RichA wrote:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos40d/page26.asp



With this quote:

"There isn't a single camera on the market which gains so much by
shooting RAW and using Adobe Camera RAW to convert its images than the
K10D. The difference is night and day and indeed the K10D in this
comparison trumps the EOS 40D for detail which hints perhaps that Pentax
are using a sensor with a lighter anti-alias filter (although if you
look at some of the crops you can see some demosaicing artifacts)."

This is true to a degree - if you study the 40D and K10D results, the
40D is at least a decent smooth raw conversion, the K10D is ragged as
hell and actually has less detail than the 40D, just higher contrast and
some aggressive sharpening.

The Sony A100 beats the K10D for raw extract detail. The only reason the
statement above is true is a subtle - the camera 'gains so much' because
its JPEGs are awful - very flat and soft. The A100 can not be said to
gain quite as much because the JPEGs are not such a contrast to raw
conversions.

I doubt the abilities present at dPreview if the analysis of the
examples shown is that the Pentax beats the Canon. Even the very first
pair of images show that the Canon has finer, smoother, more accurately
drawn detail. If I got raw conversions like those shown for the Pentax I
would upset - any further sharpening or interpolating etc would be
impossible with such crude detail.

David