I have found the K10D offers considerable advantages compared to my D. For one, I shoot a lot of indoor available light photography. The two extra stops that SR give me are very valuable for this type of work, ditto for shooting birds with a handheld 400. The higher resolution has also proved to be a boon, particularly when cropping. I can make a vertical out of a horizontal without sacrificing a lot. I feel my 11 x 17 prints show more detail as wel, although I haven't done a direct comparison. The Tav shooting mode is great. Moving from shade to sun no longer requires fumbling with the ISO. Or moving from one room to another when shooting indoors. Variable ISO is a huge plus. Paul -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Mark Erickson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > All, > > After nearly 2 years, I'm still happy with my *ist-Ds (except for the name, > of course). I'm getting results I like (even without Shake Reduction) and > I'm really comfortable with it as a tool. I shoot only raw and have a > post-processing workflow that I find fast and easy. > > Soooooo, for all of you *ist-D[x] users out there who have upgraded to > K10D's, can you comment on image quality improvements (or lack thereof) > between the two camera generations? Does 10 really beat 6 in the real > world? Your thoughts? > > Thanks, > > Mark > > -- > 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
