*ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?

[Godfrey DiGiorgi]

On Feb 10, 2007, at 11:12 AM, Jens Bladt wrote:

> I also discovered that I had the contrast set to +1. This may  
> partly have
> caused the burned out sky/the missing clouds.

That's a big help, but for such a scene I actually prefer the K10D's  
rendering over the D's ... As WR suggested, it's a subject failure. ;-)

> I will never get used to having to dial in MINUS CORRECTION for  
> back lit
> scenery or bright sky (quite the opposite of what I have been doing  
> for the
> past 30 years. Even dispite matrix metering). So I'll be doing more  
> test
> tomorrow, preferably in RAW format (now that I don't have to reset  
> it all
> the time :-)
> Hopefully I don't have to have it repaired ( I use it every day).

I think you'll find the camera is metering properly. The fact that it  
meters differently is neither here nor there. Matrix metering would  
lens more importance to the foreground/shadow areas ... it can't help  
blowing out the sky unless it underexposes those other areas since  
it's just one exposure for the whole scene. If you had captured in  
RAW format, either exposure would have been fine.

> You are right on the image quality issue, of cource.
> However, I don't see any big difference in image quality.

At the sample resolution you presented, I don't know what differences  
you were expecting to see.

Godfrey