2009/7/23 Joseph Tainter <jtain...@mindspring.com>: > Pentax claimed that the K7 would have lower noise. This is clearly not so. > The difference is especially apparent at ISO 3200 and 6400 (both of which I > would like to use).
When I look at those images, it strikes me that the K20D pics looks slightly underexposed. I downloaded the ISO 1600 images and compared the histograms, and that only reinforced the impression. However I don't have any photo editing software on the computer I'm at today, so I can't lift the K20D image to see how comparable brightness affects the noise comparison. I suspect they will become quite similar, though. > I'm glad I haven't yet bought a K-7. I may still buy one, but not for better > noise. Or I may wait to see what testing shows when the K8 comes out. Some rumor mill had it that 8 was avoided because of Asian connotations about bad luck, and that K-9 was unacceptable to cat lovers. Or something. :-) Seriously, though, I personally believe the K-7 to be a sort of one-off; a test-bed for technology intended for the 645 due next year. Jostein -- http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ http://alunfoto.blogspot.com -- 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.
