From: Bruce Dayton
One big difference for me was that with the K20 and earlier I really had
to have good conditions (lighting, processing, etc) to make a high
ISO shot reasonable. For instance, when shooting weddings I could
take a couple of shots with the 50/1.4 lens close to wide open and no
flash, then process to remove ugly color cast and grain, etc. The
resulting image would possibly even need to be turned to B&W.
Basically, this meant that the shot was not the norm, but the
exception.
I don't shoot a lot of high ISO.
My experience with the K10 and K20 is/was that the K20 is better at ISO
1600 than the K10 was at ISO 800. At ISO 800 the K10 gave really sub-par
results; at ISO 1600 the K20 gives adequate results - not great, but
adequate.
Maybe I got a better sample of the K20 than I did of the K10, but that's
the way I experienced it.
With the K-x, it is totally changed. Straight out of the camera, ISO
6400 is looking quite good - no extra work. So now I have shot
entire receptions with no flash and no heavy post processing. Even
more so, simple snaps of the family in situations where I would have
used a flash in the past, I no longer need to. Gathered around the
dinner table talking in the evening or playing a game or one of the
kids receiving an award at school, etc. The ability to shoot
consistently at high ISO (1600+) is a real game changer.
ISO 6400, 85mm Soft Focus lens, no post processing, shot right after
dinner:
http://www.daytonphoto.com/PAW/imgp1200-1.htm
Needs just a bit of post processing.
Good photo, and I can see what you mean about the low noise capability
at high ISO, but that one highlight at the inside corner of the eye just
reaches out and smacks you right in the face.
--
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.
