----- Original Message -----
From: "paul stenquist"
Subject: Re: K-7 replacement?
What big differences are you seeing?
My thoughts are that the K7 rendering is a slight bit warmer, which is
probably more software than hardware, but that's about it.
I don't feel really comfortable taking the K7 over ISO 640, which was
also where I started seeing unacceptable noise off the K20.
K7 exposure is far more accurate than the K20's, the dynamic range seems
about a stop better, and noise is improved as well. The deer pics I showed
the other day were ISO 800. My pic in the PDML annual is at ISO 3200. I
got decent results at the pool tournament shooting 6400. K7 noise level
isn't as good as Kx, but it's somewhat better than K20.
Paul
PS: When you first got your K7, you noted all these improvements and
praised the k7 effusively. If I had time I'd look it up in the archive. So
I suspect you're just being argumentative now. Of course you wouldn't do
that:-)).
You'd better do that search....
Anyway, the exposure accuracy has certainly improved, which makes getting
results easier, but doesn't really change the end result. I had a very quick
look through my own archive and didn't find any effusive praise about the K7
imaging improvements, though I did find I had priased the K7 from an
improved performance POV.
Saying the K7 noise levels are "somewhat better" than the K20 is not really
a rousing endorsement.
William Robb
--
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.
