DP rewiew K10D test

Haven´t seen this link here on the forum, so I thought it might be of interest in case someone haven´t seen it yet.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/


// Mats

Typical non-Canon review from Mr Askey I would say. He couldn't have another brand scoring better than his precious Canon.....

yes, the same conclusions as with every pentax review. The complain about the softness of the JPEG images... Is none of the reviewers aware of the fact that this might be a good thing. It gives you additional room to do adjustments on your PC. If you don't want to fiddle with the images on your PC you should buy a point and shoot camera...

I think that's a bit unfair

What is true though is that he likes Canon-style over-sharpened, over-saturated jpg's straight from the camera and his reviews reflect that preference.

It's the same with his liking for ACR - good sharpness, but poor colours etc etc.

I'm personally happy with the Pentax/Silkypix more film-like rendering and read Phil's excellent reviews with these differences in mind

Cheers,
Reuben0

So how does he manage poor photos from the K10D with the 16-45mm lens?

And why does he test the Canon 400D with the Canon EF-S 17-55 F/2.8 IS-- a lens costing 869 euros on a 659 euro body?

Sorry, but he is definitely Canon biased.

The only review of importance to me is......mine! (When I get my hands on one)

Looks like Chris's delivery is lost in the xmas post.

Hopefully Monday guys!

Mind you, was assured it would be Friday!

Will post as soon as they arrive and then expect a phone call....

Chris

It seems PUK(e?) put the order "on a van" on Wednesday.

Quite how it will take until Monday to be delivered from Slough to Watford I will never know

They come from Belguim - no stock is held in the UK, there is one warehouse for Europe these days.

Still, I did expect them yesterday!

Chris

I seem to recal a review for the istD, cant remember which mag, but the reviewer gave credit to Pentax for letting the user decide the degree of sharpening required instead of letting the camera software do it.

My instructor at the college is a canon guy , with the sharper is better mentality.
I'm trying to sway him to the dark side. I submitted an unusal print for my mid term exam.
He looked bewildered when I set up my lighting for a womans portrait with a snooted main, no diffuser and a gridded kicker, using a ringflash for a -4 stop fill.
35 mm 400 iso ilford film to boot.
But when I added heavy difussion filter, at the printing stage, to flare out the shadows, and with a layer of gauze on the paper to add texture, the results were quite nice. ( toned it with tea to complete the meloncholy theme).
maybe he will develope a taste for soft, grainy images by the time I'm done.
over saturated, over sharpened, does not automattially equal better.

Some thoughts and comments on the dpreview results:

http://stock-photo.blogspot.com

Apart from the pixel sharpness there is also moire

I seem to recall that a couple of years back, just before I bought my DS, the reviews mentioned softness of the DS's images. Isn't this just history repeating?

The only way to find out is to buy the camera and try it for ourselves. Some tests are really splitting hairs when they discuss quality. Some magazines seem to have a go at almost all digital cameras.

It is indeed, I remember a similar fuss about jpg softness when the *ist D came out

The *ist D jpg's are indeed a bit soft, but the raw's are fine. In fact I compared them at the time to some from my brother's Nikon D100 and there was very little, if any, difference (mind you, Phil also thought the D100 soft - "Lacking in-camera sharpening leads to 'soft' looking images".

So I'm sure the K10D will be fine (if I ever get my hands on one)!