K5 Jpeg vs. RAW

Started Nov 21, 2010 | Discussions thread
OP phototherapy Senior Member • Posts: 1,006
K5 only for RAW shooters.....

Hi, I started this OP, and only you have seeing what I feel in relation to the signals from reviewers like IR and others, but the problem is that they don't say anything about that Jpeg thing, you must discover it yourself by looking very cloosely to the images, like someone posted a whine bottle compare between the K5 and D7000, at ISO 3200 the red whine name was black and almost gone, but not at all with the D7000. so color and detail loss in Jpeg is present.

so to me a camera that has a bad Jpeg engine by a to strong AA filter that can not be fix by firmware update IMO, thats really bad, so the K5 is better then the D7000 in RAW, but much worse in Jpeg then the D7000, and it can not be fix, that seems to be the assessment of some not proffessional reviews also, they care about amateurs that still shoot in Jpeg's, and do not want to edite every single picture.
so did pentax forgot the Jpeg amateur photographer, maybe just a little bit.
that little bit can have a great inpact afterall.

Gazooma wrote:

Hi, I am posting just because everybody else responding seems to have evaded the real point you made, that there are some signs that K-5's Jpegs may not be as good as what is available on another camera, the Nikon D7000, even though I believe it should be fine compared to other APS-C camera. That is according to the latest reviews from Photography Blog, but that is just one review.

However, given that, you have a valid concern about the Jpeqs from the K-5, if you shoot in Jpeq a lot, shoot for work that requires quick pictures being available, or need to use a function like HDR that is only available with Jpeq. All the other posts and advice about RAW being better are sound, but not answering your query. I am also interested to find out more about this and the best way is to wait for more detailed or thorough review tests. One German magazine also suggested that its tests revealed a reservation about the IQ of K-5 at low ISO, although it is not clear how reliable if at all their tests are.

I would not rule out the possibility that K-5's high ISO 51200 rating is achieved with some tweaks that could sacrifice other things, or the tweaking had in mind DXO scores and could have negative ramifications in some hard to quantify aspects of picture quality, such as colours or details that can only be perceived by the eyes. If it is the same sensor for those 2 cameras, you would think that Nikon could also have, if it wanted to, included an ISO 51200, or even grab cheap publicity with an ISO 102,400! That might be just fine for a 3 inch picture taken with good lighting to display on a web page after some PP cleaning though.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
2PK
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow