K10d shake reduction

jeda · 06-01-2007, 01:24 AM

Originally posted by Mr CJ

I wouldn't say that SR is making the images less sharp. Especially when comparing to a DL. I have a DL and that camera produces some VERY sharp images. Much more sharper than my K10.

Very strange. I have the same experience. It looks like my DL is sharper than my new K10D !
I never had the impression with my DL that pictures were not sharp - except for when cropping estremely, but then it is the jpeg compression you see and not 'unsharpness'.

With my K10D, I have the impression that from time to time pictures are not really in focus. I changed the settings and have been testing with several settings but generally, the K10D does'nt seem 'better' than the DL when it comes to sharpness.

And I have been using the SR occasionally. All pictures I took with SR on are less sharp than without SR. (and I did turn off SR in cases with long shutter speeds ;-)

photog · 06-03-2007, 02:17 AM

[QUOTE=-spam-;61798]Pretty sure that the manual tells you to turn it off if you are using a tripod. Thats usually the go for any form of image stabilisation as it will tend to hunt for movement and potentially leave you with some slightly blurry images. ...

I have always considered it received wisdom to disable anti-shake (whatever the type) when tripos-mounted. However being now in the age bracket where memory is less reliable, I as often as not forget to disable the anti-shake. I can detect NO difference at all when I do so. The largest image I have produced on a tripod is an A2 night scene of the Storey Bridge. 60cm x 42cm. The printer is an industrial quality HP inkjet 1.5 metres wide (about 60 inches0 on Duratrans. At about 1 Kilometer (3/5 mile) away a 60 mm (2 ins) pipe railing is critically sharp and, BTW no pixels visible.

The K10D is some camera!
Ron McDermott
S-E Queensland
Australia

pentkon52 · 06-07-2007, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by jeda

Very strange. I have the same experience. It looks like my DL is sharper than my new K10D !
I never had the impression with my DL that pictures were not sharp - except for when cropping estremely, but then it is the jpeg compression you see and not 'unsharpness'.

With my K10D, I have the impression that from time to time pictures are not really in focus. I changed the settings and have been testing with several settings but generally, the K10D does'nt seem 'better' than the DL when it comes to sharpness.

And I have been using the SR occasionally. All pictures I took with SR on are less sharp than without SR. (and I did turn off SR in cases with long shutter speeds ;-)

My istD always felt soft using the DA 16-45,50-200 lenses.

After looking at the first 1000 or so files from my K10D using the above lenses and the Sigma 300F4, FA 70-222 and recently aquired 77 Ltd, SR on or off, the images are a lot better, sharpness and colour wise.

My settings are all neutral in not only my Pentax bodies but my Nikons aswell. Only other body that comes as close is my D1H.

Dave B

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Shake reduction K10D	troutman	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	09-26-2009 12:46 PM
K10D Shake Reduction Help	blank	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	12-24-2008 07:11 AM
k10d and shake reduction?	silent_eyes	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	08-14-2008 03:33 PM
K20D / K10D shake reduction	wonderer	Pentax DSLR Discussion	16	06-25-2008 01:39 PM
K10D Shake Reduction and Tripod	Ian Mc	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	12-31-2006 04:50 AM

06-01-2007, 01:24 AM	#16
jeda New Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Belgium Photos: Gallery Posts: 15	Originally posted by Mr CJ I wouldn't say that SR is making the images less sharp. Especially when comparing to a DL. I have a DL and that camera produces some VERY sharp images. Much more sharper than my K10. Very strange. I have the same experience. It looks like my DL is sharper than my new K10D ! I never had the impression with my DL that pictures were not sharp - except for when cropping estremely, but then it is the jpeg compression you see and not 'unsharpness'. With my K10D, I have the impression that from time to time pictures are not really in focus. I changed the settings and have been testing with several settings but generally, the K10D does'nt seem 'better' than the DL when it comes to sharpness. And I have been using the SR occasionally. All pictures I took with SR on are less sharp than without SR. (and I did turn off SR in cases with long shutter speeds ;-)

06-03-2007, 02:17 AM	#17
photog Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Brisbane, Qld, Australia Posts: 165	[QUOTE=-spam-;61798]Pretty sure that the manual tells you to turn it off if you are using a tripod. Thats usually the go for any form of image stabilisation as it will tend to hunt for movement and potentially leave you with some slightly blurry images. ... I have always considered it received wisdom to disable anti-shake (whatever the type) when tripos-mounted. However being now in the age bracket where memory is less reliable, I as often as not forget to disable the anti-shake. I can detect NO difference at all when I do so. The largest image I have produced on a tripod is an A2 night scene of the Storey Bridge. 60cm x 42cm. The printer is an industrial quality HP inkjet 1.5 metres wide (about 60 inches0 on Duratrans. At about 1 Kilometer (3/5 mile) away a 60 mm (2 ins) pipe railing is critically sharp and, BTW no pixels visible. The K10D is some camera! Ron McDermott S-E Queensland Australia

06-07-2007, 10:56 AM	#18
pentkon52 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: York Region Canada Posts: 641	Originally posted by jeda Very strange. I have the same experience. It looks like my DL is sharper than my new K10D ! I never had the impression with my DL that pictures were not sharp - except for when cropping estremely, but then it is the jpeg compression you see and not 'unsharpness'. With my K10D, I have the impression that from time to time pictures are not really in focus. I changed the settings and have been testing with several settings but generally, the K10D does'nt seem 'better' than the DL when it comes to sharpness. And I have been using the SR occasionally. All pictures I took with SR on are less sharp than without SR. (and I did turn off SR in cases with long shutter speeds ;-) My istD always felt soft using the DA 16-45,50-200 lenses. After looking at the first 1000 or so files from my K10D using the above lenses and the Sigma 300F4, FA 70-222 and recently aquired 77 Ltd, SR on or off, the images are a lot better, sharpness and colour wise. My settings are all neutral in not only my Pentax bodies but my Nikons aswell. Only other body that comes as close is my D1H. Dave B