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 Apr 6, 2007, 1:48 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 116
Default

I need to ask a favor.

Can someone, anyone with both a k10d and an *ist Dx camera PLEASE post comparison shots, preferably at identical settings and on the same tripod (to allow for back/forth flipping comparison) showing off dynamic range differences between the two?

I've been playing with my DL and the M42 50mm/1.4 and have been kind of disappointed at the color range with bad lighting. IE, dining table with light shining above..... either the table surface is correctly exposed while the surroundings are dark or the surroundings are well-exposed and the table surface is pure white.

I am not shooting film noir, so ultracontrast ain't my thing.

I know it's a lot to ask, but I think it would help ALL prospective buyers. Send me a k10 and I'll test it myself.

I want shake reduction, and the k100d can be had for about 450 now. But if the K10d is significantly better in terms of DR, I'll shell out the extra 400
mongrelchild is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 6, 2007, 3:14 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

I'm curious about this as well, but I doubt you're really exploiting the full dynamic range of your camera unless you're shooting RAW. Shake reduction helps though because you can use slower shutter speeds and therefore lower ISO settings. The K100, because of it's lower noise levels, performs better in low light shots than the K10. With a tripod, the DL should be about the same I'd think.

If however you're talking about shooting very long exposures at the lowest possible ISO, or shooting in very bright light, I don't know. The K10 offers ISO 100 and I wonder if the useable dynamic range of an ISO 100 shot from the K10 would be wider than that of the K100 at 200.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2007, 3:27 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

This might be useful to you. This is an image shot RAW on my K100D at ISO 200. It was imported with Adobe Camera Raw at the default settings:






Here's the same image also imported in ACR, but I readjusted the curves to brighten up the dark areas.







If I want the area outside to look a bit sharper I'd blend the two images together revealing more of the darker exposure on the outdoor part.

Just how practical it is for you to do RAW imports depends on what kind of software you have available. If you have a recent version of Photoshop you should be in great shape. I think Photoshop Elements can do a lot of this as well. The camera also comes with software for importing RAW, but it's rather slow and cumbersome. You could also use the GIMP with UFRAW to import RAW for free and it should do pretty well, but you'd need to learn the software and probably have to buy a noise reduction program like Noise Ninja.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2007, 10:48 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

I didn't think about taking comparison shots between the DS and the K10, and I sold the DS a while ago. However, I didsome comparisons between the K100 and the DS, then a couple between the K100 and the K10 and posted them here.

For the K100 and K10, with one picture posted that addressed dynamic range between the two: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=80(it's the one with the tire tracks, which don't show much for dynamic range, but there's one of some backlit trees that I at first thought showed abit more dynamic range, but mostly shows off the K10's better white balance).

Here's some comparisons between the DS and the K100: http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=80. My conclusion was that there's notmuch difference in thedynamic range with the K10 vs. K100, but not a decrease either (my only experience was with the Panny FZ30 and the Sony F717 - it seemed like the extra mp in the Panny not only caused more noise, but also a smaller dyanamic range, compared to the Sony). Don't know if any of these examples will help address your question.


mtngal 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 12:10 AM.