Thursday, September 17, 2009

Pentax/Hoya Do It Again!

For What? They post example photos of the K-x, which shows to have firmware version 1.0 in the prime EXIF tag, which implies that the photos were produced from production K-x unit(s), as it seems to be.

But then a closer look deeper inside the EXIF, it is not difficult to reveal that the firmware used is actually only up to version 0.2 and possibly it is just early beta firmware, with beta hardware! (Hint: Use PhotoMe)

That was exactly what they did last time with the early official K-7 samples, which were not looking good of course!

As for those officially edited K-x samples this time, the erratic exposure compensation values entered do scare me, but it is not surprised at all as Pentax has been infamous for exposure/metering accuracy. The IQ is not impressive and I don't like the colour response and particular the skin tone of the child, for the first sample. The reproduced skin texture looks rather plasticky too. But still I can see noise at the darker background behind, despite that the photo was taken at the lowest ISO 200 speed, which is supposed to be the least noisy. Well, I just think the IQ of the K-m is just better, or maybe obviously better. Anyway, I do believe Pentax/Hoya do need to set better default values of the settings in their cameras, too (which they usually haven't done that).

I know it is not fair to judge on the samples produced by beta unit(s) with beta firmware. But then *when* Pentax/Hoya try to tell the world that those are production samples but actually these are not.. Then? Why should they do that? Why the firmware versions inside the EXIF are mis-matched? (But for final production models that purchased in the streets never have been.) And, will there be any adverse consequences and impact?? Well, they deserved to bear all those even if there will be, as a result!

Well, whilst I am disappointed for the poor exposure accuracy/consistency, strange colour response as well as the unfavourable image quality of those samples, I am actually more upset for the inhonesty shown in the case, especially this is the second time for such bad thing to happen, but not for the first time (when some Pentaxians did discover that already before - but then they still dare to do it again!).

Related Posts

Creative Commons License
RiceHigh's Pentax Blog by RiceHigh is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.