Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-28-2009, 11:55 AM   #46
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 106
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by UnknownVT Quote
Correct?

If you please read my post #28 - all I said was sharpness setting can make a difference to the visual acuity/sharpness of a photo.
But you said that in response to jerrymouse's comment where he agreed with me that +/- 1 on the sharpness on in body jpeg wouldn't make much of a difference.

So I took it as you were trying to illustrate that the +1 of the K7 Jpeg inbody sharpness would make a huge difference.

So I stated that only DCU could be used to emulate those changes that the settings on the camera would. So I took the images did a -1 and -1 on the K7 images, uploaded them, and noted now they still looked more defined as the Kx.

Sorry, there was some miscommunication

10-28-2009, 12:12 PM   #47
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,812
QuoteOriginally posted by Daemos Quote
Sorry, there was some miscommunication
Not a problem, I wasn't trying to be disagreeable either.

and I do thank you for your sterling efforts -
instead of pursuing the point I did an Edit to Add to my post #45 -
and please note it is just for grins and not to be taken deadly seriously -
again I did 100% crops of basically the same area for the ISO100 minus1 images
posted them as-is,
and then sharpened the Kx version -
but as I said I'll leave it for people to draw their own conclusions.
10-28-2009, 12:28 PM   #48
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 106
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by UnknownVT Quote
Not a problem, I wasn't trying to be disagreeable either.

and I do thank you for your sterling efforts -
instead of pursuing the point I did an Edit to Add to my post #45 -
and please note it is just for grins and not to be taken deadly seriously -
again I did 100% crops of basically the same area for the ISO100 minus1 images
posted them as-is,
and then sharpened the Kx version -
but as I said I'll leave it for people to draw their own conclusions.
Makes sense!

Just one minor correction, I technically 'unsharpened' the images. At least I believe that is the proper term.

I ran into issues opening up the RAW files from the KX into DCU not displaying any information but displaying the image, so I couldn't 'edit' the image. So my solution was to open up the K7 RAW file and then apply the -1 sharpness setting that the KX had (instead of the 0 sharpness) and I wanted to see what -5 sharpness would do, so I posted the result of those as well.
10-28-2009, 12:31 PM   #49
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
Perhaps the in-camera sharpening in the K-x has been turned down to further reduce visible noise.

-1 sharpness doesn't necessarily mean negative sharpness, just -1 from the normal. -5 probably isn't negative sharpness (entirely different algorithm, blur, would have to be implemented in PRIME) either.

If we zoom in past 1:1 or use a resolution test sheet, we might be able to gauge the per-pixel sharpness better


Last edited by Eruditass; 10-28-2009 at 12:41 PM.
10-28-2009, 03:48 PM   #50
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by UnknownVT Quote
by merely sharpening the image in even a simple photo editor can make an otherwise lack-luster image look pretty darned good.
That was all I was trying to show.....
of course. that's exactly what photo editors were created for. btw, you got a powerful tool right there. and it's useful for sharpening.

however, the discussion here is about the K-7 and the k-x's in-camera jpeg IQ outputs and out of camera RAW IQ output differences. given the same custom image setting, same level of sharpness, contrast, saturation would produce a much better or equal output. also when using the same image editor for both images, is applying the same level of degree of sharpness produce a better or equal result? there is no doubt that the k-x will atleast equalize or yet surpass the IQ of the K-7 images. but the question is at what level or degree of sharpening does it take for it to do that? the same can be applied to the K-7 output inorder to enhance it's images. and make the images far better than the k-x's sharpened photos as well. that sharpening discussion would just put us in circles because one will try to out-sharp the other by pp. the idea here is how much detail is there before post-process is done and detail that is shown at the same level of post-processing afterwards. atleast we can have a definitive answer by then.

but again as some people pointed out that they don't want to waste their time post-processing images and content themselves with the in-camera jpeg outputs.

regarding some of the sample photos concerning the sharpness adjustment, I'll do that afterwards and post it here if nobody posted it yet.

Last edited by Pentaxor; 10-28-2009 at 03:58 PM.
10-28-2009, 04:02 PM   #51
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Eruditass Quote
That's what I was thinking - perhaps the K-x has a bit of back focus, but the DoF is such that "SD Camcorder" is within the acceptably sharp DoF. "SD Camcorder" is much more comparable to the K-7, but everything in front on the K-x significantly worse comparatively than the difference in "SD Camcorder". That's why I suggested f/8.
actually I see the sharpness inconsistency of the k-x across the field. for the most part of the image, it is quite soft and a small portion seemed to be sharp or atleast as sharp as that of the K-7 at that same portion of the image.
10-28-2009, 04:18 PM   #52
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 410
Such a fine thread!

A little measurebation never hurts
10-28-2009, 06:15 PM   #53
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
here is the 100% crop comparison between the K-7 and k-x. note that I lowered the sharpness level by 1.

for a more clearer comparative view, you could zoom-in on the image further. sorry I'm just too lazy to do that for you guys.

first pic comparison: shows a portion of the image where the K-7 is sharper and more detailed than the k-x. note that the other portions have the same or consistent sharpness althroughout the image.

k-7



k-x



second pic comparison: this is the sharpest part of the image in the k-x. while althroughout the image seems soft. this area is somehow as sharp or quite a bit close to the sharpness of that of the K-7 at the same area of the image or maybe not because the k-x results appear quite lighter in contrast. if the image is blown-up a bit to 200%, it would appear that the k-x display a lil bit of softness while the K-7 displays a bit of contrast.

k-7



k-x




excluding this test,

from the initial findings that I saw personally with the k-x, the k-x picks up it's spots (small area) on the image where it is deemed sharp, while across and from the majority of the image area, it is soft. some would debate, this is due to a wide opening at f5.6. and would rather have a test at f8. but this proves that at such aperture opening, the k-x is soft for the most part of the image. you may say that the lack of focus indicator could had contributed to the softness, but still the area all across the image is still soft and there is no excuse for it. unless, there is a BF/FF issue on the lens that has been used. but so far, the k-x images are in focus, it was just soft.

so I guess the need for post-process sharpening is still needed for those who are into detail sharpness. maybe a firmware could solve that?

10-28-2009, 06:52 PM   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Knoxville, Tennessee
Photos: Albums
Posts: 842
QuoteOriginally posted by UnknownVT Quote
Let me see if I can illustrate this -
below are crops (from 100% ie: NO resizing)
from the STD-NR versions of the ISO100 JPGs -
the EXIF info should still be attached -



the larger crop is obviously the K7 the Before and After are the Kx
all I did was to crop the images and save them to medium quality JPG
the "After" (Kx) shot had simple one-click standard Sharpen applied -
that's all nothing fancy -
look at the obvious difference
I would now pick the After shot as the better over the K7 -
whereas Before I would have chosen the K7......
I'd pick the K-7, over both the before and after. The upper Panasonic logo has really distinct sharpening halos around it in both the before and after shots, whereas the K-7 has much more subtle sharpening halos.
10-28-2009, 09:20 PM   #55
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 106
Original Poster
Because there are some grumblings on some aspects of my testing, I am offering to try and re-test the K7 vs the Kx one more time.

I was thinking of following the MTF mode's suggestion at f/4.0 using the DA* lens at ~35mm.

I am honestly not too sure what else to look for.
10-28-2009, 09:56 PM   #56
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Daemos Quote
Because there are some grumblings on some aspects of my testing, I am offering to try and re-test the K7 vs the Kx one more time.

I was thinking of following the MTF mode's suggestion at f/4.0 using the DA* lens at ~35mm.

I am honestly not too sure what else to look for.
just make sure that the custom image settings are the same. also focus on a single subject, preferably at the center.
10-28-2009, 09:59 PM   #57
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
QuoteOriginally posted by Daemos Quote
Because there are some grumblings on some aspects of my testing, I am offering to try and re-test the K7 vs the Kx one more time.

I was thinking of following the MTF mode's suggestion at f/4.0 using the DA* lens at ~35mm.

I am honestly not too sure what else to look for.
While MTF would result in the best center sharpness, it still allows room for error with FF/BF possibilities. f/8 has significantly better edge sharpness and more DoF, with still pretty darn good center sharpness. You won't see that high resolution center sharpness come into play unless there is a resolution sharp or fine detail.

I'll re-submit my f/8 suggestion.

Pentax SMC DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 ED [IF] SDM - Test Report / Review
10-28-2009, 10:07 PM   #58
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 106
Original Poster
According to the lens review 50mm seems to have the least amount of edge distortions.

But at 50mm f/5.6 seems to be the best overall detail resolution at the center and border...

I am finding it difficult to get 'right on' at 35mm according to the preview I either get 34 or 36 lol...
10-28-2009, 10:11 PM   #59
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
That's a very very slight difference in resolution at 50mm, and you still get more DoF with f/8. At 24mm, you can see the larger difference at extreme.

The preview probably rounds to those two. Whichever you choose, make sure its consistant! Make sure the tripod doesn't move and the lens zoom ring doesnt change when switching, or just go to 50mm or 16mm
10-28-2009, 10:13 PM   #60
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 106
Original Poster
I think I'm going to go 50mm at f/8

I wish I had a better way to test, but these are the limits of my resources and I hope I can at least get images that can allow people to subjectively judge the IQ from each camera in a fair manner.

It seems the sweet spot of the lens is f/5.6 (according to the charts on the review) I wonder why MTF does a f/4
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!
camera, detail, dslr, images, iso3200, jpeg, k7, kx, noise, nr, photography, quality, settings
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: (AUS) SMC Pentax-M 50mm/1.4 & A35-105mm/3.5 & MV1 body & DB1 Grip (AUS) ddhytz Sold Items 4 04-22-2010 03:28 AM
Another RAW conversion comparision HGMonaro Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 0 02-11-2010 05:33 PM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 18-250mm, 2X TC, SMC 50mm f1.4 & f2, Grip DBG2 w/remote & Batt. Flash A Peter Zack Sold Items 8 12-26-2009 12:58 PM
Pentax K-7 & K-X: My picture comparision (RAW & JPEG) Daemos Pentax DSLR Discussion 24 10-27-2009 09:18 PM
For Sale - Sold: ist DS camera & Quantaray 28-90mm lens & accessories, Promaster 7000m flash rockmaster1964 Sold Items 10 01-30-2009 05:57 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:50 AM. | 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