The DS and its mixed reviews

IanHo · Mar 7, 2005

I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the results?

Cheers,

Ian.

thw · Mar 7, 2005

IanHo said:
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

IMHO, apart from Canon which seems to far ahead of everyone else (Nikon, Oly, Minolta, Pentax) in the department of default jpeg quality, the best way to extract the best quality is to use RAW. Having said that, you can always change the settings (tone/sharpness/saturation) in all DSLRs to get decent jpeg quality. Most reviews are therefore slightly misleading in this regard because they only look at default jpeg settings. Pentax colors in the natural tone mode are very accurate.

Godfrey · Mar 7, 2005

IanHo said:
I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

I don't see how posting two identical pictures will tell you anything.

I also don't know who is writing these dumb reviews. The *ist DS produces JPEG files that are equal or a little better in quality then the ones I get out of my Canon 10D in comparable situations on the default settings. Once I tailor settings on both cameras to suit my needs, the results are as good as identical.

Godfrey

hugnut · Mar 7, 2005

Although I use an ist-D not the DS, 99.9% of my pictures are taken at .jpg. I would assume(or hope) the DS has the same quality .jpgs as the D. All the pictures on the below site were shot as .jpgs not RAW.
http://home.comcast.net/~pentax-istd/

Godfrey said:
IanHo said:

I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Click to expand...

I don't see how posting two identical pictures will tell you anything.

I also don't know who is writing these dumb reviews. The *ist DS
produces JPEG files that are equal or a little better in quality
then the ones I get out of my Canon 10D in comparable situations on
the default settings. Once I tailor settings on both cameras to
suit my needs, the results are as good as identical.

Godfrey

--
Thanks,
Hugnut

polishbroadcast · Mar 7, 2005

The differences in sharpness that the reviews have referred to are so minute i would imagine they would get lost in the final application. You can really get hung up on absolute sharpness and quality scrutiny, but what is the end result? Putting them on the web? Printing them on photo paper? The DS produces fantastic images as JPEGs or in RAW mode.

ennacac · Mar 7, 2005

The joy of RAW for me is the ability to go back and change things I wish I had done differently when I shot the photo. There is so little difference between the image quality in jpg and RAW it is hardly worth discussing.

I have no idea what settings the reviewers are using when they get sub standard images with the DS, as mine are all fantastic.

Not only do I feel putting up two of the same image in jpg and RAW would be of no value, but the RAW file size would be around 10Meg.

Tom

K1000Photographer · Mar 7, 2005

ennacac said:
The joy of RAW for me is the ability to go back and change things I
wish I had done differently when I shot the photo. There is so
little difference between the image quality in jpg and RAW it is
hardly worth discussing.

I have no idea what settings the reviewers are using when they get
sub standard images with the DS, as mine are all fantastic.

Not only do I feel putting up two of the same image in jpg and RAW
would be of no value, but the RAW file size would be around 10Meg.

Tom

Many reviewers have a bias for artificially sharpenned photos. I was caught up in that at first but later reallized I was looking at artifacts and not reality.

Dave Lewis · Mar 7, 2005

IanHo said:
I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Cheers,

Ian.

That's hogwash. I take thousands of pictures, all of them are jpg. If I thought everything would be much better in raw, I'd surely use it. Raw is great for helping problem images. The Ds has very few problem images. Go over to the Canon forum and look at Daniella's bird images. She is probably one of the best bird photographers in the world. She never uses Raw.
--
Dave Lewis

Godfrey · Mar 7, 2005

ennacac said:
The joy of RAW for me ...

The joy of RAW image capture for me is the ability to photograph stark things like this where the contrast of a bright, clear, sunny day would otherwise make it impossible.

Pentax *ist DS + A50/1.4
ISO 200 @ f/2.8 @ 1/4000 sec

There is no configuration of settings in JPEG capture mode that would have done as well with both shadows and highlights. Similarly for this one:

Pentax *ist DS + M85/2
ISO 200 @ f/5.6 @ 1/250 sec

It took the ability to manipulate gamma curves with RAW capture to express the tonalities my eye wanted. There might have been a JPEG setting that did similarly for this one, but it would have been harder to achieve.

Godfrey

Rich · Mar 7, 2005

Are they dissing it for the (lack of) sharpness? Any camera reviewer who knows their $%! from a hole in the ground knows that the less sharpened the jpg is the better. It's impossible to recover from an overly sharpened picture. Pentax made a wise move to hold back on the sharpening. I do admit, though, that Canon's in-camera sharpening routines are quite good, better than anyone else's.

And yeah, except for the old Kodaks, it's just not practical for a lot of people (myself included) to shoot raw all the time. jpeg is so easy and convenient, if the white balance is off it CAN be changed in Photoshop after all, it's not like you're stuck with the picture the camera spit out. RAW may help slightly with blown highlights, but I've never seen it work miracles (again, the old Kodaks being an exception).

Rich

hizzoner · Mar 7, 2005

IanHo said:
I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Cheers,

Ian.

Andrew Mitchell · Mar 8, 2005

Godfrey

As I am thinking of shop testing a DS in the next week or so (after very poor results when I tested a K-M 7D), can you tell me what settings I should adjust before I start taking any photos. The camera shop will probably let me play around for 20 minutes or so.

Many thanks

Andrew

Godfrey said:
IanHo said:

I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Click to expand...

I don't see how posting two identical pictures will tell you anything.

I also don't know who is writing these dumb reviews. The *ist DS
produces JPEG files that are equal or a little better in quality
then the ones I get out of my Canon 10D in comparable situations on
the default settings. Once I tailor settings on both cameras to
suit my needs, the results are as good as identical.

Godfrey

--
Andrew (in Taiwan)
C-21OOUZ, C-5O5O, S4OO, Minolta 800si, Ricoh GR1s

racehorse in the desert · Mar 8, 2005

Dave Lewis said:
Member said:

Ian.

Click to expand...

That's hogwash. I take thousands of pictures, all of them are jpg.
If I thought everything would be much better in raw, I'd surely use
it. Raw is great for helping problem images. The Ds has very few
problem images. Go over to the Canon forum and look at Daniella's
bird images. She is probably one of the best bird photographers in
the world. She never uses Raw.

I can't shoot raw except for some personal creative use. 1) I take too many images and would have a serious storage problem. 2) I don't have the time in my workflow to go through the conversion. 3) I have yet to find a good jpeg image that I thought needed to be "better."

--
John Power
Racehorse in the desert

'Life is too short to miss out on photography.'

DagT · Mar 8, 2005

The guy who tested the DS for the Norwegian magazine Fotografi says that he is impressed. The dynamics of the jpg files is the best he has seen in this class of cameras and better that the Fuji S3 with its double pixels (but the Fuji beats the DS dynamics in RAW format).

Canon 20D has a little less noise at 1600ISO, but otherwise the DS makes very good imgaes.

DagT

IanHo said:
I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Cheers,

Ian.

hugnut · Mar 8, 2005

I think the request would be to take a picture in RAW and convert to .jpg, then take the exact same picture in .jpg mode, then post both to see if there is a difference.

hizzoner said:
IanHo said:

I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Cheers,

Ian.

Click to expand...

--
Thanks,
Hugnut

Elrah · Mar 8, 2005

The reviews are there to compare one machine with another and are only loosley based on science. I have had a DS for about 2 months now, bought because I have a large number of Pentax lenses, built up over 20+ years of photography. I liked the Canon 20D in the shop, and the reviews were all excellent but after due thought I wondered if I really wanted to replace all my specialised Pentax stuff with Canon equipment and decided "no". I have been truly delighted with my DS all my lenses work perfectly and I like manual focus lenses best anyway! The kit lens with the camera is also excellent and does all the modern things as well as being light to carry. My advice therefore is to go and get one and start enjoying your photography better than you have for years! Incidentally my son bought a Canon 20D and I cannot tell the difference in the photos either raw or Jpeg - I dont think he can either but is curiously loth to admit it!
Elrah

Andrew Mitchell said:
As I am thinking of shop testing a DS in the next week or so (after
very poor results when I tested a K-M 7D), can you tell me what
settings I should adjust before I start taking any photos. The
camera shop will probably let me play around for 20 minutes or so.

Many thanks

Andrew

Godfrey said:

IanHo said:

I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Click to expand...

I don't see how posting two identical pictures will tell you anything.

I also don't know who is writing these dumb reviews. The *ist DS
produces JPEG files that are equal or a little better in quality
then the ones I get out of my Canon 10D in comparable situations on
the default settings. Once I tailor settings on both cameras to
suit my needs, the results are as good as identical.

Godfrey

Click to expand...

--
Andrew (in Taiwan)
C-21OOUZ, C-5O5O, S4OO, Minolta 800si, Ricoh GR1s

Rick Ashford · Mar 8, 2005

I wholeheartedly concur. I don't have the time to include RAW processing and conversion in my workflow, either. I try.... from time to time, but I keep wondering what all the RAW "hoopla" is about. I usually get frustrated by all the bother, knowing I could have gotten results just as good by shooting JPG. Besides, I am MUCH more comfortable working in PS with a JPG converted to TIF than I am using any of the RAW conversion programs.

racehorse in the desert said:
Dave Lewis said:

racehorse in the desert said:

Ian.

Click to expand...

That's hogwash. I take thousands of pictures, all of them are jpg.
If I thought everything would be much better in raw, I'd surely use
it. Raw is great for helping problem images. The Ds has very few
problem images. Go over to the Canon forum and look at Daniella's
bird images. She is probably one of the best bird photographers in
the world. She never uses Raw.

Click to expand...

I can't shoot raw except for some personal creative use. 1) I take
too many images and would have a serious storage problem. 2) I
don't have the time in my workflow to go through the conversion.
3) I have yet to find a good jpeg image that I thought needed to
be "better."

--
John Power
Racehorse in the desert

'Life is too short to miss out on photography.'

--
Rick A.
Johnson City, TN
http://www.photographyimpressions.com

Anastigmat · Mar 8, 2005

That is, to quote the rock group the Animals, "the biggest load of rubbish I have ever heard in my life."

IanHo said:
I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Cheers,

Ian.

romamor · Mar 8, 2005

Statements like this make me wonder... If I can get "decent" jpg results with a 3Mp Coolpix, why wouldn't a 6Mp D-SLR give more than decent jpg shots?

IanHo said:
I have got loads of Pentax lenses and I am thinking of buying the DS.
However, in the UK, the DS seems to get mixed reviews with some saying
that the RAW format is the only format for decent results, not JPG.
Is this true. Could someone post two identical pictures to see the
results?

Cheers,

Ian.

Rob22315 · Mar 8, 2005

With the caveat that this is more a matter of preference than science or religion, it takes no more practical time for me to convert from RAW to TIFF than from JPEG to TIFF. I use the Pentax software to do the conversion then PSP to edit. PS is even better because there is a compatible converter available.

JPEG is lossy so you do lose something but whether or not it is noticeable is in the eye of the editor/beholder unless you use extreme amounts of compression. Several folks have noted that the DS in-camera compression is higher (more lossy) than can be done through the Pentax software.

In the end, all that really matters is that the target audience enjoys the end product. How you got there is immaterial.

RG

Rick Ashford said:
racehorse in the desert said:

Dave Lewis said:

Rick Ashford said:

Ian.

Click to expand...

That's hogwash. I take thousands of pictures, all of them are jpg.
If I thought everything would be much better in raw, I'd surely use
it. Raw is great for helping problem images. The Ds has very few
problem images. Go over to the Canon forum and look at Daniella's
bird images. She is probably one of the best bird photographers in
the world. She never uses Raw.

Click to expand...

I can't shoot raw except for some personal creative use. 1) I take
too many images and would have a serious storage problem. 2) I
don't have the time in my workflow to go through the conversion.
3) I have yet to find a good jpeg image that I thought needed to
be "better."

--
John Power
Racehorse in the desert

'Life is too short to miss out on photography.'

Click to expand...

--
Rick A.
Johnson City, TN
http://www.photographyimpressions.com

The DS and its mixed reviews

New member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Active member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Dave Lewis

Guest

Forum Pro

Rich

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Well-known member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Well-known member

Senior Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts