Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 15, 2006, 7:58 PM   #91
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 12
Default

May be, if everyone just ignores Benjamin, he will just go away!

Or is that too much to hope for?

Len


lenkerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 15, 2006, 9:04 PM   #92
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

lenkerry wrote:
Quote:
May be, if everyone just ignores Benjamin, he will just go away!

Or is that too much to hope for?

Len
I just wonder what you guys are arguing. Both Nikon and Pentax are neither good at high ISO regarding noise. If this really matters, consider a Canon!

p.s. Pentax does do some noise reduction by default in the PPL for higher ISO RAW pictures (not sure about in-camera jpegs which I seldom use) and if you use some other RAW converters, you will see the noises! (but in turn there will be much more resolution and details!)

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 15, 2006, 9:48 PM   #93
Senior Member
 
zygh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 531
Default

RiceHigh wrote:
Quote:
I just wonder what you guys are arguing. Both Nikon and Pentax are neither good at high ISO regarding noise. If this really matters, consider a Canon!
Rice, are you High?
zygh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2006, 12:42 AM   #94
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Code:
http://www.radugrozescu.com/photo-tech/nikon-50-1-8-review.html

There you go!
It seems strange that you throw reviews up to contradict those of us that have actually used the equipment, while you won't take the time to do it yourself, basically calling us liars.

Tom
Well, the lens had a very positive review, (thanks for the link man)! The only issue doesn't even sound like an issue at all expecially for such a "value for money" lens. Just because it has seven aperture blades means that it is bad wide opened? How about the Pentax lens, how many aperture blades does it have? Do we even know the true performance of it?

Code:
The reviews I read stated that the bokeh on the Nikon 50mm 1.8 is so bad that situations where it would be critical to the image use of the Nikon 1.8 should be avoided.
Now for your previous statement:

Wow, sooo bad that situations where it would be critical to the image use of the Nikon 1.8...does it even sound like that???



Quote:

Nikon 50 1.8 review - Conclusion:


I find the Nikon 50 1.8 lens a very high quality lens, much more considering its price.

If you are addicted to zoom lenses, a prime lens may look limiting to you, but this one has a lot of advantages:

Price
If you just want to "get your feet wet" with prime lenses, this is the best choice to start.

Image quality
One of the sharpest lenses you can get. If you are using consumer grade zooms, by any means get the Nikon 50 1.8 just to see what a sharp lens can do.

Large aperture
Even than it can't be used successfully at 1.8, from 2.8 you will get very good results consistently. And if you are in a situation when getting the shot is more important than absolute sharpness, the Nikon 50 1.8 will get the image you can't take at 3.5.

Small and light
You can keep it in the bottom of your bag all the time and you will not notice it until the need arises.
They never said thatit is so bad that it can't be used wide opened. If you take a look at the sample images captured by it at F/1.8 at http://www.photozone.de, you will noticed that it isn't bad at all. (I posted the link somewhere above)
BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2006, 2:26 AM   #95
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Wigan, UK
Posts: 568
Default

Benjamin wrote: I view my photos at 100%

6MP is 3000x2000 pixels can you tell us what kind of monitor supports this resolution? or do you scroll them around? if you using digital projector on the wall that's diffrent and to get good quality on that you have to go back to slide film. or to compare quality and details get yourself a roll of 1600 film, shot few frames scan them at 2700dpi and view on monitor next to any digital file. or print them at the size of two monitor screens (about A3), and tell me where all tis details hwve gone??
for the rest of us who actually print our photos all this issue is irrelevant. at 5x7 or 10x8 you won't find any differences between different brands.

if you want ultimate quality, sharpness and details you should read this http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/limits.htmland get yourself gear mentioned there. there's a table with lens resolutions. unfortunatelly it's not digital. and getting this in real life is almost impossible. and it says to get this amout of resolution you have to use slow film like 50 or 100 iso. so if you're looking for photos in iso 1600 and sharpness and details of iso 50 or 100 it never existed.


greg

gfurm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2006, 3:22 AM   #96
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

gfurm wrote:
Quote:
Benjamin wrote: I view my photos at 100%

6MP is 3000x2000 pixels can you tell us what kind of monitor supports this resolution? or do you scroll them around? if you using digital projector on the wall that's diffrent and to get good quality on that you have to go back to slide film. or to compare quality and details get yourself a roll of 1600 film, shot few frames scan them at 2700dpi and view on monitor next to any digital file. or print them at the size of two monitor screens (about A3), and tell me where all tis details hwve gone??
for the rest of us who actually print our photos all this issue is irrelevant. at 5x7 or 10x8 you won't find any differences between different brands.

if you want ultimate quality, sharpness and details you should read this http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/limits.html and get yourself gear mentioned there. there's a table with lens resolutions. unfortunatelly it's not digital. and getting this in real life is almost impossible. and it says to get this amout of resolution you have to use slow film like 50 or 100 iso. so if you're looking for photos in iso 1600 and sharpness and details of iso 50 or 100 it never existed.


greg
I'm afraid that you are wrong both theoetically and practically..

Practically, the sharpness (actually it should be the resolution) will determine big difference. Pictures with more resolution and clearer details (which laymen always refer to if a pic is "sharp" or not) will surely look more 3 dimensional and more close to our eyes can see. Human eyes are actually of very high pixel count.

Theoretically, a 300 dpi printing is something typical for a *good* print. Take your example of a 8" x 10" 8R photo (not even to mention longer (like a 8F) or larger 12R or up), 300 x 10" simply means you need at least 3000 pixels at the longer size, just for a 8R photo print. Of course, one can always decrease the dpi for larger print, but then the print will not be considered as a good quality one.

If a 6M DSLR is more than enough, why people need 10M cameras in 2006?

Finally, it should be noted that film can have more resolving power (much more than 10M), but just that there exists grains, which doesn't mean they contains less picture data, but the reverse is true. Digital SLRs have less visible noise (just because the CCD data have already been heavily processed before the camera gave you the pic), but they still contain less picture info when compared with film.

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2006, 3:27 AM   #97
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,868
Default

I agree with Lenkerry. Ignore this tosser, and as with all bored, sad trolls, he will go away.



Darren



(Got to have reviews coming out my ass before considering a lens!!)
Dal1970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2006, 3:28 AM   #98
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Essex, UK
Posts: 1,868
Default

I agree with Lenkerry. Ignore this tosser, and as with all bored, sad trolls, he will go away.



Darren



(Got to have reviews coming out my ass before considering a lens!!)
Dal1970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2006, 3:55 AM   #99
Senior Member
 
BenjaminXYZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 788
Default

Quote:
(Got to have reviews coming out my bottom before considering a lens!!)

I wasn't forcing you to reada review before considering a lens (You can do what you want). That was actually in reference to myself. (I'm the one that must understand a thing well enough in orderto accept it)

Code:
Benjamin wrote: I view my photos at 100%

6MP is 3000x2000 pixels can you tell us what kind of monitor supports this resolution? or do you scroll them around?


Yes, I view my photos at full size and scroll around on them. I like a camera to have the crispness (per-pixel sharpness), well defined crisp images at high ISO (Especially ISO 1600), not one that is soft or NR infected, and a natural look; not one that is saturated or high looking "all at 100% view". (High colors) I prefer natural colors.

I am the type that is more concerned about the definition and crispness of an image at high ISO than noises. Noises are in fact the smallest part of the problemto me. (As long as the noises are not directly affecting image quality) I prefer not to have any NR at all.

I don'tneed to buy a "Hubble Space Telescope"to get what I want , I already have available choices around me thatcan be moreconvenient to operate. I am not demanding for all those machines or equipments; I just want something that I can carry around conveniently; one that is capable of delivering the results I want. (And one that I can afford.)

Quote:
if you using digital projector on the wall that's diffrent and to get good quality on that you have to go back to slide film. or to compare quality and details get yourself a roll of 1600 film, shot few frames scan them at 2700dpi and view on monitor next to any digital file. or print them at the size of two monitor screens (about A3), and tell me where all tis details hwve gone??
for the rest of us who actually print our photos all this issue is irrelevant. at 5x7 or 10x8 you won't find any differences between different brands.

if you want ultimate quality, sharpness and details you should read this http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/limits.htmland get yourself gear mentioned there. there's a table with lens resolutions. unfortunatelly it's not digital. and getting this in real life is almost impossible. and it says to get this amout of resolution you have to use slow film like 50 or 100 iso. so if you're looking for photos in iso 1600 and sharpness and details of iso 50 or 100 it never existed.




BenjaminXYZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 16, 2006, 4:52 AM   #100
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 344
Default

BenjaminXYZ wrote:
Quote:
Yes, I view my photos at full size and scroll around on them. I like a camera to have the crispness (per-pixel sharpness), well defined crisp images at high ISO (Especially ISO 1600), not one that is soft or NR infected, and a natural look; not one that is saturated or high looking "all at 100% view". (High colors) I prefer natural colors.
Exactly, and me too for all!

Quote:
I am the type that is more concerned about the definition and crispness of an image at high ISO than noises. Noises are in fact the smallest part of the problem to me. (As long as the noises are not directly affecting image quality) I prefer not to have any NR at all.
Me 2!

Quote:
I don't need to buy a "Hubble Space Telescope" to get what I want , I already have available choices around me that can be more convenient to operate. I am not demanding for all those machines or equipments; I just want something that I can carry around conveniently; one that is capable of delivering the results I want. (And one that I can afford.)
Yep! But do note that the K10D is a bit rather heavy, so carrying around may not be convenient.

For what you've stated, my K100D has achieved all those!

I bet we are the same kind of people afterall - Measurbator! ;-D

RiceHigh
http://www.geocities.com/ricehigh
RiceHigh is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:54 AM.