• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Another letter from Larry and my Respnse re: K10D

Originally Posted by LRY
Hi Ben,

I'm glad you're on here to voice your experiences, particularly since you *disagree*. And since I own the K10D, I want to know how you're getting images better than Canon's XTi (400D)! Or the old XT(300D) for that matter, since my testing shows the XT to best the K10D as well. Who needs to measure it when you can see it like night and day at 100% onscreen?

All that said, if someone would kindly instruct or demonstrate to me and/or John that we messed up somehow, I will be the first to publicly say "I was wrong" and retract any misinformation or erroneous commentary. That's just expected, right? So, it would be great to reproduce that magazine's results myself, I'll look for it at the foreign newsstand. As I mentioned, the lens appears to be the weak point here.

Just so you know, I have no particular axe to grind, I'm not a Canon or Nikon or Leica fanboy, and I'm not hoping Canon or Pentax or anyone sponsors me someday. I really just want the camera to get outta my way while giving me solid, consistent results. For all my career, this has been Canon. I've used or owned other systems (Leica, Nikon, Hassy) and you know they all work great. Canon bodies (most) just happen to fit my hands better than others, although the K10D is very good too and offers all the tremendous usability I talk about in the review.

For people interested in buying a K10D, please remember that in my review I suggest that the comparisons are part of what we do here, but when you're doing photography, this debate is academic. Nobody except other photographers look at a great photo and say, "hmm, looks like a Nikon." In other words, it's the content, and it's a good bet it will always be that way. Getting the content can indeed be influenced by the gear however, so that's why we always come back to these comparisons. It's more interesting than politics, after all.

Anyway, I welcome any comments or suggestions (though I'm not online all the time). Ben, you wrote that you're using the 16-45mm zoom a lot. Maybe that's the lens to beat, because it sure isn't the little 21mm, unfortunately. Guess I'd better get busy looking for some old Leica R glass and an adapter... Just kidding, maybe someday but not now.

Best regards,
Larry

My assessment is based on how my images have translated to print media. I don't care about how it appears on the screen, as my final images are going to be viewed in "Gloss Trendy Press" magazines. Please remember that I am shooting RAW DNG and in almost all cases at 100-200 iso. What I am saying here is that the Sony 10.75 megapixel sensor performs very well for my usage when I know which support it will be featured in. In the case of magazine publication, the K10D works very well. If I know that a client wants to do a 3x4 meter Subway/Metro Advert, I will probably use a Pentax 645 with a digital back. As to the noise of the K10D compared to Canon, I too was surprised by" Chasseur D'Images" test results. They are very objective in their testing methodology and they were quite taken a back by the results. Pentax was as good at 200 iso as was the Sony at 100 iso. These results were published in issue number 290. Another thing to remember is that the Pentax K10D is still a baby. It has only been out officially since the New Year and will present another Firmware Update shortly. I have had some focussing issues that are being addressed by Pentax in Germany. I think it is in the interest of Pentax like that of any large conglomerate, to address the issues at hand and find solutions that work for most users.

Best Wishes
Ben
 

Kyle Nagel

New member
Ben,


Are Larry's reviews based on JPEGs or RAW files? I have noticed that a lot of the reviews I see are based on out of camera JPEGs, especially those critical of the sharpening. With products like RSP, Lightroom, Silky Pix, Capture One, etc., I find no advantage to shooting JPEGs (other than saving a little bit of space on the memory card), the limitations of the in camera conversions due to processing capabilities and the firmware creator's vision of what the default conversion settings should be, make it difficult to compare in-camera JPEGs when evaluating the capabilities of the camera and lens its self. Maybe if these in-camera converters were all identical this would be a fair way to compare these, otherwise a lot of what is seen will have to do with the in-camera converter and it's settings. As Larry also mentioned the lens can also be an issue, I'm sure he probably had a nice piece of glass on the Canon, tell him he might want to throw one of the FA Limiteds on the K10D and try it, the 31mm or 77mm are as good as any of the equivalent Canon lenses (The 31mm is better). I have shot straight RAW from day one when I switched to digital and have tried or own nearly every RAW converter made, as well as Alpha/Beta testing 2 major ones. I think with the caliber of RAW converters on the market now, shooting JPEGs will soon be something that very few photographers will be doing. The real test is what's in the RAW file. Just my opinion.

Kyle
 
Top