It shouldn't be wider, 18mm with a crop factor of 1.5 is the eq of 27mm, whereas the olympus has a crop factor of 2, so is the eq of 28mm.

Sorry Mhuni, even as a "brand defector" I can't help as I had no intention of buying consumer zooms so didn't do the research.

Beware posting proper-gander around here, it's a bit tense at present

A bit more dof would be benefitial on these group shots or trying to isolate a solitary bird may be a better approach if the light wont allow it. Those orange eyes give the impression of a quite demented stare.

It looks like 3 persons standing on a balustrade under a bright light, rather than a window.

I do hope that if the guy pictured has sold enough produce this week to afford a luxury, that he doesn't spend it on a laptop & internet access, only to find himself being referred to as "wonky head".

I do hope you bought some produce Mike, it looks both fresh & flavoursome.

No chicken for you Sir !

I'm not sure if Mike is referring to the orange fringe above the mans head.

This shot has all kinds of mind altering effects going on & doesn't quite sit right. the scales look as if they are superimposed, they must be catching a different light to the produce beneath. Also the weighted scale seems to be one of those optical illusions that looks concave one minute & convex the next, if it wasn't for the weights I'd be convinced this was a sphere.

All those straight lines are calling out for the Fisheye !

No problems Morten,

Shooting RAW can produce better images than jpeg, simply because you are making the decisions image by image rather than applying a generic setting to all.
This does mean however that you need to put the time & effort into tweaking each image afterwards.

Looking at your examples, you put thought into the shots & are not one to take 2 dozen quick fire shots & hope for the best so I'd say stick with RAW and practice your processing. Do try shooting RAW+JPEG though, it should give you a good target to aim at when processing your RAW files.

Some will swear by shooting JPEG but I would only consider that if I knew I had control over the lighting & were producing lots of images.

I've essentially done the same job as Aminstar here, but are including them as 100% crops. As a final image it's a little overdone, but is ideal for showing the need for sharpening if shooting RAW.

First shot converted from your RAW file with zero sharpening.

[IMG]http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q105/RR76/IMGP0311nosharp.jpg[/IMG]


Second shot converted in adobeRAW with settings of; amount=100, radius=1.4, detail=50, masking=20. I also gave it a slight contrast boost as this has alot to do with percieved sharpness too.


[IMG]http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q105/RR76/IMGP0311sharp.jpg[/IMG]



The forum software may well resize them into the thread so you may need to click on them to see them at native resolution.

Morten,

It may be that your RAW conversion method will have to be altered, try shooting RAW+JPEG & if you can't produce a sharper image from the RAW than the camera has produced as a jpeg then you need more practice on your conversion technique.

Don't forget that you also have roughly 50% more pixels with the k20d over k10d & the added resolution will highlight any weaknesses in the optics.

And as others have said, they're not bad anyway, just slightly soft at 100% which I would expect from a siuperzoom anyway.