Has anyone managed to decode the RAW files?

Offsets from 0 seems to be

242 for 19 bytes is the Make, obviously ‘Pentax Corporation’
262 for 18 bytes is the model, e.g. ‘Pentax *1st DL2’
297 for 22 bytes is the Firmware, e.g. ‘*1st DL2 Ver 1.00’
322 for 10 bytes is the date
333 for 9 bytes is the time.
73725 start of CCD information where the offsets seems to be
0 First 8 bits of the most Significant bytes representing the 12bits colour information
1 First 4 bits of the least significant bytes representing the 12bits colour information
Last 4 bits of the most significant bytes representing the next colour information
2 First 8 bytes of the least significant bytes representing the next colour information
Etc.

That’s all I can be bothered to work out. Any web sites that can give a detailed decoding of the RAW files?

Does that mean if I get a leather jacket, I'll be a proper photographer LOL

I just had to laught at that comment. I shall, of course, use it in future conversations.

Just an interesting point though, when I was at college, I was one of two people that had a Pentax. The general feeling was that Pentax is 'Not as good as it use to be' and 'Canon is the best'. It doesn't matter if theses comments are right or wrong. What is important is the general feeling about Pentax and if theses two comments represent the general feelings, bye bye Mr Pentax from the camera world.

I personally got nothing against Canon, just their bragging users. They may be one of the big dogs but at the end of the day, when I see a photograph I like, I ask who took that not what took that.

I've seen Sony's line-up and it looks impressive, but saying that, I don't know what Minolta's line-up was like. Sony knows what they are doing and how to market stuff. After all, despite being the under dog, they broke into the video-game market destroying Nintendo's dominance. So, yes, watch out Canon and Nikon (and even Pentax), Sony is coming

source: http://www.ephotozine.com/forum/viewanswers.cfm?qid=17170

This is from someone called Nikonman, are all non-pentax users that dumb

Sorry to say I wouldn't show this photo to a customer. When it comes to the most expensive dress a woman will ever wear and customer photos, regardless if its just a snapshot, anything less than perfect is not acceptable.

The black object towards the left is a distraction and the dress itself looks like it is not straight. The curtain is not parallel with the top of the photo. However, the shadow looks good. Well done on that. You have a good eye for a photo shot, I suggest, if possible, retake the photo with them three things corrected and you will have a excellent photo.

Possible and a good idea. Darkroom is tricky and you certainly need to practice at it, but it's also the waste that is produced as well. Those chemicals are not exactly environmentally friendly that is why I store my chemicals.

I suppose an old-thinker like me will have to admit it. Digital has taken over colour photography (which is a good thing) and now it’s moved on to B&W (which is a bad thing). Give it a try and see what you think is prudent

I'm just trying to get a diverse opinion on black and white photography: which is better, film or digital. This is not about which has the better quality!

To give you an idea what I'm on about, take digital. Some of the photographs can be stunning especially when you use curves in photoshop. However, it is that stunning attribute that can cause, in my opinion, make the photograph look artificial. To look more creative design than photography. Where as film with its grain and neutral grey balance looks more traditional, more true to life (apart from the lack of colour).

Personally, I think too many digital users are using Photoshop to create photographs that are far from what they look like in real life.

What do you think, and please nothing about which is the better quality otherwise it will go on forever.

I can see your point, i.e. the contrast range in colour film is something like 1 in 4 and b&w is 1 in 10. Digital is a lot more, but its more than the human eye can make out.

As for the end user, Pratical Photography held a B&W comparison test a few months ago, taking two photographs from the same position, one in digital and the other in film. The film looked better cos the digital, although dynamic, look artificial. It's just my opinion that some people share and others don't.

You may find that non-full frame canon DSLR are not worth the extras cash. Personally I think the sensors are far too small which makes the camera more of an over-sized expensive compact camera than a SLR. Noise is a real issue expect in the brightest of conditions, although this could be due to poorly chosen camera settings. (Not my mine of course, I don’t own canon)

Research your choices of cameras, but don't pay too much attention to picture quality opinions as in the real world I find there is no REAL quality difference between Pentax and Nikon 6mp camera and that is my honest unbiased opinion. The REAL quality comes down to choice of lens.