Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-15-2009, 12:13 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
So maybe the camera focused on a different part of the bookshelf than you wanted. That's certainly common enough, and pretty much unavoidable.
Unlikely, I select the AF point and there was nothing else to lock on to except the bridge of the white book with black text. if anything it looks to be front focussing which I hope is the issue.

QuoteQuote:
The real test would be to shoot a subejct where *something* is guaranteed to be in focus. Like newspaper on an angle. Find the sharpest area of the K100D and comapre it to the sharpest area of the K20D photo.
I did and it hits the mark every time which is why i am confused but I cannot test for sharpness or noise all that well using this method.


QuoteQuote:
Also, the difference you are seeing could potentially be in the ACR's profile for the two cameras - would be interesting to see hwo the camera JPEG's compare, or the RAW files as processed by PPL or some other program.
No I select the profile, ACR 4.4. for both upon import.

QuoteQuote:
BTW, you mention using the remote release - but are you also using the timer to get MLU? Might as well remove that variable form the equation too.
Yes, MLU.

QuoteQuote:
Oh - I'd also check to seeing if PS provides different options for the resizing, and try them out. There *are* different algorithms that can be used, and they vary in their effectiveness. Also, when downsizing images, it is common to want to apply some degree of sharpening. Another interesting test would be to *upsize* the K100D image to match the K20D.
Nothign was re-sized, these are straight 540*810 crops from full size images.

05-15-2009, 12:44 PM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
so Dave, maybe the K100D ain't so bad focusing after all eh
05-15-2009, 12:46 PM   #18
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by Alfisti Quote
Unlikely, I select the AF point and there was nothing else to lock on to except the bridge of the white book with black text. if anything it looks to be front focussing which I hope is the issue.
That's what it looks like the me - the book furthest in front looks more in focus than the rest. All it would have taken was one other book a little further in front, or a plant with a leaf overhanging the shelf - within range of your selected AF point, of course - to get this effect. But it's easier to remove focus issues from the equation completely using the angle method than to try to *fix* them.

QuoteQuote:
I did and it hits the mark every time which is why i am confused but I cannot test for sharpness or noise all that well using this method.
Why not? If text doesn't do it for you, try something else. The point is to remove any possibility of focus issue from the sharpness tests.

QuoteQuote:
No I select the profile, ACR 4.4. for both upon import.
Yeah, but ACR has to have been individually tweaked to demosaic those very different RAW files, and even with all user-controllable settings the same, you have no way of controlling what is going on under the hood. Again, the goal is to remove all *possible* variables. If you see the same with all other RAW converters, only then can you be *sure* it isn't just a case of ACR doing better with one camera than the other.

QuoteQuote:
Nothign was re-sized, these are straight 540*810 crops from full size images.
Then I'm missing something. They look like the same FOV. Straight crops of the same dimensions from sensors of different resolutions should show entirely different FOV. Unless maybe you shot from different distances to make the crops look similar? In which case, you've just introduced another variable you need to eliminate.
05-15-2009, 01:05 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
Original Poster
I set the test up initially to look for noise as I found the 20D WAY noisier than the pentax regulars led me to beleive. I like the different colours the shadows and the range this test covers and frankly it should focus on the dang thing.

Regarding the cops, initially I thought something was odd and now you've convincedme something is odd .. i will double check my cropping tool in CS3.

05-15-2009, 02:33 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
Original Poster
Correct 20D image added.
05-15-2009, 02:34 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by k100d Quote
so Dave, maybe the K100D ain't so bad focusing after all eh
3 Pentax bodies and each one is a focussing ****ing masterpiece I tell you.
05-15-2009, 03:16 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 730
Alfisti,

I used to have both K100D and K20D but I'd sold the K100D.
I still have some photos taken with K100D and when I compared it to K20D, yes the photo from similar lens could be less sharp on K20D.
First I thought it's my camera problem but actually it's because the difference in the sensor's resolving power.
Here I'm talking in pixel peeping level of RAW files.
However, after I got used to K20D and knowing how to PP it, the picture now looks even crispier with K20D.
So my conclusion is from a picture straight out of camera, K100D's look sharper than K20D but at the end K20D will be as sharp and could be even more if we know how to control the PP.
I can't explain the technically as to why but that's what I experience so far.

But in your case is different. It seems your K20D is Front Focusing.
Do you use similar lens for both K100D & 20D?
My FA*80-200 is spot on w/K100D but on K20D is front focusing a lot so I have to micro adjust it by 7.

The funny thing is that is the only lens I need to adjust. The rest is spot on without micro adjustment. Weird huh?
05-15-2009, 06:37 PM   #23
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
I'd say there is a very clear difference between the pics, but it sure as heck looks lens/focus related, not sensor related.

05-15-2009, 06:42 PM   #24
Veteran Member
KungPOW's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,702
Are your testing using incandescent light? Or a light source with a high IR content?

If so, it might be causing the camera to front focus.

If you can, try your focus tests with natural light.
05-15-2009, 07:36 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
Original Poster
Not a lot of time tonight but taking a few HH shots it appears ye old incandescant light is the culprit. If I dial in -4 on the AF adjust it looks a lot better. There is still this ... i dunno ... 'sheen' on the omages (like they lack contrast) but it's way sharper adjusted.
05-15-2009, 07:37 PM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
Original Poster
Thanks for your thoughts, interesting to read. I think crispness is a good word, even with the AF right on i seem to be missing the 100D's crispness.

QuoteOriginally posted by HermanLee Quote
Alfisti,

I used to have both K100D and K20D but I'd sold the K100D.
I still have some photos taken with K100D and when I compared it to K20D, yes the photo from similar lens could be less sharp on K20D.
First I thought it's my camera problem but actually it's because the difference in the sensor's resolving power.
Here I'm talking in pixel peeping level of RAW files.
However, after I got used to K20D and knowing how to PP it, the picture now looks even crispier with K20D.
So my conclusion is from a picture straight out of camera, K100D's look sharper than K20D but at the end K20D will be as sharp and could be even more if we know how to control the PP.
I can't explain the technically as to why but that's what I experience so far.

But in your case is different. It seems your K20D is Front Focusing.
Do you use similar lens for both K100D & 20D?
My FA*80-200 is spot on w/K100D but on K20D is front focusing a lot so I have to micro adjust it by 7.

The funny thing is that is the only lens I need to adjust. The rest is spot on without micro adjustment. Weird huh?
05-15-2009, 09:44 PM   #27
Igilligan
Guest




I felt the same way when I first got my K20

I think there were a few things going on. One was that after a year and a half I had the K100d dialed. I knew the internal settings (jpeg) to get close to the look I wanted in most situations. So it took very little PP to get them to pop for me.

The K20 looked less "crisp", kind of flat at first look and less sharp. I had a couple of lenses that needed adjustment and It took me a while to figure out what the K20 wanted to see in my simple PPing. I don't know the technical reasons for it but I have found It can take a little more push in level/contrast and definitely in sharpening than I could ever do to my 6mp K100 with out hurting the image. After I figured that out, there was not so much difference after all, and what was different was usually better.
I still think the K100d is a little better at ISO 1600 to my eyes. The noise is finer on the K20, and I have even got some OK shots a 3200 in a pinch with it... but if I nailed exposure on the K100d it could look darn good at ISO 1600. I think a lot of the folks who said the K20 was a big step up in ISO usefulness were coming from the K10...

Once you dial in a couple lenses... and figure out what settings on the camera work for you... then once you get you PP flow down the K20 will really pop.
05-15-2009, 09:53 PM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 730
QuoteOriginally posted by Alfisti Quote
Thanks for your thoughts, interesting to read. I think crispness is a good word, even with the AF right on i seem to be missing the 100D's crispness.
You're welcome.
I like fried food, maybe that's why I like to use that word "crispy"
05-15-2009, 10:06 PM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Southern California, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 730
QuoteOriginally posted by Igilligan Quote
I still think the K100d is a little better at ISO 1600 to my eyes. The noise is finer on the K20, and I have even got some OK shots a 3200 in a pinch with it... but if I nailed exposure on the K100d it could look darn good at ISO 1600. I think a lot of the folks who said the K20 was a big step up in ISO usefulness were coming from the K10...
I'm with you, Igilligan.
So far nothing has ever beaten my old K100D in high ISO. Not even my K20D.
One time I set up a candle on a table to light up a center piece and turned off the room light. It was so dark that I couldn't even see my camera's button.
K100D on tripod, ISO 1600. Believe it or not, I couldn't find any noise pixel on the photo.
Almost as smooth & clean as with ISO 200.
I really missed that little fella. Actually I'm thinking to buy another K100D Super for my backup but I want to see what the K-7 will bring on the table
05-15-2009, 10:16 PM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 356
I have both and have done comparisons, my results are not nearly as bad as yours from the K20D. I was a little disappointed to see the k20 wasnt noticably better, but it definitely wasn't much worse. I guess this just goes to show how excellent the K100D was/is. I was considering selling it to recoup the cost of the K20D but it is just such an excellent compact low light shooter iso 800 is basically noiseless!
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
100d, camera, dslr, miles, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
100D Part mike_s104 Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 09-15-2010 02:05 AM
10d vs. 100d, seems obvious, right? old soul Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 12-09-2008 07:05 AM
Super 100D w/old lenses Nuker54 Pentax Film SLR Discussion 5 01-03-2008 03:57 AM
10d or 100d super? jmdeegan Pentax DSLR Discussion 39 12-18-2007 06:09 AM
100D with flash and manual JCSullivan Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 09-12-2007 05:30 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:28 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top