review - Tech.co.uk So how come the K10D gets such a bad rap for soft JPEGs while I haven't heard anything about the Canon? IIt's called marketing. Canon spends a lot of money to promote their products. Those advertising dollars have a way of influencing opinions of not only consumers but also reviewers. As a test I downloaded the test JEPGs from DP Review for the Canon D5 and K10D, and sharpen them the exact same amount in Photoshop CS3. I printed them in Lightroom 1.1 on a Epson 2400 printer (13X19) you could not tell the difference in sharpness. The print from the K10D was a little more saturated than the Canon D5 print. Some individuals disagrees with me saying that you cannot evaluate the sharpness of an image by a print. They says the only way to evaluate the sharpness is on a calabrated monitor. How they can tell how sharp an file is on a 72dpi monitor is beyond me.