I've had these problems before Will. When I got a new laptop a few months back, the gallery images went completely to pot. After much investigation, I found that it was mostly due to the Photoshop / Adobe Camera RAW settings. Although both PS and Adobe Camera RAW stated that they were using SRGB, I had to go through all the settings in both programs and re-set them all. After doing this, all returned to relative normality.

My Photoshop colour settings are:

RGB: sRGB IEC61966-2.1
CMYK: US Web Coated (Swop) v2
Gray: Dot Gain 20%
Spot: Dot Gain 20%

RGB: Preserve Embedded Profile
CMYK: Preserve Embedded Profile
Gray: Preserve Embedded Profile

Adobe Camera RAW: sRGB IEC61966-2.1

All of my cameras are set to sRGB Colour Profile.

I hope this helps, but I do have to say that even though all my colour settings are consistent and also that I always re-size to 1000px on the longest side before uploading, the Gallery images are not as vibrant / detailed as the file I upload from. I've just compared this image which is on the Gallery with the same file on my PC, and the one on my PC is far better. Now, the really odd thing is that if I link to the Gallery Large View image to place it in this thread and compare it with the identical image freshly uploaded to this thread from my PC, the one that I've linked to from the Gallery Large View has got its vibrancy back, whereas the freshly uploaded one has lost something! I'm at a loss to explain this.

Linked from Gallery Large View version:



Fresh upload from original file:



Regards
David

Welcome to the forum Eric, I'm afraid I have no Welsh connections!

Regards
David

Hi from me too Katy, hope you enjoy your K-r and this website too. Lots of useful help available on this Forum, so don't hesitate to ask if there's anything you need advice on.

Best wishes
David

I don't think Will said the skies were 'soft' Shaun, he said there was a slight blur to the skyline (where the land meets the sky).

I can see this on the third one, but a lot of lenses produce this type of effect and to my eye it's pretty minor and not worth worrying about.

Regards
David

None of my new lenses have had any dust either and most of my used ones don't have any visible signs of dust.

If I had bought this lens I think I would return it, ask for a refund and buy one from a different retailer. I'm sorry to hear about the problems you have had, this must have been very frustrating. After all this I think you deserve a good lens, hence the advice to get a refund and buy another one.

Regards
David

These are superb Shaun, I bet you are glad you bought that lens! To my eyes, these are better than any you've shot with the Siggy 10-20 - do you agree?

Regards
David

Thanks for the clarification, I've sent you a PM, hopefully we can move on from this now. I sincerely hope that Gary loves the K-01.

I think we can both learn some lessons from this experience.

Regards
David

Hope the K-01 is great for you Gary and I would be interested in your thoughts on how it performs, what you like about it and what you don't like.

Regarding the sales process I experienced with the seller, what really annoyed me was the message I got back after my last enquiry about the camera, 24 hours after I thought I had bought it. The reply was curt to say the least and I had been nothing but polite and flexible with the seller. That's why I took exception to it, clearly nobody on here has seen the communications, so I stand by what I've said above.

I think 99% of transactions on the Forum are handled with courtesy and integrity - all others I've been involved in have been this way.

Regards
David

K-5 and 55-300.




Regards
David

I don't think you need to have any concerns if you're using a K30. Like Bill says, have a beer (or a few glasses of nice red wine like I am) and don't worry about it.

Regards
David