On Jan 29, 2010, at 8:34 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
What I have seen from Bong, makes me want to get one of those bodies
just for the high ISO capability.
Damn!
I do not need this right now. Unless I get some income, my finances
are going to implode in a month or two. There's no way I can justify
going out and buying a K-X body, despite all the low light shooting I
do.
I guess it's time to get a bit more proactive on selling some of my
unused gear. If I were to get a K-X I guess I wouldn't really need my
K100 any more. I wonder what I could get for K100 super with about
40,000 shutter clicks on it?
--
Best regards,
Bruce
Friday, January 29, 2010, 6:29:16 PM, you wrote:
DS> Rob Studdert recently posted a shot taken at ISO 12800 with a K-x.
DS> As a D700 shooter, to say I was suitably impressed with the IQ,
would
DS> be a mild understatement.
DS> DS
DS> 2010/1/30 Bruce Dayton <[email protected]>:
I am curious for those who may have experience with the low light
capabilities of the K-x how much better it might be than this.
This was shot with my K20D @ ISO 3200.
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/imgp1928.htm
I seem to be encountering more low light (or rather somewhat poor
light) situations where I need to freeze action, so the shutter
speed needs
to be up a bit. I've been toying with the idea of getting a K-x to
supplement the K20D mostly for the low light/high iso situations.
Would it be much of an improvement? Could I get another stop or two
light at this noise level?
Thanks for any thoughts you have.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above
and follow the directions.
--
Larry Colen [email protected] sent from i4est
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
