I can't guess how the 100D might perform in low light. I only know that I can get at least as high a shutter speed with the K10D as I can with the *istD with acceptable image quality. Paul On Nov 26, 2006, at 6:54 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 27/11/06, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> My results are preliminary, but after about 400 exposures with the >> K10D, I'm quite sure that I can get better results in low light with >> this camera than I can with the *istD. It's a combination of SR and >> very good high ISO performance. I think you'll feel the same way once >> you try it. > > Often for me it's not a case of absolute IQ when shooting high ISO but > more the need to attain the highest shutter speeds that I can. If the > shooting situation provides me with the scope to reduce ISO and stop > down a little I'll do it and if SR buys me another couple of stops I > can definitely see it being an advantage. But ultimately I'd guess > that the K100D would still be a superior low light camera to the K10D > even factoring in the suggested advantage of the K10Ds 22bit ADC. > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
