I grant that could very well be the case...


Tom C.


----Original Message Follows----
From: Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: K10D aimed as D200 killer
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 18:41:13 -0500

You're reading a lot into brief and confusing remarks that have been
translated from the Japanese.
Paul
On Oct 30, 2006, at 5:01 PM, Tom C wrote:

 > I agree with that in principle, but the issue here as I read it, is
 > one of
 > the sensor making this an issue because of high noise levels that
 > were not a
 > concern in the 6MP models.
 >
 > In other words, I expected that image qualiy would get better in
 > the new
 > body across the board, not that their would be tradeoffs.
 >
 > It seems Canon at least (don't know about Nikon) has been able to
 > continually increase sensor resolution while continuing to keep
 > noise to a
 > low level.
 >
 >
 > Tom C.
 >
 >
 > ----Original Message Follows----
 > From: Adam Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 > Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>
 > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]>
 > Subject: Re: K10D aimed as D200 killer
 > Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:31:02 -0500
 >
 > 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
 >
 >
 >
 > --
 > 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



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Reply via email to