[kamicota]

Thank you tromboads

It seem to an other worldly air to it.

Thank you russv

Possibly the color of the Rocky Mountains & Rivers close at hand

OR are there any suggestions???

Cheers for years
Colin

[RussV]

Thank you tromboads

Possibly the color of the Rocky Mountains & Rivers close at hand

OR are there any suggestions???

Colin

That sounds good, anything with some strong colours would be interesting too.

People have sometimes likened the K10d at ISO100 with Kodak's old Kodachrome film which gave saturated colours.

[paulh]

Happiness is a puddle
At the dogpark with a K10D & inexpensive Quantaray (Sigma) 28-90 (xposted to Pets)

[kamicota]

Love that shot Paul

Cheers for years
Colin

---------- Post added 04-21-15 at 03:18 PM ----------

Righty Ho the K-r arrives Monday

Did a quick "Squizzie" of the settings and too pics today to com[pare

K10D & K-rt were set @ -1.0EV (Bright Sunshine) F6.3 for K-r & F6.7 for K10D Both @ 100ISO and on AV setting

Processing IS My "Hilarious" way as I find the Fee DX0 Pro 8 does batch images, Then I take the tiff file into ACR and this time both pics were rendered with in ACR --->>>
Clarity 20 Vibrance 40 Saturation 10
Detail
100 Radius 1.0 Detai 25 & Masking 10

And went in to ACR Hue/Saturation/Luminace and sett ALL Colors to 100 Saturation hehehe

So here they are the first is the K10D


The second is the K-r

Cheers for Years
Colin

---

Last edited by kamicota; 04-21-2015 at 02:22 PM.

[RussV]

Thank you for making the effort to take these. It's a really interesting result. The K10 has under exposed slightly and the KR silghtly over (IMO). It could be argued this has given the K10 better colours but I think there's more to it. The '10' has a much more 3 dimensional look. To my eyes it looks sharper with more punch.

On paper the 10 has an inferior sensor compared to the KR but the results say otherwise. It will be interesting to see if further comparisons reveal the same.

[Dartmoor Dave]

Of course I'm completely biased, but I much prefer the K10D shot. I agree with Russ that it has a more 3d look. Thanks to Colin for posting the comparison.

It would be interesting to see straight raw to jpeg versions of these at the camera raw default settings, without the saturation boost.

[pentaxpete]

I use my 2007 K10D for Local Press work -- I find it still 'back-focuses' though -- I have tried it with 'manual Focus' and I have to focus forward but here are some of my latest Press photos taken with it and the 'Kit' lens 18-55mm f3-5-5.6 SMC Pentax -DA AF
Good Friday 'Walk of Witness' and the annual Brentwood Charity Half Marathon event

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[kamicota]

Righty Ho here are the Comparisons again

This time both fro ACR to Jpeg with Detail ONLY but as in first post Detail
100 Radius 1.0 Detail 25 & Masking 10

K10D--->>>


K-r--->>>



Now I am looking forward to those more experienced eyes and their point of views.

Cheers for years
Colin

[paulh]

I think these latest shots are much closer than the first ones. The K10 looks slightly underexposed, but I find the blue of the sky more pleasing than the K-r's. The K10 seems to impart a warmer tone overall as well. You might be able to replicate the "warmth" by tweaking the WB a bit on the K-r image.

[kamicota]

Thank you Paul

Both used -1.0EV and yes agree about the K10D

Both were set @ Auto WB and have not dared venture any further with WB Settings

OOOPPPSSS!!! Just remembered a quote or info that the K10D sensor was darker @ 0.0EV so putting it @ -1.0 may have been a little too much.

Cheers for Years
Colin

[Dartmoor Dave]

Thanks for the new versions Colin. For the sake of a fair comparison I adjusted them in Photoshop so that the exposures are identical, but I still prefer the K10D shot. And I still admit that I'm a biased observer.

Even with the exposures equalised the K10D shot has got richer colours than the K-r, something that's particularly visible in the blue sky. In the K10D shot the sky is a deep rich blue, but in the K-r shot it has a slight magenta cast. In fact there's a magenta cast to the entire K-r shot, which suggests that the auto white balance tends that way, while the K10D colours look quite neutral. In the K-r shot the reds in the playground equipment have a slightly washed-out pink appearance, but they look a much more vivid red in the K10D shot. The yellows look pretty much the same in both shots.

For those who date back to the film era, I'd say that the K-r shot looks like it was made with colour print film, while the K10D looks more like a slide. On my calibrated monitor there's a definite richness to the rendering of the K10D that clearly comes from more than just the under-exposure. The difference is still very visible even after the exposures have been equalised.

I'm sure that, at higher ISO settings, the K-r will have much better noise levels than the K10D. But in the shots that you've posted the K10D wins hands down as far as I can see.

Thanks for posting these Colin. It's a fascinating comparison.

[kamicota]

Thank you SO much Dave

On my own P&Click perspective I truly appreciate your IN DEPTH observations and have similar sentiments regarding the K10D

I had some misgivings about the K-r too and am still wondering HOW to set it up more effectively.

One thing I must point out though - MOST of my "Creative Mission" is towards producing abstract Painting like images. Something like this one I will post and APOLOGIZE before hand for doing so. So thought the K-r may be better suited but right now am undecided hehehe.


This is a Lee Norse Continuous Miner from Balmer North Underground Coalmine NOW a tourist attraction

Cheers for years
Colin

[RussV]

For those who date back to the film era, I'd say that the K-r shot looks like it was made with colour print film, while the K10D looks more like a slide. On my calibrated monitor there's a definite richness to the rendering of the K10D that clearly comes from more than just the under-exposure.

I'm sure that, at higher ISO settings, the K-r will have much better noise levels than the K10D. But in the shots that you've posted the K10D wins hands down as far as I can see.

Thanks for posting these Colin. It's a fascinating comparison.

+1

The KR still takes decent picture though and a lot can be done in post processing.

[csa]

Colin; to my eyes, the images appear "muddy". Perhaps tweek the lighting, shadows, and contrast a bit to bring out the details more clearly. Of course, posting on any forum might change the details from your original, just thought I'd mention this.

[kamicota]

Thank you CSA

Was that both K10D & K-r???

Have never ventured into those settings at all.

Will just have to try & explore the menus and see what happens

Cheers for Years
Colin