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 Jul 11, 2006, 9:37 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
thekman620's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 6,084
Default

I'll throw my 2 cents in. When I first bought my ds, I thought the images seemed soft. Well, they are soft shot at default settings. I don't know about the other brand of dslr's, but Pentax at default is a little soft. They're designed that way I believe, leaving the photographer more room for deciding how they want the final outcome to look. After shooting for a while and learning the real use of USM, and learning more about the camera itself, it was evident that there is a tremendous amount of detail there to be had. Most p&s digicams have by default the sharpening and contrast cranked up making nice pictures that one can print straight from the camera. Nothing wrong with that, but don't confuse detail of a dslr with that of a digicam that has it's parameter defaults set much higher than the former. As of now, I've learned a lot of the ins and outs of settings after more than a year of usage, and find I don't have to crank up the sharpening much at all anymore.
On the subject of taking the dl back, if I were you, I'd return it and wait for the new body to come out. Should be just a matter of a week or 2, and you'll have image stableization and a newer model to use. Should be about the same price too...cheers.....Don.
thekman620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2006, 9:48 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Default

Danielchtong;

The Pentaxians, sounds like a band :-)

Yeah, no kidding about the primes and all that. That's why I'm here on this board. No one was more surprised than me. The question is, what am I doing that the Pentax isn't prerforming like it should.

As to the ISO 400 thing; I lettheOlympus run in auto since I was not trying to compare cameras, I was just using the Oly as a yard stick. I ran the DL in auto and also setit's ISO to 200, 400 and 800. The different ISO settings didn't make much difference to the shadows (call me on it if you want to - it didn't) butthe higher ISO and faster shutters helped the shake which helped everything else a bit.

What I'm not getting is theclean sort of image like in the Race Car in the previous post. SO..... Post processing seems to definitely be needed and what else?

I read a post where someone had their sharpness setting set at +1 andcontrast setiing at -1. What is everyone else using? Mine were set to default when I ran the tests today.

Thanks for the reply Dan... and Long Live Toronto.
looppeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2006, 9:57 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

I usually played with my photos when I had my Sony F717, and I did have some trouple getting used to converting RAWphotos with ACR, but I've gotten used to it now. I was quite happy with the Sony, but it has EVF/LCD problems. I didn't think that the Sony's landscape photos weren't hugely worse than the DS (I have a DS). However, when it comes to macro, having a small DOF, low light (the Sony is one of the better low-light cameras in my opinion), long zoom, versatility,etc. the DS is much better.

I had owned a Panasonic FZ30 for a month before getting the Pentax, and found there was no way I could avoid camera shake with that camera.My techniquemust have gotten better than I thought because I don't have half as much problem with the DS (but then, I'm using fast lenses for the most part). I became pretty good using Neat Image with the Panny (a must at anything over 100 ISO, and occasionally used it then too). The noise with the DS at 800 ISO is about the same as the Panny at 100. I took very few good pictures with the Panny but I don't throw out many with the DS (but then, my longest lens goes to 200 - I keep trying to talk myself out of buying something that goes out to 300 because I know I can't handhold it).

Your right answer might be to return the DL and getting the K100D. However, the IS on the Panny didn't makemuch difference to me, I still couldn't control it properly.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2006, 10:04 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Default

Thanksfor the 2 cents Kman

I was just looking at the pics that are posted here and was noticing again that they are all closer and cleaner than most of what I took today and they made me wonder about selective focus and settings for sharpness, contrast etc. Certainly practise/experience is an issue.

I'm not blaming the camera here but the issue of the newer version is a bit of a dilema. I've heard that the K100 won't be in Toronto until September - I've also heard next week. On the one hand, newer technology - on the other, time to get to know the camera... What to do?


looppeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2006, 10:28 PM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Default

Hi mtngal

Thanks for your thoughts.

That's the thing with long lenses. I like the look they give you, butI don't always want to carry a tripod. With a film camera I don't often use anything shorter than a 90mm (except for a 24mm that gives mea nice look) and normally don't shoot longer than a 200mm - and no zoom lenses. I have a 350mm that I like but it pretty much needs a tripod which as I said I don't always have. Given the 1.5 multiplier of digital cameras, unless I want to buy all new lenses (I don't at this time anyway) Image Stabilization is tempting, notwithstanding what you said about IS on your Panny.

I suspect a lot of theissues I'm facing nowwon't go away with the K100 and I'll still need to learn what I don't know now.We'll have to see how it goes.

Loop
looppeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2006, 11:06 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
wadue's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 914
Default

Hey Loop,

Ok, I've got 2 cents also ... When I got my dl in December, I thought "what have I gotten into??? $800 for a camera??? which I've been hearing is now under $400 for it BTW. I was a little overwhelmed with all the functions but within 2-3 weeks I had gotten a basic grasp for the camera (don't get me wrong...I'm definitely stilll learning but thank goodness for this forum!) During that time of overwhelmness, I also thought of returning it but I stuck with it & have been very pleased with it. If the new age is what you're after, then do it ... I know everybody here is going to anxiously awaiting news of the camera but if you decide to keep the dl, we'll also be looking forward to some posts with it!

Good Luck & welcome to the forums!

Ron
wadue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2006, 11:11 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

I agree with Daniel, I find it hard to believe your P&S even comes close to the quality of the DL in jpg mode. I almost never use RAW and my photos are sharp and are mostly hand held without a tripod such as this one.

ISO 400-jpg-hand held-300mm Pentax lens:



Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2006, 12:38 AM   #18
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11
Default

hey ennacac

Great pic - nicely done.

You mentioned ISO 400, 300mm lens. Was it prime or a zoom lens? Did you use auto settings or manual? Are your sharpness, contrast, saturation etc settings default or custom, and did you Photoshop it (if you don't mind me asking)?



I also want to say that I'm not just talking about my test pictures being unsharp. I did take some braced against a tree for stability and I did take others handheld that are sharp. It's more the shadow detail that's noisier than I expected and I'm questioning the softness in the shadow detail.

Aslo I was expecting the 3 mega pixel difference between the cameras to have a more pronounced effect. The file size is much larger on the DL pics and the frame size is larger and yet onsome of the pics, side by side, I have tolook twice to tellwhich one came from which camera (I'd take a snap with the DL and then right after it with the Olympus so the lighting was the same). Obviously the Pentax is the better camera. I guess the difference needs to be drawn out in different ways.

Having said all that, I read the thread referred by >philneast< (several posts up) and it made a lot of sense. I bracketed all the test shotsItook & I suspect that if I go with the darker bracket shots and process them with PS, I'll find I can clean up a lot of the shadow stuff. For all the years I've spent in darkrooms, there haven't been many pics that went under the lamp & into the baths without some fussing. Why should digital be any different. It also goes to what Kman said in his post (higher up this thread).


Last to Wadue; thanks for your 2 cents and thanks for the welcome. Unless my shutter finger breaks I'll be around for a while (seems like a nice place).

Loop

looppeee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2006, 7:48 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

looppeee wrote:
Quote:
hey ennacac

Great pic - nicely done.

You mentioned ISO 400, 300mm lens. Was it prime or a zoom lens? Did you use auto settings or manual? Are your sharpness, contrast, saturation etc settings default or custom, and did you Photoshop it (if you don't mind me asking)?

Loop
Loop,

300mm prime lens, auto settings, manual focus, no extra sharpening in camera or contrast or saturation and some minor USM in CS2.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 12, 2006, 8:06 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,888
Default

Notwithstanding what I said, there is some possibility that your DL is a bad copy . Can you email a couple of the full pict to danielchtong At Yahoo Dot com (3 mg at a time)? I know Futureshop does not allow it. Maybe you can go to Henry and let them take a couple of pict from their DL for comparison purpose.
About tweaking the contrast or sharpness setting, there should not be that much difference.
You are not a newbie and you have been asking intelligent questions. Something is not quite right.
There is no question about sharpness of DL. You may go through the pict at my photo site at ww.pbase.com/danieltong. Tom or
ennacac also show you what can be done with the lowly DL.

Daniel

looppeee wrote:
Quote:
Danielchtong;

The Pentaxians, sounds like a band :-)

Yeah, no kidding about the primes and all that. That's why I'm here on this board. No one was more surprised than me. The question is, what am I doing that the Pentax isn't prerforming like it should.

As to the ISO 400 thing; I lettheOlympus run in auto since I was not trying to compare cameras, I was just using the Oly as a yard stick. I ran the DL in auto and also setit's ISO to 200, 400 and 800. The different ISO settings didn't make much difference to the shadows (call me on it if you want to - it didn't) butthe higher ISO and faster shutters helped the shake which helped everything else a bit.

What I'm not getting is theclean sort of image like in the Race Car in the previous post. SO..... Post processing seems to definitely be needed and what else?

I read a post where someone had their sharpness setting set at +1 andcontrast setiing at -1. What is everyone else using? Mine were set to default when I ran the tests today.

Thanks for the reply Dan... and Long Live Toronto.
danielchtong 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 9:54 PM.