Originally posted by Andi Lo I think ogl has every right to doubt the color reproduction capability of K-x until he finds the result that's not too muted or overcooked like those two samples. You can't really believe it until you see it for yourself, right?
Problem is, there's simply no way for anyone else to provide images that with satisfy someone who is so particular - there is simply no way for anyone else to know exactly what he is looking for. He needs to shoot the camera himself, in lighting he controls, using processing he controls, and if he can't get the results *he* likes, that would be something - it would show the camera is *incapable* of producing results he likes. As it As it is, all he is doing is proving the subjective nature of these things - the camera is capable of producing pictures that others but he doesn't. That doesn't prove - or even come close to suggesting - that it would be incapable of producing results he liked if *he* were in control.
And even if that turned out to be true, it's pretty clear that this is an *extreme* minority opinion. There's a huge difference between saying, "my own tastes are so quirky and narrowly defined that I am unable to get results I like out of this particular model even though the rest of the world is thrilled with it" versus "this camera's colors are terrible".
Quote: I hope the earlier poster can give him the raw so he can see for himself whether the files can be processed to his liking or not.
Since there are penty of RAW files available for download from the various review sites, that really shouldn't be necessary. But again, given that these shots will have been of scenes and in lighting he couldn't control, it's really barely worth the effort - he'll still have no way of knowing if what he is seeing reflects reality or not.