Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 
Log in or register to remove ads.

Showing results 1 to 2 of 2 Search:
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 12-26-2018, 07:48 AM  
DP Review puts K-1 Mark II as second worst camera of 2018
Posted By EssJayEff
Replies: 996
Views: 84,444
Regarding my not upgrading my K-1 (which I love) to a Mark II, I based my decision on this PentaxForum article AND the RAW Capture paragraph of the "Overall Image Quality" chapter of the DPReview article, because both illustrate the differences. To borrow the PentaxForum staff's phrase I put myself in the "purist" camp. ("Purists might not appreciate the fact that with noise reduction comes some loss in detail,. . .") I also know that I'm constantly learning and that I can be factually wrong or misunderstand a concept. Also, as in anything I read I take stock of what was said and who said it, so I take DPR for what it is. I don't believe in living in a cordoned-off echo chamber.

My perspective on this issue is formed by being a photographic archivist, which I have been for more than thirty years. I think about the future, not just the present. In theory I want the "pure" RAW file of the data a camera produces. Why? Because post processing technology is steadily improving. If the camera is making unalterable changes using in-camera preprocessing, then it negates the ability for post-processing improvements to make an even better image in the future. If a camera is trading internally less detail for less noise, I don't have the opportunity for some current or future software solution to provide even better image quality because the detail has already been sacrificed. I have no issue with this happening to JPEGs: each camera is already "baking" its files to create JPEGs with that brand's "look and feel." As for RAW files, however, I believe "theoretically" that they shouldn't be processed in-camera.

If in-camera RAW file pre-processing truly isn't an issue, then why are there so many RAW converters for post-processing? They must be producing different results from the same image file, otherwise why bother with more than one? Perhaps some handle the detail/noise continuum better than others? If so, having the files altered in-camera eliminates the possibility of taking advantage of even better noise reduction "out-camera."

Just my "two cents," with which I am totally open to learning how I am misguided in spending those pennies and willing to invest them into making those two coins worth more.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 12-22-2018, 07:21 PM  
DP Review puts K-1 Mark II as second worst camera of 2018
Posted By EssJayEff
Replies: 996
Views: 84,444
They mainly disliked the baked-in noise reduction for RAW files, which is the exact reason I didn't pay for the upgrade.
Search took 0.00 seconds | Showing results 1 to 2 of 2

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:16 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