|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
04-09-2007, 09:41 PM
|
| |
Hi Sean,
Sadly the so called fix did nothing for my DS which continued to show pronounced banding. However this was far more akin to the D200 type banding which was also fixed. Furthermore the hysteria was nothing LIKE the same volume from what I remember.
VPN has a totally different cause. Do you think Pentax would not fix it if they could - without messing something else up anyway? I mean, they have always been quick to address failings in the past when they could, why do people think they are ignoring it? Spite?
Personally I think Pentax engineers have enough on their hands, including a 645D, several lenses, a replacement for the K100D and their future employment prospects, so I'm sure they will get around to everything in good time, but I would rather everyone at Pentax focused on continuing to survive as a great camera company....
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
04-09-2007, 05:01 PM
|
| |
Actually the inverse is true. Its like you think you can reverse climate change by talking about it which actually just generates more CO2. Now if you lobby Governments and Industry you may have some effect, so write to Pentax or report an issue to their service department if you want them to fix something.
VPN clearly exists but since GBG came up with a plausible explanation several months ago, not one thread on the topic has contributed one iota to solving it or improved anyones ability to deal with it, but probably has put more than one prospective customer off buying it.
I just dont get the point of all the hand-wringing and angst. If someone found a really good PP solution, that would be a positive contribution, but 99% of each thread is the same old information repeated ad nauseam. What does it achieve?
And, BTW climate change IS perfectly natural, no-one doubts that - the debate is whether the rise in the last 40 years is natural.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
03-31-2007, 12:56 PM
|
| |
as bundled with the camera, rather than the colour space. However I also agree you should use 16 bit and a wide gamut colour space during the editing process;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
03-31-2007, 12:15 PM
|
| |
Randy - for high ISO shots avoid using ACR as your RAW converter. PhotoLab and SilkyPix both remove much more noise. I use ACR primarily for people shots (slightly better highlights and healthier skintones) but PhotoLab for all high ISO work.
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
03-30-2007, 10:41 PM
|
| |
Camera Performance Anxiety!
Yes its possible to create visible VPN at high ISO without underexposing or pushing a shot. Some folks are accutely sensitive to it even at ISO400 but most people have to have it pointed out they them with little arrows, which gives you some idea how bad it really is most of the time. Some people see it in every shot because they are convinced its there somewhere in the shadows.
Compared to the high ISO performance of the A100 which is there in EVERY shot, or the amp noise on the D80 which is a real bummer in low light night scenes, I would probably make the best of it and get on with my life. I never had a perfect camera yet, so this is just something to bear in mind and work around. I shoot at ISO1000 or 1250 more than 1600 specifically to avoid it and rarely see it to any major degree. I have shot a lot of high ISO shots, and one or two were spoiled by it. A lot more were spoiled for other reasons. Some I could recover in PP to a large extent.
One or two Pentax service personnel have denied being able to see it. That does not constitute an official Pentax statement. How much business Pentax lost because of this issue I dont know. Probably quite a bit. The lather generated around it seems to me disproportionate to the degree of the issue, which was much worse on my DS. Like I said, the perfect camera does not exist so why this has generated such furore I dont know. Over-egged expectations? There are a small number of folk who seem to decide its worth producing a new thread on the issue every week and then flogging it to death on the understanding that such behaviour will force Pentax into providing a solution and in the meantime they seem to be terribly anxious about being in possession of a defective camera which is undoubtedly spoiling their fun (and a lot of other peoples who would never have noticed the problem otherwise).
This is not only deathly boring but probably counter productive. They fixed a more serious long exposure issue, so I think they would have addressed this if they could. However, if the issue proves tricky to fix - which it may well be - the noise created on the forum will NOT influence Pentax to divert resources from new models etc. plus it would be virtual corporate suicide to issue a statement admitting such a problem if there was nothing they could reasonably do about it. What would it achieve except to generate even more negative publicity?
For now, I'm just regarding it as a general characteristic of the camera thats less that optimal, as is the JPEG softness and other minor issues. Pentax do not have infinite resources and this was an entirely new model, and hey, guess what, a few bugs appeared. The *istD and DS also had some known issues which were never fixed but gradual refinement led to the K100D, which has very few. MS Windows has been out for nearly 15 years and it still has bugs! The K10D replacement will undoubtedly extract better performance from the NuCore processor once Pentax's engineers get a bit more practice.
Sure, I hope they fix it too, but another 100 threads on this issue will not make it happen any faster and in the meantime I'm getting some very nice results at ISO1000 that are better than anything I could get out of my DS.
|
