The issue here is whether or not the camera should do any non-reversable processing such as sharpening or noise reduction. Nikon has decided to make it configurable on the D80, and set the defaults to what's appropriate for P&S use, while Pentax has chosen to make its defaults more appropriate for post-processing.
I prefer Pentax's approach. It gives me more control over rendering, and does not reduce the level of information in the image (which noise reduction does). -Adam Tom C wrote: > In my mind it's difficult to understand the difference between > sharpness/unsharpness/detail and noise. It seems to me that an image > considered to be sharp, yet with a lot of noise, is in reality not sharp > and/or contains less detail because the noise is itself replacing detail > that would otherwise be there. > > Noisy picture = Yucky picture. > > > Tom C. > > > ----Original Message Follows---- > From: Joseph Tainter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: K10D aimed as D200 killer > Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 12:09:23 -0800 > > My comment at end. (Caution: Some of you wll hate it. You may not want > to read it.) > > ----- > > Remember the reviews of the *istD? It got beaten up because Pentax > decided to make soft pictures strait out of the box. I was not part of > the list then, but I imagine many talking about this being better > because it left the decision to the photographer. > > As I understand it, it's the same with noise vs. details. > > > Tim > Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) > > > -----Original Message----- > > In addition, requiring the the user to do even more in post-processing > to try to correct for what could be viewed as a camera short-coming, > strikes me as a cop out. I already don't use the *ist D for anything > serious over ISO 800. I don't want additional post-processing work, > that may or may not correct the situation on an image-by-image basis. > > Tom C. > > ----- > At dpreview I just found a translation of a interview with Hisashi > Tatamiya, who has been leading the K10D project. > > http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=20671456 > > ----- > > I believe Pentax made the right decision in regard to high ISO noise. > Image sharpness is retained, if you can figure out a way to reduce noise > in PP without softening the image. But Nikon may have been smarter > marketing-wise. > > Pentax would have been criticized whichever way they went. Popular > Photography's review of the D80 praised it for low noise at high ISO, > completely forgetting to mention that the D80 achieves this at the cost > of soft images. When Pop reviews the K10D, they will complain that it > compares poorly to the D80 in high ISO noise. And readers who don't know > any better will believe that that is the final word. > > Reading between the lines of the summary of the interview, Mr. Tatamiya > is (it seems to me) saying two things: (1) there will be noise at high > ISO and you may not like it, and (2) its your problem. None of this is a > surprise. The sensor is known to be noisy at high ISO, and I suspected > that Pentax would choose a middle course between Nikon and Sony. I just > hope that images will be useable at ISO 800. If they are, I'll be > satisfied. But I am not expecting this. > > Herb Chong contacted me off-list, and suggested something I had not > heard before. According to Herb, the rule of thumb for good image > quality is two steps above the base ISO. This matches my experience with > the D, which is fine at 800, but (to my eye) not at 1600. If this rule > of thumb holds for the 10 mp sensor, then ISO 400 will be the point > above which we can expect image quality to decline noticeably due to noise. > > (Actually, the paragraph above assumes that all else is equal--like > pixel density. Since the K10D has a higher pixel density, one may expect > the loss of an additional step due to inherently higher noise. Combining > (1) lower base ISO, and (2) smaller pixel size, the K10D could > conceiveably yield noticeable degradation in image quality above ISO > 200. But Nikon seems to get good image quality without softening at ISO > 400, so I believe we will too.) > > Joe > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
