IQ fix in K10D Firmware update?

Hi, I'm looking at buying a K10D - my first digital, and first SLR since my beloved old ME Super .

I love the look, feel, and feature set of the K10D, but after doing the usual internet scouring I have come to the conclusion that there is a flaw in the camera's image quality - specifically, a kind of jaggedness on straight edges that is visible in some of the shots on DPReview (both RAW and JPeg - see the Royal Seal on the Martini bottle in the RAW test shot, and the edges on some of the paperclips, esp. in the Jpeg) and elsewhere. Most importantly, this is not present in comparison shots from other cameras in this class.

I understand from reading (here: http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/dslr/pentax_k10d/index.html) that this is to do with the camera's (lack of) vertical anti-aliasing. My question is, have the firmware updates resolved this or is it still an issue? This could be a deal breaker for me as the effect is very digital and not at all the smooth, film-like appearance the K10D is said to have.

Thanks for any help, and apologies if I've misinterpreted anything

Peter

If you shoot RAW then this problem does not exist. You will only notice it on screen when shooting JPEG and not when printed. RAW completely bypasses any in camera processing so any errors in RAW are the fault of the person developing it or the RAW software (that one is very unlikely).

Thanks - that was quick. So, as I understand your reply, the obvious flaws in DPReview's RAW sample (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/PentaxK10D/page22.asp, eg top crop, see gaps in the swashes at left and right and general roughness) are faults in the RAW conversion? Just to play devil's advocate for a second, if that is so, wouldn't the same faults be evident in ALL the DPReview RAW captures?

Don't try and judge a camera by looking at small JPEGs produced by a person who is paid to sell Canons.

G

that''s a new one for me.......

If you read all the problems on DPreview then we would be put off every camera....

So much dissinformation rattling around...

There are a lot of satisfied K10D owners here

Can you be more specific about what you're seeing?

The Pentax and Canon crops are different sizes, so it's not clear to me that the comparison is a good one. The Canon one is smaller, so all other things being equal, you'd expect it to appear sharper.

I take your point, although I don't believe there is any deliberate manipulation of the image there - I have seen the very same artifacts in other images, some produced by amateurs, and the phenomenon has been discussed elsewhere as mentioned in my original post. And besides, DPReview politely declined to mention the IQ problems in the K10D RAW capture, glaring though they appear to be.

This appears to be a known issue. I just want to know whether it has been addressed.

I was absolutely stunned when I got the *ist-D and used JPG. The image quality was waaaay above anything I'd ever managed to get on film (S1a, ME Super, MEF, MZ5, MZ10, Z1).

Then along came the K10D and that blew me away again

Film like - definitely. That's in terms of colour and gradation, shadow and highlight response especially.

As has been said, shooting RAW will give you astonishing results. But to be honest, I reckon that you'll find JPG amazing too As far as I can see, there aren't any "flaws" on the K10D - whether JPG or RAW. Even if you shoot JPG and print straight out you'll get sublime results.

The one big downside is that you may well find that your current stock of lenses will need upgrading as you find out just how sharp and good the K10D is LOL!

Matt

If you look at the Royal Seal on the Martini bottle (RAW capture, top crop), you will see there are gaps in the swashes (letter curlicues) on both left and right, and the general character of the lines on the graphic is very rough and somehow "digital" as if there are misplaced pixels there, especially compared to the Canon and Nikon examples. I have seen this very same effect on other K10D images that contain similar details (package labeling, printed letters etc).

Now look at the jagged undersides of the paperclips in the ISO100 jpeg examples, and the moire in the same place on the RAW capture. These seem to correspond to the anti-aliasing issue raised in the Photozone review http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/dslr/pentax_k10d/index.html).

I'm sorry, I can't be any more specific than that, but it seems obvious to me.

Cheers

Peter

Ok, well I saved both pictures and looked at high magnification (much higher than actual pixel sizes) in PS3. I think I can see what you mean on the curlicues.

As I say, the magnifications are not the same in the K10D and 30D crops, so the comparison is not really like with like.

Assuming that it's not an artefact of whatever techniques were used in the creation of the graphics files on the DPR site (who knows what they did converting RAW to the JPEGs shown), and that it's got nothing to do with the different magnifications, then if this is really more important to you than everything else about the K10D, then maybe you shouldn't buy it.

They don't mention whether they were using SR enabled with a tripod when doing the tests - it's possible that had a bearing on the matter.

I have never had a problem with image quality on any of the Pentax cameras when using Capture One and Silkypix. Other converters have image quality problems IMO, and it may be down to that.

What I can say is that the *ist-D held its own when compared with a 20D and L-series lenses using Capture One Pro and Silkypix, and the K10D is visibly better than the *ist-D

To quote:
It's a case of favouring higher resolution. Even the Pentax supplied RAW convertor will produce excellent results (as will even the free Silkypix convertor from www.silkypix.com).

Bottom line - don't worry about it

EDIT: In my book, the K10D wins hands down when it comes to usability, especially when controlling ISO, Av, and Tv together.

Matt

I don't think so. What he's referring to is not a general blurring of any kind.

And it's surely inconceivable that they did the tests by pressing the shutter release with their finger.

If they used any kind of "mirror up" option then the SR is switched off by the camera.

The issue I'm referring to is not a fault with DPReview, but surely the one identified by the Photozone reviewer. I guess you guys have answered my original question, which is that the issue has not been identified (as least, not identified as a problem) or "fixed" in subsequent updates. It may not even be a problem, as such, in that, in theory, it increases resolution (apparently).

Interestingly, the specific problem with the RAW Royal Seal crop (and the lettering on the battery, too, by the way) is not present in the jpeg crops. The more I look at those jpeg crops, the more I like the quality, eg in comparison to the edgy, over-sharpened Canon one (different resolutions notwithstanding). The softness there looks like something I could handle in Photoshop.

Thanks for your replies!

Peter

Many of the pictures submitted to this site were taken with the K10D.

Look at them and see if you can see any problems.

In the real world, there IS no problem. But reviewers always have an agenda, and will come up with a load of techno-babble to be confuse and worry people.

DPReview appeals to a particular sort of troglodyte. Such people crouch in darkened rooms with large magnifying glasses pressed to flickering screens and claim to see artifacts that are invisible to the naked eye.

They take pictures in complete darkness at high ISO, and claim to see patterns in the gloom. This isn't photography, but it's how they get their kicks.

The other site you mention claims there are probems with the 16-45 lens. Oh yes? Tell that to the people who use it everyday and rave about it.

If you say where you are, it's quite possible that somebody here will live fairly near, and be prepared to let you handle their K10D, take a few pics, and judge for yourself.

Years ago, reviewers were competent and objective. There isn't one, it seems, who fits that description today. Certainly, none that I trust.

G

In fairness, photozone.de is very complimentary about the 16-45, and indeed about the K10D generally.

It says:

So the only fault they describe is the CA, which either is present, or is not. It either is worse than other lenses, or is not. If it is, then of course maybe it's the individual copy.

Either way, this paragraph doesn't read like an anti-Pentax diatribe.

I think we need to be careful, if we want to keep the moral high ground in respect of comments on the quality of Pentax kit, not to appear to be showing as much pro-Pentax bias as others show anti.