[Salminus]

I'about to buy my K10D but there's an issue that's making me hesitate.
I'm concerned, about the in camera RAW to jpeg convertion. According to dpreview and others:
...JPEG straight from the camera, if anything the JPEG has a slight lead on very fine detail . Both the JPEG and Photo Laboratory however suffer from a softening of edge detail which can be seen quite clearly when compared to the output from Adobe Camera RAW...

I know that this software might have it's advantages, but still I'd like to know if there's a way we can modify this. The question is, does the K10D offer a alternative JPEG-RAW converter option wich can produce crispier images?

thanks, I'm looking forward for your reply
Salminus

[jfdavis58]

Cannot be modified; ultimately it doesn't matter. Every camera that outputs a jpeg has it's own characteristics--you either like it or get a camera with RAW OUTPUT CAPABILITY AND CONVERT EXTERNALLY TO SOMETHING MORE TO YOUR TASTE. I think the K10 produces fine looking jpegs straight from the camera--so do many who have purchased my work--that's all I really care about anyway. This is a hot button issue that every reviewer has somehow mentioned--much ado about nothing--a lot of useless noise!

I'about to buy my K10D but there's an issue that's making me hesitate.
I'm concerned, about the in camera RAW to jpeg convertion. According to dpreview and others:
...JPEG straight from the camera, if anything the JPEG has a slight lead on very fine detail . Both the JPEG and Photo Laboratory however suffer from a softening of edge detail which can be seen quite clearly when compared to the output from Adobe Camera RAW...

I know that this software might have it's advantages, but still I'd like to know if there's a way we can modify this. The question is, does the K10D offer a alternative JPEG-RAW converter option wich can produce crispier images?

thanks, I'm looking forward for your reply
Salminus

[RiceHigh]

I'about to buy my K10D but there's an issue that's making me hesitate.
I'm concerned, about the in camera RAW to jpeg convertion. According to dpreview and others:
...JPEG straight from the camera, if anything the JPEG has a slight lead on very fine detail . Both the JPEG and Photo Laboratory however suffer from a softening of edge detail which can be seen quite clearly when compared to the output from Adobe Camera RAW...

I know that this software might have it's advantages, but still I'd like to know if there's a way we can modify this. The question is, does the K10D offer a alternative JPEG-RAW converter option wich can produce crispier images?

thanks, I'm looking forward for your reply
Salminus

The K10D's soft jpeg is both a hardware and a software issue. Hardware is the strong Anti-aliasing filter used in one direction only and the software is the weak algorithm in sharpening up well the blurred image by the strong directional AA filter.

Do note also that shooting RAW won't help if you use Silkypix or Pentax Photo Lab. Using ACR or RawTherapee etc. can get sharper pictures out of the K10D RAW but you'll get also (much) noiser images.

For details, see: RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Klaus Schroiff's K10D Review at PhotoZone

[Peter Zack]

Personally I see nothing wrong at all with the Jpegs straight from the camera (or RAW converted images) and they can easily be sharpened if the need arrises for a particular image.

Pentax has chosen to have the images look more like film and I like that approach. Also bear iin mind that DPReview is heavily bias to a couple of other brands in thier reviews. They can be overly critical of the smaller players in the DSLR market. Each system will have it's own particular 'look'. I usually take the images off the card and convert them to a TIFF file and do any PP work there (maybe not the right way but it works for me) Then save it as a Jpeg for uploading or as a TIFF for printing.

Not sure? Check out the following results for 2 of the forum posters here (these are only a few examples of some of the sharpest images around this forum):

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/10251-things-wings.html

and

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/post-your-photos/11430-new-hummingbird-im...rge-files.html

Worry about getting some good lenses (the limiteds and numerous others) and you will have results that are as good as anything available once you get familar with the gear.

[JMI]

Just so you know the K10D's jpegs look similar in "softness" to the Nikon D200's but you don't hear anyone talking about that camera's soft jpegs. It's pretty amazing how one very biased reviewer can tarnish an otherwise amazing camera (especially for the price).

I will say that both my K100d and Nikon D40's had "sharper" standard outputs, but by setting the K10D's sharpening up 2 notches they looked very similar, especially after you down rez the 10 megapixel shot to 6 megapixel's.

Also, one feature that is perfect for a jpeg shooter, is the dedicated Raw button. If you are about to do a shot that you are worried about, just hit the button and get a raw+jpeg!

[Peter Zack]

Oh and BTW ignore the poster just above me (rice high). We have all learned to live with him even if he belongs in the corner, facing the wall with a tall pointy hat. He hasn't a clue how to take a photograph and that's not just my opinion, nobody takes him seriously, ask anybody here or on DPReview. Rants about Pentax all the time and never provides a single real photograph to back up his bogus claims. Notice that he has no images in the gallery. He doesn't even own a K10D! Nuff said.

Pentax isn't perfect and no brand is but for most of us the gear far exceeds our ablities. Get yourself the camera a few nice lenses and have some fun shooting.

Welcome to the forum...

[Salminus]

Is it possible to compare the k10d and the D200 raw-JPEG converter by taking an image in raw for example in a K10D, uploading that image to D200 and then JPEG it in booth cameras and see what happens?
has anybody tried to do that?


salminus

[JMI]

Is it possible to compare the k10d and the D200 raw-JPEG converter by taking an image in raw for example in a K10D, uploading that image to D200 and then JPEG it in booth cameras and see what happens?
has anybody tried to do that?


salminus

I'm not sure you could do that.

Side by side K10D with my friends D200, but set to default sharpening, shot in jpeg with similar lenses produced similar sharpness files. Both sharpen up very well and both hold a lot of detail.

I think you might be focusing on this aspect to much. It really is not important. There are so many other factors to getting a good photo.

[mattdm]

Just so you know the K10D's jpegs look similar in "softness" to the Nikon D200's but you don't hear anyone talking about that camera's soft jpegs. It's pretty amazing how one very biased reviewer can tarnish an otherwise amazing camera (especially for the price).

Note that the comments in Digital Photography Review's review specifically compares sharpness to the Nikon D80. (The D200 hadn't been reviewed there yet.)

Then, in the D200 review, they specifically note that the sharpening is low by default but that increasing the in-camera setting "fixes" this (if that's what you want). Because of the algorithm the K10D uses, it doesn't behave the same way when you increase in-camera JPEG sharpening. That's pretty much indisputable, whether or not you like the effect or whether you'd rather shoot in RAW anyway.

It's all well and good to go spouting accusations of "bias" when a review says something less than sparkling about your favorite brand, but you're not really doing anyone any favors by not actually reading the review in question.

Instead, look at the criticism seriously and decide if the issue raised is something you're concerned about. The K10D is clearly a great camera, and for many people for various reasons (either they like the softer edges, or don't care because they shoot RAW) the JPEG engine isn't a concern. In fact, all of the reviews at dpreview need to be read with this particular mental filter, as they put significant weight on out-of-camera JPEG quality. (Certainly a lot more weight than they put on brand name. Look at the glowing K100D review, for example.)

[SteveB]

There's a current UK camera magazine (forget which, I didn't buy it) that has an in depth comparison of K10D, Canon 30D and Nikon D80. The K10D was much sharper than the 30D and had much better highlight detail than the other two in JPGs. It was also the best one all round in RAW if I remember correctly. It also did the best B&W shots in-camera with no computer PP, now that's one trick you never read about normally!

[bc_the_path]

Why are you worried this much about the so-called "jpeg softness"?

I believe, K10D is an advanced amateur or semi-pro camera with many professional features. Most of the people using it would prefer RAW format anyway; and "jpeg softness" is of no concern for them.

I suggest comparing other image qualities (like color rendition) and ergonomics of K10D and your other choices taking into account of their prices also! I also suggest "holding" them and testing them.
Also, try answering questions like these: Would you prefer an "over sharpened" jpeg or a "soft" jpeg? Which one is easier to post process?

If you value "sharpness" as the most critical image quality; then, what could possibly stop you from shooting RAW (or DNG)?

[imadethis]

The K10D is only "soft" in jpeg normal mode to make a more natural photo. Dpreview and other sites at the time tested the camera in the normal mode instead of the "bright" mode, which produces more saturated and sharp jpegs. I believe it even states this in the manual.

I'm not sure where you heard the RAW conversion details, but in regards to the RAW to jpeg conversion, the reviews said RAW was sharp, and even sharper than the competition.

-imt

[Tbear]

I'about to buy my K10D but there's an issue that's making me hesitate.
I'm concerned, about the in camera RAW to jpeg convertion. According to dpreview and others:
...JPEG straight from the camera, if anything the JPEG has a slight lead on very fine detail . Both the JPEG and Photo Laboratory however suffer from a softening of edge detail which can be seen quite clearly when compared to the output from Adobe Camera RAW...

I know that this software might have it's advantages, but still I'd like to know if there's a way we can modify this. The question is, does the K10D offer a alternative JPEG-RAW converter option wich can produce crispier images?

thanks, I'm looking forward for your reply
Salminus

Or should I say the K10D. 7 months ago I was in the exact position you were, wondering what the heck is going on with the JPEGs in the K10D, based mainly on Phil Askey's review (which overall I thought was excellent). I spent many hours investigating on my own and scouring the forums and looking at many people"s posted examples. I can say as an owner of a K10D for 7 months, and 10,000 exposures under my belt, that there is absolutely no problem with the K10D's JPEGs. I simply use "bright mode" and bump up the in-camera sharpening by a notch when I use JPEG (which is only about 5% of the time, the rest I shoot using PEF). I have never regretted my decision since.

Regards,

Ted

[kenyee]

I'd have to agree...based on the reviews, I figured I'd have to run the K10D in RAW mode all the time, but JPEG is fine most of the time. What RAW does give you is an extra stop or two of highlight recovery that you can't get w/ JPEG, so if you blow highlights, you can recover quite a bit...

[*isteve]

The K10D's soft jpeg is both a hardware and a software issue. Hardware is the strong Anti-aliasing filter used in one direction only and the software is the weak algorithm in sharpening up well the blurred image by the strong directional AA filter.

Do note also that shooting RAW won't help if you use Silkypix or Pentax Photo Lab. Using ACR or RawTherapee etc. can get sharper pictures out of the K10D RAW but you'll get also (much) noiser images.

For details, see: RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Klaus Schroiff's K10D Review at PhotoZone

As usual you are talking rubbish. Silkypix produces extremely sharp images from RAW. The Pentax Photolab sharpening settings are different, even though it uses the Silkypix software. Both can be modified.

I wish you would shut up and stop taking about things you know nothing about.