If you shoot in RAW those won't matter.
If you shoot in JPG and it means you doing less PP then yes it does improve IQ but only because you don't downgrade your photo when saturating the photo in photoshop.
Beside that I can't see why desaturation will improve IQ TBH.

anyone already tried it yet, it works pretty well I believe.
www.wolframalpha.com/


It also works for photographic relate question.
I'm still playing with it finding out what it can do but it looks promising.

You can use "capture in focus" I believe.
So you press the shutter release button and move the focus and when the camera comfirms focus it will make a photo, sometimes that even works better then autofocus.
Don't ask me more about it, I don't know much besides the fact that you can do that and having it used a half year ago a couple of times. I'm sure someone here can tell you more.

Nice shots, looks like a lovely place.

The second one is the best of the three, with a bit more PP with the first one so that it would look like the second one you might end up with a better photo IMHO.

With the third one, I don't really know...
The red colour looks quite hard in the photo, maybe lowering the clarity might help... it's a difficult one to say something about it, it just doesn't feel right in a way but can't lay my finger on it.

Those look lovely, no real comments though ^^;
Maybe you could have gotten a better composition with the first if you aim down a tinny bit more but that's a maybe.

I don't really like the flash in the first two, there isn't much depth in them. Did you use the build in flash?

The first one also seems you've to shallow DOF, the flower accept the rain drops are out of focus. my gues is that you use 5.6, you would probable want to use f/8 are more likely even more with such close focus shots. It's a really good shot though besides the thing said, you certainly need to experiment a bit more and find out what works.

The second shot is nicely framed and I would leave it like that, just to be differend.

The third shot is technically the best one, you didn't use the flash so you got a much better and softer light there. It's also more pleasant to look at it. I don't know what lens and settings you use with that shot but I think you shot wide open there. Next time squeeze a lens a little bit most of the time the bokeh gets smoother, it's now a bit busy.

If you use the build-in flash it's most of the time better to also let some surounding light to enter the photo, the lights gets softer and you get some depth then. A way to do that is to set the flash on "trailing curtain" that way the camera keeps on metering normally and if you set the camera to M-mode you can underexpose the shot and if everything is alright the flash would flash more to get the exposure right (just tested that). So in a way you have controll over the balance off flash light and surrounding light, you can use this way of flashing also as a fill in flash with sunny days.

Well a lot of advice, that will keep you busy this weekend
oh, next time try to get the EXIF data with the photo since now it's guesing on what you're doing, so harder to give you advice.

It really depends on how well the development stage went, most of the time with the pre-production model they're still putting the points on the i so the first camera's rolling from the assembly-line are the ones testing the effectiveness of the assembly progress and if it work correctly.
The first batch would be the one that will be tested the most so in away you're more certain of getting a good one but still, small errors might slip through which come at light with use but that's always the case right.
We've seen that happening with Canon 1D for example, I haven't heared a lot from design faults or such from Pentax although the DA*16-50 weren't that free of faults in the begining.

Yes Vikram, someone posted photos of both side by side....
here it is Linky

Those are great shot Dave, do you do it for a living?

Hello Martin,
we are getting a lot of Martin's here