Edward Bussa
Member
at imaging-resource:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K10D/K10DIMATEST.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K10D/K10DIMATEST.HTM
-
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!
Pentax K10D Imatest Results
- Thread starter Edward Bussa
- Start date
Asher Kelman
OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Hi Ed,
I have gone through the very interesting work you refer to on Imaging Resource. This test is rather new and represents a major effort to measure and understand lenses and camera systems in a reproducible and fair way.
Still, one has to validate the model of Imatest by using it to predict the ratings of lens performance that photographers would give to the files produced.
Perhaps this has already been done?
It is heartening that the K10D has performed so well in reproducing colrs with fidelity in this test.
"The Pentax K10D showed really excellent color accuracy overall, holding strong reds more in check than almost any other camera we've encountered. Its greatest color error was a hue shift of medium-orange toward yellow, but even that was relatively slight. Average saturation was 108.6% (oversaturated by 8.6%, largely in the reds, but somewhat in the blues as well); average "delta-E" color error was 302 after correction for saturation, the most accurate color rendition we've ever tested, if memory serves me. All in all, unusually accurate color, among the best we've seen. (Some consumers may find its strictly accurate rendering less vibrant than that of some other cameras, but pros should welcome this level of accuracy in their work.)" (Source http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K10D/K10DIMATEST.HTM)
After that the data produced is a little overwhelming in richness, Safe to say that the noise at low ISI is reasonable. But we knew that, the dynamic range is superior to many other cameras, that's great too. In any case, this test appears to produce a lot of detailed figures that might support your particular lens, but for me, at least, I need to see more in a simple way.
Part of it might be the human interface by which we are presented data, also much time one needs to devote to digest the data.
Although I respect the testers a lot, I still would, and they concur, test the cameras or lenses myself, before using the data for actually buying or lens selection purposes.
Since I find the Canon 50 1.2L magical and Imatest does not, I go with my own judgment.
Likewise, it would bother me not 1 iota if the Imatest results were poor of any Pentax lens. That really is not important as testing the damn thing!
Now, am I fascinated with Imatest?
Yes!~ !
Asher
I have gone through the very interesting work you refer to on Imaging Resource. This test is rather new and represents a major effort to measure and understand lenses and camera systems in a reproducible and fair way.
Still, one has to validate the model of Imatest by using it to predict the ratings of lens performance that photographers would give to the files produced.
Perhaps this has already been done?
It is heartening that the K10D has performed so well in reproducing colrs with fidelity in this test.
"The Pentax K10D showed really excellent color accuracy overall, holding strong reds more in check than almost any other camera we've encountered. Its greatest color error was a hue shift of medium-orange toward yellow, but even that was relatively slight. Average saturation was 108.6% (oversaturated by 8.6%, largely in the reds, but somewhat in the blues as well); average "delta-E" color error was 302 after correction for saturation, the most accurate color rendition we've ever tested, if memory serves me. All in all, unusually accurate color, among the best we've seen. (Some consumers may find its strictly accurate rendering less vibrant than that of some other cameras, but pros should welcome this level of accuracy in their work.)" (Source http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/K10D/K10DIMATEST.HTM)
After that the data produced is a little overwhelming in richness, Safe to say that the noise at low ISI is reasonable. But we knew that, the dynamic range is superior to many other cameras, that's great too. In any case, this test appears to produce a lot of detailed figures that might support your particular lens, but for me, at least, I need to see more in a simple way.
Part of it might be the human interface by which we are presented data, also much time one needs to devote to digest the data.
Although I respect the testers a lot, I still would, and they concur, test the cameras or lenses myself, before using the data for actually buying or lens selection purposes.
Since I find the Canon 50 1.2L magical and Imatest does not, I go with my own judgment.
Likewise, it would bother me not 1 iota if the Imatest results were poor of any Pentax lens. That really is not important as testing the damn thing!
Now, am I fascinated with Imatest?
Yes!~ !
Asher
Edward Bussa
Member
Imatest is fascinating to me as well - like you say, the results are overwhelmingly rich. Hence, I think, the fascination.
I haven't found where the lens tests are? Your post makes me think the Canon 50 1.2L is "Imatested" somewhere?
Choosing lenses (and cameras) is such a subjective thing that it really defies quantification. I do think there are objective measurements that can and should be made. However, to make these tools useful, it is important to define what is important to you and pay careful attention to how your tastes line up to the objective data so you have a chance in predicting whether you'll like a given piece of equipment.
Also, one important service these objective measurements provide is a baseline. I think they tend to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Nice summary by the way. You pulled out what I thought was one of the more important or fascinating conclusions about the K10D - the way it reportedly holds on to detail in the red.
I haven't found where the lens tests are? Your post makes me think the Canon 50 1.2L is "Imatested" somewhere?
Choosing lenses (and cameras) is such a subjective thing that it really defies quantification. I do think there are objective measurements that can and should be made. However, to make these tools useful, it is important to define what is important to you and pay careful attention to how your tastes line up to the objective data so you have a chance in predicting whether you'll like a given piece of equipment.
Also, one important service these objective measurements provide is a baseline. I think they tend to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Nice summary by the way. You pulled out what I thought was one of the more important or fascinating conclusions about the K10D - the way it reportedly holds on to detail in the red.