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 May 14, 2010, 2:43 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Tachikoma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Wales
Posts: 1,086
Default

Were these both converted from RAW's? as has been said above, could be more down to the built in JPEG conversion, taking them in RAW and processing the same should give a good indication if it's the lens or not.
Tachikoma is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2010, 7:29 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Frogfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 2,774
Default

Nikon have a 'stronger' in-camera processing algorithm than Pentax whose cameras, in their default settings, prefer to leave the sharpening up to the user.

Am I right in saying that Canon's default jpg processing is even stronger still re. noise reduction / sharpening ?

These are both older cameras so maybe the algorithms used have changed too.
Frogfish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2010, 8:47 AM   #13
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

I'd say there are too many differences to draw any conclusions, as lighting can change quickly during the day. As already pointed out, they were taken at different ISO speeds (100 for the Nikon, 200 for the Pentax), apertures (f/5 for the Nikon, f/5.6 for the Pentax), metering modes (spot for the Pentax, matrix for the Nikon), Exposure Compensation Settings (negative setting for the Nikon, probably to help offset the brighter exposure using Matrix vs. Spot metering), settings for contrast, sharpening, etc. (increased on the Pentax, normal for the Nikon), Aperture differences (stopped down from wide open a bit more for the Pentax versus the Nikon, and most lenses are sharper when stopped down more), etc.

Even if they were the same using Manual Exposure, and fixed WB settings for both, with the photos taken at exactly the same time, you'd probably have differences in lens quality between them.

Given that both cameras use a similar Sony 10MP CCD Sensor (although AA filters may differ a bit), I wouldn't expect to see a lot of difference between them at lower ISO speeds, except for some minor processing differences (which you could probably "equalize" with settings and/or PP tweaks). So, the lenses being used would probably be the major difference.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2010, 10:46 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
rhermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
Default

Sorry or may happy to say that the differences are not enough to take a favorite.

And I guess if you would take a pentax mx and a nikon 300 there would be no differences visible at this size and settings as would with the reverse taking a nikon 5000 and the pentax k7.

The one thing that makes me smile any and all brands have the possibility to make the same good shots.

Ronny
__________________
rhermans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2010, 3:45 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

I used the two cameras that I did because I knew that they use the same Sony sensor, which I thought would be a fair test.

It was not a scientific test and I did not notice the Nikon was at ISO 100, but when I processed the RAW files in ACR, I did not do anything different with either file, any changes were made at exactly the same number value for each image.

I left the cameras to deal with WB and AF since that is the way most people use them. The metering was a issue since the Nikon is not the most intuitive camera I have ever used, and I could not figure out how to stop if from changing metering modes and focus points on its own. The Nikon also seemed to process the RAW/NEF file more than the Pentax did, which was something I did not like, as I like to deal with that myself in PP.

So far as I can see there is no advantage in the D200 over the K10D other than AF and I found some things I did not like with the D200, such as blown highlights which made me prefer the IQ of the Pentax over the Nikon.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14, 2010, 4:41 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
I'd say there are too many differences to draw any conclusions, as lighting can change quickly during the day. As already pointed out, they were taken at different ISO speeds (100 for the Nikon, 200 for the Pentax), apertures (f/5 for the Nikon, f/5.6 for the Pentax), metering modes (spot for the Pentax, matrix for the Nikon), Exposure Compensation Settings (negative setting for the Nikon, probably to help offset the brighter exposure using Matrix vs. Spot metering), settings for contrast, sharpening, etc. (increased on the Pentax, normal for the Nikon), Aperture differences (stopped down from wide open a bit more for the Pentax versus the Nikon, and most lenses are sharper when stopped down more), etc.

Even if they were the same using Manual Exposure, and fixed WB settings for both, with the photos taken at exactly the same time, you'd probably have differences in lens quality between them.

Given that both cameras use a similar Sony 10MP CCD Sensor (although AA filters may differ a bit), I wouldn't expect to see a lot of difference between them at lower ISO speeds, except for some minor processing differences (which you could probably "equalize" with settings and/or PP tweaks). So, the lenses being used would probably be the major difference.
I agree with most of JimC's post, but missed the -Ev comp, so forget about the exposure difference stuff in my previous post. In my defense, it was late, and the differences in aperture and ISO just jumped out at me. . .

I also missed the differences in sharpness and contrast settings, but these only exacerbate the halo thing, in my view. A lot of the time, I use negative contrast and sharpness settings so I can deal with these in PP where I think I can get closer to what I want. I shoot jpegs, so I'd find halos bothersome. Perhaps this might not happen in RAW, in which case, there'd be little for a RAW shooter to pick at. . . and the rendering characteristics of the comparable lenses would probably be the difference as JimC stated.

For quite a while, I've found the IQ differences between competing models from different mfgs more picky than substantive. . . but that's always been the case in photography. . . picky, picky, picky. . . This is good for the most part, but only serves to confuse those that have less than the very highest standards, and much of what is said is subjective, and/or not that relevant to digital photography (lens' color rendition is one I don't really get )

Scott
snostorm 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 3:47 PM.