On 9/28/2011 21:08, Larry Colen wrote:
I would be very interested to see comparisons between pictures from
the Q, and pictures from some of Pentax's early APS DSLRs.
I am in the midst of putting my photo collection in a bit more order as
Galia's photos are growing in numbers and we share the LR catalog and
the HDDs of course. So I recently looked at some photos I made with
*istD. I kind of wonder why on earth I spent so much money for the
cameras that came after it... Of course there is justification and
improvement, but sometimes having a look with your own eyes has a
sobering effect, in a manner of speaking.
I expect that in 3-5 years, the Q-format will be capable of photos on
par with at least the K-7, if not the K-x or even the K-5. By the
time that they have a sensor that'll appeal to the fussier
photographers, they'll have a lens selection that will appeal to
those photographers as well. They'll also have a low end kit,
selling for under $500.
With all due respect, Larry, I expect you to be proven wrong, let's say
in 3-5 years.
By the way TOP by Mike Johnston had an interesting article recently
where he showed (albeit pixel peeping 100% thumbnails) that D90 is just
a tad worse than D700 and that V1 or J1 or whatever is just a tad worse
than D90, but boy, does V1 or J1 or whatever really suck compared to D700...
By the way, judging from early samples, new 24MP APS-C sensor from Sony
takes quite a step back in high ISO noise department, and all...
Presently, K-5 appears like the best choice for all-round kind of
photography, without super high resolution specialization such as in
fashion, landscapes or building-size enlargement...
Your mileage may and probably will vary...
Boris
P.S This year tenset (actually dozenset) will boast photos chosen by
Galia and processed by Galia. Although I will still supervise.
--
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.
