On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 10:54 AM, P N Stenquist <pnstenqu...@comcast.net> wrote: > > On Nov 6, 2010, at 9:15 AM, Adam Maas wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 2:20 PM, Larry Colen <l...@red4est.com> wrote: >>> What I find amazing is how the Kx seems to outperform the Kr. And at >>> high ISO even outperforms the K5 in dynamic range. >>> >>> If you lose a stop of dynamic range and a stop of SNR for every stop of >>> ISO, why not just shoot at the base ISO and underexpose? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est >>> >> >> One reason I don't put all that much stock in DxO's tests is the >> variance in performance of cameras with known-identical imaging >> chains. >> > Although the Kx and Kr results are very close. I figured it was just normal > margin of error for their testing, and it would seem to be a reasonable > margin of error. > Paul
Could certainly be margin of error. The DxO tests are a decent guide to performance but they seem to be taken as direct gospel by altogether too many people and some of the tests are directly opposite to my actual experience (the Nikon D90 was rated by DxO as the top APS-C camera long after its performance in terms of IQ was exceeded by others, including the K-x) -Adam -- 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.
