On Jan 3, 2010, at 7:18 PM, Tim Bray wrote: > On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 4:11 PM, P. J. Alling <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> My opinion, for what it's worth, is that none of the tests really mean much, >> and they seem to be more subjective than all the charts and graphs would >> indicate.. The best way to see if the low light performance is to shoot >> some photos and decide it you like hot they look. > > That's true, but the consensus is that none of the K-10/20/7 represent > a major leap forward in terms of low-light mojo. I went from *ist-D > to K20 and that was significant, but I bet the anti-shake was part of > the deal. Haven't tried a K-X, but it may be the case that it's a > pleasant surprise. > > BTW, I did some test shooting the other night at a not-very-well-lit > party with a Canon S90 and was flabbergasted. Mind you, I was judging > the pix by their presentation on the dinky LCD on the back, but > jeepers, it seemed remarkable for a pocket camera. -T > I'd be surprised if those S90 pics passed the test of real world scrutiny. In any case, as I've mentioned before, the major benefits of the K7 are superb exposure accuracy, write speed and build quality. Low light performance is more than adequate for everything I do, including performance pics in a rather dark bar. Paul
> -- > 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. -- 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.
