Pentax K-5 icm profile same as K-7 !?
FileName: PentaxK5-Generic.icm
Internal Name: PentaxK7-Generic
also white point and gamut are the same 😕
Internal Name: PentaxK7-Generic
also white point and gamut are the same 😕
0
-
Also creation date and time seem to be the same. 0 -
not that only - check this thread - viewtopic.php?f=41&t=9972 - some of profiles are in fact reused from different (in some cases completely different sensors) 0 -
So, is Phase One cutting corners with regard to the K-5? If they are, there will be many disappointed Pentax users. Hopefully, there will be a good explanation from someone on the Phase One staff.
Rob0 -
Hopefully there will be some K-5 users who like to report results. I have only read complaints about bits and bytes, but nothing about results. I downloaded some K-5 PEFs from the web and first impression pleases me. 0 -
For what I've seen until now the results with the K5 files are not bad, I wolul say pretty good, even if the ICC profile is not taylor made for this specific camera, but this does not remove the doubt that a taylor made profile could eventually give better results.
The above unfortunately is not applicable to the provided Olympus E5 profile, which once again has not been created on an E5 but apparently has beeen recycled from an existing one, and is not satisfactory at all, not to me at least.0 -
[quote="Ario" wrote:
(...) but this does not remove the doubt that a taylor made profile could eventually give better results.
That's my point: FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt). You never know indeed. Maybe the current profile did give a better result than the taylor made profile. We don't know but can ask. No need to speculate. Maybe Pentax went to a great length to create a cameras with similar color spaces. What do we know?
I regularly read reports here of Canon users who on purpose use a other Canon model's profile (same for Nikon).
In other words: the fact that a certain camera's profile seems to be a copied for another model is in itself not sufficient for the conspiracy I read in this and the parallel thread on the CO6/Win forum. It does not make a point. Discuss results, strength and weaknesses, compare with other products if you like: be my guest. But until now its all FUD to me.0 -
[quote="Paul_E" wrote:
[quote="Ario" wrote:
(...) but this does not remove the doubt that a taylor made profile could eventually give better results.
That's my point: FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt). You never know indeed. Maybe the current profile did give a better result than the taylor made profile. We don't know but can ask. No need to speculate. Maybe Pentax went to a great length to create a cameras with similar color spaces. What do we know?
I regularly read reports here of Canon users who on purpose use a other Canon model's profile (same for Nikon).
In other words: the fact that a certain camera's profile seems to be a copied for another model is in itself not sufficient for the conspiracy I read in this and the parallel thread on the CO6/Win forum. It does not make a point. Discuss results, strength and weaknesses, compare with other products if you like: be my guest. But until now its all FUD to me.
Paul,
Fair enough. Perhaps the results will be satisfactory, but that still begs the question as to why Phase One does not create custom profiles for all cameras that they support, at least for those with identical sensors. Are there cases of Nikon or Canon cameras for which recycled profiles were used? If not, then it would suggest that smaller manufacturers (and their users) do not get the same treatment as bigger ones. Perhaps that is just a fact of economic life, the price that we "off-brand" users must pay, but it is certainly one worth knowing.
Rob0 -
Rob,
I think you hit the nail just right. Now it only takes a user to open a case, explain the issue in plain English and wait for an answer.0 -
[quote="Paul_E" wrote:
That's my point: FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt). You never know indeed. Maybe the current profile did give a better result than the taylor made profile. We don't know but can ask. No need to speculate. Maybe Pentax went to a great length to create a cameras with similar color spaces. What do we know?
but P1 also does not know that w/o actually profiling the camera and if they do profile and found it similar - they why copy 1:1 Pentax K7 profile instead of providing the profile created - the very logical and simple answer is - they simply did not profile it... now that is not the only case - you see that w/ Kr and Kx, GH1 and GF1... I did not bother to check the rest of profiles...0 -
[quote="Paul_E" wrote:
I downloaded some K-5 PEFs from the web and first impression pleases me.
but as you do not have the real profile for K5 you can't compare... I can use Phase One P65+ profile for GH2 raw files and it renders OK... so does it mean that P1 can provide just one profile for all cameras ? profiling is not about just pleasing - it is about getting the best out the camera0 -
After reading the attached thread, I have come to realize that camera profiling is not quite as straightforward as I had thought. Maybe having a specific profile is less reliable (and important) than It might seem.
http://photo.net/digital-darkroom-forum/00Xt3X
Rob0 -
[quote="robgo2" wrote:
Maybe having a specific profile is less reliable (and important) than It might seem.
it depends on who is profiling and what kind of tools (targets and software) they are using... again the absence (or rather copying of profiles 1:1) simply means there were no attempts to profile... if you believe that K7 w/ Samsung sensor inside using the same lens in the same setup that P1 is using for profiling (same light, same target, same software whatever they use) will give the same profile as K5 w/ Sony sensor then of course do this by all means...but CFAs for example just can't be same in those 2 cases - different pixel sizes, different light transmissions to allow for different high ISO performance... and somehow those profiles are different from other vendors (I mean K7 vs K5 profiles by Adobe or Bibble, etc)... you can ask also why C1 profile for K20D is different from the one for K7... those 2 sensors from Samsung are much closer to each other than to K5's... anyways - it is going for several days and P1's staff silence speaks for itself... do you really believe that they did not read this and did not ask the question inside ?0 -
color response tab :
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Cam ... /Pentax/K5
vs
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Cam ... /Pentax/K7
daylight :
http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/9231/k5k7d50.th.jpg
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
tungsten :
http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/7574/k5k7ciea.th.jpg
Uploaded with ImageShack.us0 -
[quote="deejjjaaaa" wrote:
[quote="robgo2" wrote:
Maybe having a specific profile is less reliable (and important) than It might seem.
it depends on who is profiling and what kind of tools (targets and software) they are using... again the absence (or rather copying of profiles 1:1) simply means there were no attempts to profile... if you believe that K7 w/ Samsung sensor inside using the same lens in the same setup that P1 is using for profiling (same light, same target, same software whatever they use) will give the same profile as K5 w/ Sony sensor then of course do this by all means...but CFAs for example just can't be same in those 2 cases - different pixel sizes, different light transmissions to allow for different high ISO performance... and somehow those profiles are different from other vendors (I mean K7 vs K5 profiles by Adobe or Bibble, etc)... you can ask also why C1 profile for K20D is different from the one for K7... those 2 sensors from Samsung are much closer to each other than to K5's... anyways - it is going for several days and P1's staff silence speaks for itself... do you really believe that they did not read this and did not ask the question inside ?
Why don't you do as Paul suggests and submit a formal support case expressing your concerns? I think that you will get some sort of response. Meanwhile, I would like to see some K-5 samples posted, so that we can judge the results with our own eyes.
Rob0 -
[quote="robgo2" wrote:
Meanwhile, I would like to see some K-5 samples posted
judged vs what ? vs the absent K5 profile ?0 -
[quote="deejjjaaaa" wrote:
[quote="robgo2" wrote:
Meanwhile, I would like to see some K-5 samples posted
judged vs what ? vs the absent K5 profile ?
How about me judging them by how they look to my eye? Ultimately, that's what matters most to me. And you can judge them however you wish.
Rob0 -
[quote="robgo2" wrote:
[quote="deejjjaaaa" wrote:
[quote="robgo2" wrote:
Meanwhile, I would like to see some K-5 samples posted
judged vs what ? vs the absent K5 profile ?
How about me judging them by how they look to my eye?
to your eyes DxO was good (I remember well) until you tried C1... so goes w/ profiles - but the difference is that unlike with C1 vs DxO you can't try P1's real K5 profile as it is absent... 😂0 -
PS: for Nikon D7000 PhaseOne provided a different profile - CLUT table inside is different of course... 0 -
How about me judging them by how they look to my eye?
to your eyes DxO was good (I remember well) until you tried C1... so goes w/ profiles - but the difference is that unlike with C1 vs DxO you can't try P1's real K5 profile as it is absent... :lol
Do you actually think that the major difference in how DxO and C1 render images is in the profiles? It may be one of the least important factors.
Understand that I would like to have a specific profile for whatever camera I use, but it is probably not going to be a deal-breaker for me. What about you? Are you even planning to get a K-5?
Rob0 -
[quote="robgo2" wrote:
but it is probably not going to be a deal-breaker for me. What about you? Are you even planning to get a K-5?
no, I do not plan to get K5 - buy how does it matter ? I have GH2 however and I see where C1 is going w/ this (now that GH1 profile is the same as GF1 and so far for GH2 C1 is suggesting to use GF1 profile too)... Duplo (who uses K5) filed the case asking about that and he reportedly (see another thread) did not get a straight answer at all... if there is a valid reason for what is happening - why there is no direct answer ? P1 either should say that there is no difference between cameras in their color response _or_ we do not have time now to profile your cameras, please use the most suitable profile out of supplied it will be OK in 9x% cases... simple...0 -
Capture One 6.1.1, released today, should provide improved image quality for several cameras, including Pentax K-5 and K-r. 0
Post is closed for comments.
Comments
21 comments