[Klusen]

Good Morning,

just read an article (Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ) about my new K10D were was said it has a very low dynamic range and also relatively poor resolution. I don't know whether this is a neutral source or not, but anyway it mad me a little bit disappointed. Of course I have to make pictures and judge by myself but what do you guys think. Is there an remarkable weakness regarding those issues.

Thanks and regards from Germany,

Klaus

[Klusen]

I read through the forum a bit and found many answers. Sorry, I was lazy here. Looks like there is a permanent discussion on that points and depending on something the opinions vary.

Greets Klaus

[PentaxPoke]

Good Morning,

just read an article (Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ) about my new K10D were was said it has a very low dynamic range and also relatively poor resolution. I don't know whether this is a neutral source or not, but anyway it mad me a little bit disappointed. Of course I have to make pictures and judge by myself but what do you guys think. Is there an remarkable weakness regarding those issues.

Thanks and regards from Germany,

Klaus

Hello Klaus,

Can you post the link to where they say that? I have not read a review where someone said that the k10d had "very low dynamic range" and "poor resolution." The only negative i have ever heard, is subjective critique of the jpeg and high iso (which people here and elsewhere have shown to be untrue)

[Klusen]

Pentax K10D Review: 15. Photographic tests: Digital Photography Review

this is the link to the relevant page. There's a graph comparing dynamic ranges (page 15) and resolution (page 24).

Regards,
Klaus

[Canada_Rockies]

Good Morning,

just read an article (Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ) about my new K10D were was said it has a very low dynamic range and also relatively poor resolution. I don't know whether this is a neutral source or not, but anyway it mad me a little bit disappointed. Of course I have to make pictures and judge by myself but what do you guys think. Is there an remarkable weakness regarding those issues.

Thanks and regards from Germany,

Klaus

Klaus, if you read the very fine print, you will note that the pixel peepers are complaining about 1/3 stop of range lost at the top. They do not state, in my brief overview, which firmware version they are testing. At v 1.30, I am quite satisfied with the tonal range available to me with my K10D. I cannot compare it to previous versions because I went straight from the 1.0 that came with the camera to 1.30 before I took a single shot. I enclose a link to a shot taken New Year's Day. You may examine the other photos in the area to see the DR available to a K10D. Please note that the images were taken to test both the camera and the person behind the viewfinder who, although a photographer with Pentaxes since 1961, is not at all familiar with the digital environment yet. I have found, in my limited testing, that the K10D likes to be right on the edge of overexposure - which is difficult for me, coming from the slide film background where slight underexposure often resulted in superior images.

Beauvais Lake, Alberta on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[bymy141]

I read through the forum a bit and found many answers. Sorry, I was lazy here. Looks like there is a permanent discussion on that points and depending on something the opinions vary.

Greets Klaus

I advise you to read some more reviews of other cameras that are compared with the K10D.
You'll see that the K10D in RAW is on par with the 300D, the D80 / D200 etc.
You've got yourself a camera capable of more than the competition, functionality/features wise.
The DR in JPEG is in deed less than with the (more expensive) competition.
However, tweeking the JPEG settings helps and shooting RAW will give you full control and best in class DR.
8 Gb cards will give you loads of RAW pictures to shoot at reasonable price these days.

Live and work with your camera for a while and explore its different functions.
You'll see that you did make the right choice.

Happy shooting.

- Bert

[jeffkrol]

Pentax K10D Review: 15. Photographic tests: Digital Photography Review

this is the link to the relevant page. There's a graph comparing dynamic ranges (page 15) and resolution (page 24).

Regards,
Klaus

Phils DR test is flawed... Period....

[stewart_photo]

(snip) I don't know whether this is a neutral source or not, but anyway it mad me a little bit disappointed. Of course I have to make pictures and judge by myself but what do you guys think. (snip)

Guten Tag, Klaus,

Yes, take pictures and look them over yourself (after all, you are your best source). When printed on good photo paper, you'll find the images look terrific (similar to the results from a quality print film). This (fine prints) was Pentax's intent when designing the K10D.

Regardless, if you want even sharper images, adjust the camera settings (sharpness, contrast, etc) to your taste or shoot using the RAW mode. However, too much sharpness and contrast can look very unnatural (some of the reviews just don't seem to understand this). Of course, since sharpness increases as size decreases, none of this matters with the smaller images used for publication (internet, magazines, etc).

In the meantime, calm yourself by looking at the many fantastic images in the photo sub-forum on this website to see what the K10D is truly capable of.

stewart

[philmorley]

hi,

I really wouldn't worry about it. To my thinking a third of a stop in jpeg really isn't a big deal. If you are desperate for the extra bit shoot raw (which has other advantages / disadvantages too)

Phil

[Lowell Goudge]

A while back I posted a curve with the dynamic range of the K10D in JPEG.

I forget now the reference, but can describe what you get when you view the histogram and the grey scale value.

between 0 and 25 are between 1 and 2. stops of dynamic range, hugely compressed and non linear with the first stop going between 0 and about 7, the second between 7 and 25. A similar non linear portion appears between about 230 and 255.

the middle range is between 4 and 6 stops, uniformly spaced in grey scale.

The reason I give ranges, is because this depends upon the contrast setting. at maximum contrast, there are 4 linear stops in the middle and one non linear at each extreme, with contrast set to minimum there are 6 linear stops in the middle, and two non linear ones at the extremes.

You need to remember that your contrast setting has a big impact on dynamic range. If contrast is set to low, you can always add a little, while still preserving detail in the shadows and highlights, if your contrast is set to high, you can't get detail back.

The point is, I see nothing wrong with dynamic range through 10 stops., who says anything is lacking.

[Klusen]

thanks to all of you. I feel much better now. Bought a 24" Display high res, did some sharpening just to see how RAW works and :-)).....

I do not need more.

Cheers,
Klaus

[Tom M]

Another thing you'll note, many magazines refuse to include the K10D in any of their comparative reviews.

I suspect it has everything to do with loyalties to Canon and Nikon, etc, and their huge advertising expenditures.

Only recently have I seen Pentax ads and, they're not as prevalent.

[RiceHigh]

There is no neutral source on Earth but it should be noted Dpreview Phil tells more or less the same thing regarding the "comparatively" less DR and the "soft edged" jpeg problems.

Good Morning,

just read an article (Digital Camera Reviews and News: Digital Photography Review: Forums, Glossary, FAQ) about my new K10D were was said it has a very low dynamic range and also relatively poor resolution. I don't know whether this is a neutral source or not, but anyway it mad me a little bit disappointed. Of course I have to make pictures and judge by myself but what do you guys think. Is there an remarkable weakness regarding those issues.

Thanks and regards from Germany,

Klaus

[MRRiley]

Even IF there is an issue with lower DR in the K10D as compared to cameras costing 3-4 times as much, if you have to use a microscope to see the difference, who cares....

[WMBP]

Even IF there is an issue with lower DR in the K10D as compared to cameras costing 3-4 times as much, if you have to use a microscope to see the difference, who cares....

Well, I don't think you have to have a microscope to SEE the difference -- to measure it, yes, but not to see it. There are a lot of situations in life where even relatively untrained persons can perceive something without being able to put their fingers on exactly what it is: really high quality steak tastes better than mediocre steak; a really good orchestra is more pleasing to listen to than a merely pretty good one; etc. Non-connoisseurs don't know how to explain their preferences, but they do observe them at some basic level. The conductor will be able to tell which chair in the second violin section is playing an out-of-tune instrument. The ordinary persons in the audience will simply have the feeling that this isn't the best performance of Beethoven's third symphony that they've ever heard -- but they will have that feeling.

Just as taste matters more than chemistry in cooking, LOOKING matters more than measuring in photography. And while you might want to hire an engineer to make measurements, you want to hire a photographic connoisseur to look. That's why reviews of the K10D like Sean Reid's are so valuable. Reid reviews the camera on its own terms and compares it to other cameras not the way an engineer does, but the way a photographer does.

Will