Pentax K20D in stock in Ottawa

Discussion in 'Pentax' started by Darrell Larose, Mar 6, 2008.

  1. Galaxy Camera, Ottawa just got them, body $1229.99
     
    Darrell Larose, Mar 6, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Darrell Larose

    IV III Guest

    Samsung did a terrible job with the 14mp CMOS sensor, avoid the K20D and
    the GX20
     
    IV III, Mar 6, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Darrell Larose

    RichA Guest

    It's apparently testing out very well, considering the pixel count.
     
    RichA, Mar 6, 2008
    #3
  4. I did a test shot at 100 and at 3200 ISO, I haven't posted them yet,
    maybe later today if I find the time. BUT, any dSLR will beat 1600 and
    3200 ISO film. At 3200 it looked like 400 film.
     
    darrell.larose, Mar 6, 2008
    #4
  5. What 14 megapixel dSLR do you suggest? The not seen yet Sony?
     
    darrell.larose, Mar 6, 2008
    #5
  6. Darrell Larose

    steph Guest

    What would be the problem?
     
    steph, Mar 6, 2008
    #6
  7. Darrell Larose

    IV III Guest

    <> a écrit dans le message de
    What 14 megapixel dSLR do you suggest? The not seen yet Sony?

    =========

    none, grab the D300 or the 40D
     
    IV III, Mar 6, 2008
    #7
  8. Darrell Larose

    IV III Guest

    "steph" <> a écrit dans le message de
    What would be the problem?
    ====

    lots of noise, terrible IQ
     
    IV III, Mar 6, 2008
    #8
  9. Darrell Larose

    Pete D Guest

    Thats bad, can you show some links to these examples?

    Cheers.

    Pete
     
    Pete D, Mar 6, 2008
    #9
  10. Darrell Larose

    John Sheehy Guest

    How do you know? Where did you find the RAW files and what program did you
    use to view them?

    Or, are you just basing this on conversions?

    I have a K20D ISO 1600 RAW file here, and it has about the same read noise
    as the Nikon D300 does at ISO 1600. I really want to see low ISO RAWs. If
    the K20D improves at all on per-pixel read noise over the K10D at low ISO,
    it will have killer DR at the image level.

    --
     
    John Sheehy, Mar 6, 2008
    #10
  11. Darrell Larose

    Pete D Guest


    He is just a troll otherwise he would post links to examples. There has been
    some posted at DP Review in the Pentax SLR forum, they are pretty damned
    good by the looks.
     
    Pete D, Mar 6, 2008
    #11
  12. Darrell Larose

    John Sheehy Guest

    That's nice, but I am only interested in RAW files. JPEGs and conversions
    hide the real facts about what a camera with RAW is capable of.



    --
     
    John Sheehy, Mar 7, 2008
    #12
  13. Darrell Larose

    OG Guest

    Of course he can't
     
    OG, Mar 7, 2008
    #13
  14. Darrell Larose

    OG Guest

    But a RAW file is a series of 0s and 1s, just like all files

    You can only judge the RAW by the conversion done by the software you are
    viewing.

    RAW is a bit like Platonic truth There is no way that you can get ALL the
    information out of a RAW file in a single instance.
    Software - converts 0s and 1s to an image on the
    Screen - not big enough to show full image at best resolution, and dependent
    on the monitor settings so you sending it to the
    Printer - more depth, but dependent on quality of printer, ink etc.
     
    OG, Mar 7, 2008
    #14
  15. Darrell Larose

    Pete D Guest

    If you go and look there is raw, both pef and dng examples there, do you
    need spoon feeding or can you manage this? There is even the Pentax software
    posted if you want it.
     
    Pete D, Mar 7, 2008
    #15
  16. Darrell Larose

    Pete D Guest

    \
    Don't worry, he obviously didn't look because there is pef and dng links
    posted, even links to the Pentax software if you want it.
     
    Pete D, Mar 7, 2008
    #16
  17. Darrell Larose

    John Sheehy Guest

    Technically, yes. A better model is that it is a range of numbers
    representing luminosity in color-filtered pixels. The fact that the data
    is binary is irrelevant; that's just an artifact of the way the data is
    captured and stored.
    If I have the RAWs, I have full control of the way they are rendered, and
    can, consequently, render images from different cameras equitably. No
    commercial RAW software will do that; they process RAWs from different
    cameras differently.
    Platonic truth is a psycholinguistic mirage; RAW is a hard enumeration of
    charge levels with a little fuzz (read noise) thrown in.
    I don't need to. I can, however, take the RAWs from two different
    cameras and compare their noise and DR. I can upsample or downsample
    them to the same size and compare. I can not do that with out-of-camera
    JPEGs, or with manufacturer's converters, or ACR, or Capture One.
    Irrelevant, as I can compare one RAW to another. You're imaging some
    kind of mystique that isn't there; RAW files are very simple things,
    despite the fact that probably less than 1% of people serious about
    photography have ever bothered to play with them; they are just
    interleaved B&W images from different sets of color filters.

    --
     
    John Sheehy, Mar 7, 2008
    #17
  18. Darrell Larose

    John Sheehy Guest

    It would be unreasonable to expect me to follow the Pentax Forums on a
    daily basis. I don't even follow the ones about cameras that I already
    own.

    It was very recently that I looked through the Pentax forum and found
    nothing but ISO 1600 RAWs, and asked about any ISO 100s, and no one
    replied. There are none yet on the sites where I usually get RAW files.

    I am not particularly interested in the Pentax software at this point in
    time. That won't help me look at the RAW data and see how much DR the K20D
    has at low ISO.

    --
     
    John Sheehy, Mar 7, 2008
    #18
  19. Darrell Larose

    Zilla Guest

    Image (some math) = RAW files
    RAW files (some math) = jpeg files

    To me, the less math, the better quality. For example, I have the Pentax
    K10D, and PS converted jpeg files are better than the Pentax converted
    jpeg files. DPReview.com commented on this too.
     
    Zilla, Mar 7, 2008
    #19
  20. Darrell Larose

    Pete D Guest


    Like most D-SLRs the jpegs are pretty damn good anyway, nothing much to test
    really unless you plan to print at extra huge sizes.
     
    Pete D, Mar 7, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.