I've had the gut feeling that the image quality of my K20 isn't up to par. As a matter of fact, in low light situations, it my not even be as good as my K100.
I did an informal test, shooting with both cameras at a dance Friday night. The K20 was shot at 3200, 1600 and 800. The performance shots were taken at 1600 with a flash The K100 was shot at 800, pushing it a stop or two in post processing. The only processing done to the shots was throwing away the totally bad ones and "auto tone" in lightroom, with a couple of the "pre greycard" shots white balanced, most of the shots are in camera custom white balance. They were all shot raw and processed to 1000x800 in lightroom. These are the two sets. Comments on the photography are welcome, but would more reflect the lack of editing, comments on the apparent relative performance of the cameras is solicited. I used the same lenses (31, 50, 77 and maybe 40) on both cameras, mostly at f/1.8 or thereabouts. I mostly used the 50 and the 77. If you're curious, check the EXIF for details. k20 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621624892293/ K100 shots http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621749191672/ -- The first step is learning to take great photos, the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http://www.red4est.com/lrc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
