I very much appreciate your non test, Bill. I agree that that completely dispels any worries about possible ISO inadequacies.
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 10:39 PM, Bill <anotherdrunken...@gmail.com> wrote: > With that in mind, I invite you to click the link below, for your viewing > pleasure: > > WARNING: 12MP PAGE!!!! > > http://users.accesscomm.ca/wrphoto/k3k5/idonttestcameras.html > > Don't crank at me if your browser hocks a loogie. > > Anyway, it's fairly self explanatory. > I had noise reduction set to off on both cameras. > I downsized the 5% images by 50%, I downsized the K3 file to the same as the > full K5 dimension, and then downsized it again by 50% to get the same > length. > The K3 image is a little taller than the K5 image. > Images shot using a desk lamp for illumination, lens was the DFA 100/2.8 > macro at f/8. > The focus was about a third of the way from the trim ring to the tip. > I thought the K5 was pretty good at high ISO. > The K3 doesn't have to worry about high ISO performance. > > What this set of images doesn't show, because it can't, is how much more of > a pleasure to use the K3 is over the K5. Everything about the K3 is better > in terms of usability. I'm super impressed with this camera so far. > > bill > > -- > 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. -- -bmw -- 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.