It's Simply Sharpening IMO

[ozdean]

IMO Pentax has their Engine set too conservatively.

I downloaded the Fuji and K3III

In Picassa ( don't laugh ) quickly hit default sharpening on the K3ii File (Might be a bit Much) and here's the result.

BTW it is not Shutter Shock or Mirror slap if it was you would see a double image when magnified.











--
Regards Dean - Capturing Creation
N.B. All my Images are Protected by Copyright

 

[DougOB]

Are you look at the RAW or JPG files? The Pentax in-camera options for sharpening only apply to JPG.

Doug

 

[ozdean]

Doug even RAW files are processed to create a RAW.

 

[robbo d]

Dean,

Did you do any sharpening with your k5iis comparison? What iso?

Looked OK on those images.

 

[RBIV]

Doug even RAW files are processed to create a RAW.

Mmmm. Apples to Oranges I think.

Yes you are correct that RAW data is compiled to create an acceptable image. But it is without "adjustments" -- or can be, depending on the RAW converter.

Seems to me...

JPG comparisons say more about in camera software.

RAW comparisons are more about differences in the sensors.

 

[ozdean]

Rob in the pink camelia shots the K3III was set to Jpeg Natural +3 Sharp with Fine Sharp

Then with Pixel Shift.

K5IIs Natural Extra Fine Sharp - My Macro Setting

Then Bright with Extra Fine Sharp.

Re the K3III, it's all there, just depends how much you want to pull out of it. Maybe they have been conservative to give better results at higher iso?

ISO was 100

--
Regards Dean - Capturing Creation
N.B. All my Images are Protected by Copyright

 

[MarBa]

Why would sharpening play a role only at certain exposure times? The point is that the "blurred" images are only at ISO 100, 200, 400 (not at higher ISOs as the shutter speed was faster). .. plus any sharpening set in the camera does not influence the raw images.

It is indeed very likely a shutter shock that happened for this particular combination of lens and exposure time (and maybe also tripod) .. .not some settings that they changed etc.

 

[Mako2011]

. .. plus any sharpening set in the camera does not influence the raw images.

That's not always the case. Some RAW convertors will "honor" the in camera sharpening instruction and use that level as the zero point at the start regards sharpening applied

 

[DougOB]

. .. plus any sharpening set in the camera does not influence the raw images.

That's not always the case. Some RAW convertors will "honor" the in camera sharpening instruction and use that level as the zero point at the start regards sharpening applied

These settings are simply stored in the DNG/PEF file and applied later during processing (or not). They do not actually change the digital values of the image data in the RAW file. Sure, DCU uses these settings as a starting point but ACR/LR ignores them. Both starting from the same RAW data.

Doug

 

[Mako2011]

. .. plus any sharpening set in the camera does not influence the raw images.

That's not always the case. Some RAW convertors will "honor" the in camera sharpening instruction and use that level as the zero point at the start regards sharpening applied

These settings are simply stored in the DNG/PEF file and applied later during processing (or not). They do not actually change the digital values of the image data in the RAW file. Sure, DCU uses these settings as a starting point but ACR/LR ignores them. Both starting from the same RAW data.

Yes your right....the final image (RAW file is not an image) is affected by in camera sharpening settings when using DCU but not when using ACR. That was all I was eluding to

 

[Class A]

BTW it is not Shutter Shock or Mirror slap if it was you would see a double image when magnified.

Have a look at the fine-print text ("As with you...") right above the centre of the images.

The K-3 III image clearly exhibits some vertical blur (looks like "distortion" after sharpening). This seems like it would be consistent with shutter-shock.

It could be a problem common to all K-3 III, but it could also be just an issue with their particular K-3 III copy and/or the particular camera/lens/tripod combination. I'm flabbergasted that they state "...this is something we'll be looking at further as we delve further into our analysis for our review." but already published the results.

Have they contacted Ricoh for clarification yet?
Maybe it is just a defective camera or something that can be fixed via firmware (could be related to the SR mechanism, even when it is not active)?

Anyhow, thanks for posting these examples which demonstrate that a lot of the initial impression is due to sharpening levels.

 

[James O'Neill]

. .. plus any sharpening set in the camera does not influence the raw images.

That's not always the case. Some RAW convertors will "honor" the in camera sharpening instruction and use that level as the zero point at the start regards sharpening applied

Are we saying that if I have a Canon set to sharpening +1 and a Pentax set to sharpening +1 software reads that and does different things ?

Or put another way does (e.g.) Adobe's profile for any given camera try to develop a raw with no adjustments to look like the camera would have developed it ?

 

[Mako2011]

. .. plus any sharpening set in the camera does not influence the raw images.

That's not always the case. Some RAW convertors will "honor" the in camera sharpening instruction and use that level as the zero point at the start regards sharpening applied

Are we saying that if I have a Canon set to sharpening +1 and a Pentax set to sharpening +1 software reads that and does different things ?

It most certainly can..rarer though...depending on what software used. More a case of in camera sharpening set to +2 ACR vs ViewNX or DCU or DPP

Or put another way does (e.g.) Adobe's profile for any given camera try to develop a raw with no adjustments to look like the camera would have developed it ?

I think ACR ignores the in-camera sharpening tag regardless of profile

 

[James O'Neill]

. .. plus any sharpening set in the camera does not influence the raw images.

That's not always the case. Some RAW convertors will "honor" the in camera sharpening instruction and use that level as the zero point at the start regards sharpening applied

Are we saying that if I have a Canon set to sharpening +1 and a Pentax set to sharpening +1 software reads that and does different things ?

It most certainly can..rarer though...depending on what software used. More a case of in camera sharpening set to +2 ACR vs ViewNX or DCU or DPP

Or put another way does (e.g.) Adobe's profile for any given camera try to develop a raw with no adjustments to look like the camera would have developed it ?

I think ACR ignores the in-camera sharpening tag regardless of profile

That's always been my understanding, generally makers software tries to be faithful to the camera and 3rd party software tries to do the same thing for all cameras (though exceptions to both generalizations exist). I don't think software vendors re-set the scale their sharpening depending which camera made the source file, although someone somewhere is bound to have done so.

 

[RBIV]

. .. plus any sharpening set in the camera does not influence the raw images.

That's not always the case. Some RAW convertors will "honor" the in camera sharpening instruction and use that level as the zero point at the start regards sharpening applied

Are we saying that if I have a Canon set to sharpening +1 and a Pentax set to sharpening +1 software reads that and does different things ?

It most certainly can..rarer though...depending on what software used. More a case of in camera sharpening set to +2 ACR vs ViewNX or DCU or DPP

Or put another way does (e.g.) Adobe's profile for any given camera try to develop a raw with no adjustments to look like the camera would have developed it ?

I think ACR ignores the in-camera sharpening tag regardless of profile

That's always been my understanding, generally makers software tries to be faithful to the camera and 3rd party software tries to do the same thing for all cameras (though exceptions to both generalizations exist). I don't think software vendors re-set the scale their sharpening depending which camera made the source file, although someone somewhere is bound to have done so.

Not meaning to endorse pro or con here, but I found this summary from Rawtherapee of what RAW processors do and do not do to be pretty good. If I managed to copy the link correctly it should open to an article titled "Eek! That's not my JPEG!"

Editor - RawPedia (rawtherapee.com)

 

[Mako2011]

I think ACR ignores the in-camera sharpening tag regardless of profile

That's always been my understanding, generally makers software tries to be faithful to the camera and 3rd party software tries to do the same thing for all cameras (though exceptions to both generalizations exist). I don't think software vendors re-set the scale their sharpening depending which camera made the source file, although someone somewhere is bound to have done so.

I just realized there has been a change. If you use the "Adobe Camera" specific profiles to open the RAW file in ACR....then some of the in-camera settings like sharpening, contrast, etc. are applied from the start. Depends on camera model though. With the straight Adobe profiles...in-camera settings are ignored.