Tue Jan 19 10:59:30 CST 2010 P N Stenquist wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote: > > > > > Paul, I agree that it is possible to do good pictures with K-7 at > > 1600. > > - I posted one just recently > > http://pdml.net/pipermail/pdml_pdml.net/2010-January/205671.html > > > > My point is rather that with K-x one can push further; and it is also > > more consistent. > > Interesting. But you say below that you had to push the exposure in > three shots. I find the metering in the K7 to be extremely accurate, > and I rarely have to push a shot in conversion. Consistency is one of > that camera's main virtues. > Paul I didn't get a feel yet whether the accuracy of exponometry of K-x is much different from that of K-7. With very limited base and very subjectively, I can say that about the speed of AF. K-7 is indeed much more consistent (I compare to the previous body I have: *istDS), - and that's what I like about it. However, with the K-7, at least with the indoor shots, and especially with the flash, - I have the compensation set to +0.3 - +0.7, most of the time, and for long-distance shots with the flash (AF 540 FGZ) - up to +1.0. I also had a either +0.3 or +0.7 compensation set for K-x for those shots. I remember somebody else here (Boris?) saying that they have to set the compensation for indoor shots on their K-7 to +0.5 - +1. Igor -- 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.
