From: Miserere
2) The K10D IS NOT RUBBISH at ISO 1600! People say all the time that the K10D is bad in low light, but never explain what this means. If by "low light" you mean "not enough light to achieve correct exposure", then yes, the K10D falls short when you underexpose and then try to recover an underexposed image. However, if by "low light" you mean "light so low that you need to use ISO 1600 for correct exposure", then no, the K10D is not bad. When proper exposure is achieved, the K10D works very well at ISO 1600:
I've seen many shitty ISO 1600 shots from K10D's, and invariably they were shot by someone who didn't know how to shoot the K10D at high ISO, meaning they underexposed their images and then increased the exposure in postprocessing. High ISO shooting is a whole 'nother game, and I suspect it's different for each camera, but there's certainly a learning curve that most photographers don't crawl up before announcing to the World that a particular camera is bad at high ISO.
I think it depends on the example of K10D you have. I did not find ISO 1600 usable in very low light on my own K10D.
ANY camera at ANY ISO will give piss poor results if you try to recover an under-exposed image in post processing.
My experience is you can MAYBE rescue 1/3 - 2/3 stop if you're really, really good at post processing and just don't have any choice ... but I don't rely on it.
I prefer to get exposure right in the camera. And when I did so at ISO 1600, my K10D just gave me unsatisfactory performance.
-- 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.
