Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
2009/12/25 Margus Männik : > > I don't like small-sized bodies. Nikon D3x was quite perfect for me. OK, if > it can't be K20D body, then let it be at least the digital version of Z-1p. > K-7 is a bit too short from left. > Megapixels... as long as there's enough pixels to fill A4 (8"x12") at > 300dpi, I'm happy. It's APS-C body and there's no reason to increase the > sensor density without end. If I really do need more, I still have my film > bodies and possibility to use Imacon scanner. No digital camera can beat 'em > :) If even that's not enough, I have also some 6x6 cameras. > But that's just my point of view. > > BR, Margus > I'm exactly the opposite, the small size of the K-7 was the biggest draw for me (although the Oly E-30 ended up being my choice due to offering a better everyday zoom in the 14-54 II at a significantly lower package cost). I don't like today's oversized bodies, my preferred size is that of a mid-sized AF film body(think Nikon F801s or Minolta Maxxum 7) down to a mid-sized MF film body (Nikon FM2n) -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
From what I've seen so far with the K-x I have on test, I fully agree with DPReview's comments. BTW, I've already taken around 800 shots with an old set of Eneloops on the K-x I have and is still running fine (no recharge needed so far). Dario -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On 12/25/09, drd1...@gmail.com wrote: > I like the loud shutter. Then again, I have a Harley. ;-) Mark! -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Fri, Dec 25, 2009 at 9:38 AM, wrote: > I like the loud shutter. Then again, I have a Harley. ;-) I like quiet shutters. Then again, I ride a trackbike. (no freewheel clatter, perfect chainline, no howling brakes...) ;-) cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Steve (probably) Desjardins wrote: I like the loud shutter. Then again, I have a Harley. ;-) 2010 advance mark! -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "Margus Männik" Subject: Re: dpreview reviews the k-x Dario Bonazza wrote: Tim Bray wrote: On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T And a lot better! For that reason, some time ago I wrote I'd love a K-7 with the K-x sensor. Dario ... and K20D body, please! I've come to prefer the K7 body, and while I like what I am seeing in the K-x, I have no wish to go back to a 10mp camera. If they could get a 15mp chip from Sony with K-x performance, that would be nice. I don't like small-sized bodies. Nikon D3x was quite perfect for me. OK, if it can't be K20D body, then let it be at least the digital version of Z-1p. K-7 is a bit too short from left. Megapixels... as long as there's enough pixels to fill A4 (8"x12") at 300dpi, I'm happy. It's APS-C body and there's no reason to increase the sensor density without end. If I really do need more, I still have my film bodies and possibility to use Imacon scanner. No digital camera can beat 'em :) If even that's not enough, I have also some 6x6 cameras. But that's just my point of view. BR, Margus -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
I like the loud shutter. Then again, I have a Harley. ;-) --Original Message-- From: Dario Bonazza Sender: pdml-boun...@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List ReplyTo: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: dpreview reviews the k-x Sent: Dec 25, 2009 3:40 AM Margus Männik wrote: > Dario Bonazza wrote: >> Tim Bray wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: >>>> ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': >>>> >>>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ >>> >>> And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T >> >> And a lot better! For that reason, some time ago I wrote I'd love a K-7 >> with the K-x sensor. >> >> Dario > ... and K20D body, please! Yess! I like K20D size and user interface better than that of the K-7. So I keep shooting the K20D. The only improvement I really miss is the low-noise shutter of the K-7. Dario -- 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. Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Margus Männik wrote: Dario Bonazza wrote: Tim Bray wrote: On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T And a lot better! For that reason, some time ago I wrote I'd love a K-7 with the K-x sensor. Dario ... and K20D body, please! Yess! I like K20D size and user interface better than that of the K-7. So I keep shooting the K20D. The only improvement I really miss is the low-noise shutter of the K-7. Dario -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Overall you can take a multitude of short exposure lower ISO shots, avoiding the noise and software-stack them. Noise is a factor, of course, but I'm sort of concluding that for night/dark sky images that high-ISO performance is not the issue. For concerts or street scenes where one has one shot/exposure, yes it's a factor. The max you can go with a tripod, on a mount that doesn't track the sky, for wide-field exposures of the heavens, is about 20 seconds regardless of ISO, aperture, focal length, etc. Tom On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Joseph McAllister wrote: > On Dec 24, 2009, at 16:54 , David Savage wrote: > >> But if you wanna' freeze the motion of stars high ISO performance is >> critical. > > Aw, jess bring a huge field tripod with clock drive as for a Meade or > Celestron 8" or larger SC mirror 'scope, a 12 volt car battery, then clamp > that Pentax to it with some gaffer tape and let 'er rip! Take another shot > with it unplugged for the foreground, then merge. > > :-) > > Merry Holidays and a fortune filled New Year to you all, stars or not! > > >> 2009/12/25 Thomas Cakalic : >>> >>> I like by pictures taken in the dark to look that way, so I'd never >>> use the high ISO settings. :-) >>> >>> 2009/12/24 Margus Männik : Tim Bray wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: > >> >> ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': >> >> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ >> > > And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T > Yes, and they're absolutely correct. I tested the camera for 3 weeks and as a result, K-7 doesn't impress me any more. It's dark here... >>> > > Joseph McAllister > pentax...@mac.com > > "Gaudeamus igitur, juvenes dum sumus..." > http://tinyurl.com/ndmfhb > > > > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Dec 24, 2009, at 10:43 PM, Thomas Cakalic wrote: > Size consideration is for wimps. :-) > I was being polite:-) > Tom > > On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 6:31 PM, paul stenquist > wrote: >> >> On Dec 24, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: >> >>> On 25/12/2009, paul stenquist wrote: >>> I agree. That's not a big difference. But the big plus for me with the K7 has been the exposure accuracy. No comparison between that camera and the 20 in regards to nailing the exposure. The Kx doesn't have the same metering system as the K20. It's considerably less sophisticated in that regard. That would be the deal breaker for me. Plus, I think it's even smaller. The K7 is borderline in that regard for me, even with the battery grip installed. I need mass for handholding. As far as low light is concerned, I've found the K7 to be quite adequate at 3200 with accurate exposure, and that's all I need. My commercial work is never low light. I do shoot lowlight snaps of Grace and pics for grins, but those aren't critical. >>> >>> It would be interesting to see some real life comparisons showing how >>> the metering responds between the Kx and K7, I've not a fan of the >>> K10/20 though I still have a 20. The K20 is a behemoth compared to the >>> *ist D or Kx even without the grip. I bought the Kx so that I could >>> retire my *ist D as my general duty (i'll take it because it's not too >>> big) available light cam and so far it's doing the job well, it so >>> nice having a screen that's bigger than a postage stamp, LV, video and >>> much faster save times. >>> >> If size is a consideration, the Kx is obviously a good choice. I have no >> idea how accurate the kx metering might be, but I know the K7 excels in that >> regard. In any case, it's my main tool for now. And I'll shoot the heck out >> of it:-). I'm already at 10,000 exposures, thanks to some marathon magazine >> shoots. It's a good hammer! >> Paul >>> Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) >>> Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours >>> Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Speaking of which... I got to hold an play with a K7 this week (nice camera, but I'd forgotten how noisy the older in camera motor AF was). Jeeebus it feels like a feather weight kids toy in my hand after about 18 months of D700 usage. Which probably explains why my arms are looking so ripped :-) DS 2009/12/25 Thomas Cakalic : > Size consideration is for wimps. :-) > > Tom > > On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 6:31 PM, paul stenquist > wrote: >> >> On Dec 24, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: >> >>> On 25/12/2009, paul stenquist wrote: >>> I agree. That's not a big difference. But the big plus for me with the K7 has been the exposure accuracy. No comparison between that camera and the 20 in regards to nailing the exposure. The Kx doesn't have the same metering system as the K20. It's considerably less sophisticated in that regard. That would be the deal breaker for me. Plus, I think it's even smaller. The K7 is borderline in that regard for me, even with the battery grip installed. I need mass for handholding. As far as low light is concerned, I've found the K7 to be quite adequate at 3200 with accurate exposure, and that's all I need. My commercial work is never low light. I do shoot lowlight snaps of Grace and pics for grins, but those aren't critical. >>> >>> It would be interesting to see some real life comparisons showing how >>> the metering responds between the Kx and K7, I've not a fan of the >>> K10/20 though I still have a 20. The K20 is a behemoth compared to the >>> *ist D or Kx even without the grip. I bought the Kx so that I could >>> retire my *ist D as my general duty (i'll take it because it's not too >>> big) available light cam and so far it's doing the job well, it so >>> nice having a screen that's bigger than a postage stamp, LV, video and >>> much faster save times. >>> >> If size is a consideration, the Kx is obviously a good choice. I have no >> idea how accurate the kx metering might be, but I know the K7 excels in that >> regard. In any case, it's my main tool for now. And I'll shoot the heck out >> of it:-). I'm already at 10,000 exposures, thanks to some marathon magazine >> shoots. It's a good hammer! >> Paul -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Dec 24, 2009, at 16:54 , David Savage wrote: But if you wanna' freeze the motion of stars high ISO performance is critical. Aw, jess bring a huge field tripod with clock drive as for a Meade or Celestron 8" or larger SC mirror 'scope, a 12 volt car battery, then clamp that Pentax to it with some gaffer tape and let 'er rip! Take another shot with it unplugged for the foreground, then merge. :-) Merry Holidays and a fortune filled New Year to you all, stars or not! 2009/12/25 Thomas Cakalic : I like by pictures taken in the dark to look that way, so I'd never use the high ISO settings. :-) 2009/12/24 Margus Männik : Tim Bray wrote: On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T Yes, and they're absolutely correct. I tested the camera for 3 weeks and as a result, K-7 doesn't impress me any more. It's dark here... Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com "Gaudeamus igitur, juvenes dum sumus..." http://tinyurl.com/ndmfhb -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Size consideration is for wimps. :-) Tom On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 6:31 PM, paul stenquist wrote: > > On Dec 24, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: > >> On 25/12/2009, paul stenquist wrote: >> >>> I agree. That's not a big difference. But the big plus for me with the K7 >>> has been the exposure accuracy. No comparison between that camera and the >>> 20 in regards to nailing the exposure. The Kx doesn't have the same >>> metering system as the K20. It's considerably less sophisticated in that >>> regard. That would be the deal breaker for me. Plus, I think it's even >>> smaller. The K7 is borderline in that regard for me, even with the battery >>> grip installed. I need mass for handholding. As far as low light is >>> concerned, I've found the K7 to be quite adequate at 3200 with accurate >>> exposure, and that's all I need. My commercial work is never low light. I >>> do shoot lowlight snaps of Grace and pics for grins, but those aren't >>> critical. >> >> It would be interesting to see some real life comparisons showing how >> the metering responds between the Kx and K7, I've not a fan of the >> K10/20 though I still have a 20. The K20 is a behemoth compared to the >> *ist D or Kx even without the grip. I bought the Kx so that I could >> retire my *ist D as my general duty (i'll take it because it's not too >> big) available light cam and so far it's doing the job well, it so >> nice having a screen that's bigger than a postage stamp, LV, video and >> much faster save times. >> > If size is a consideration, the Kx is obviously a good choice. I have no idea > how accurate the kx metering might be, but I know the K7 excels in that > regard. In any case, it's my main tool for now. And I'll shoot the heck out > of it:-). I'm already at 10,000 exposures, thanks to some marathon magazine > shoots. It's a good hammer! > Paul >> Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) >> Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours >> Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio >> >> -- >> 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. > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Dec 24, 2009, at 7:16 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 25/12/2009, paul stenquist wrote: > >> I agree. That's not a big difference. But the big plus for me with the K7 >> has been the exposure accuracy. No comparison between that camera and the 20 >> in regards to nailing the exposure. The Kx doesn't have the same metering >> system as the K20. It's considerably less sophisticated in that regard. That >> would be the deal breaker for me. Plus, I think it's even smaller. The K7 is >> borderline in that regard for me, even with the battery grip installed. I >> need mass for handholding. As far as low light is concerned, I've found the >> K7 to be quite adequate at 3200 with accurate exposure, and that's all I >> need. My commercial work is never low light. I do shoot lowlight snaps of >> Grace and pics for grins, but those aren't critical. > > It would be interesting to see some real life comparisons showing how > the metering responds between the Kx and K7, I've not a fan of the > K10/20 though I still have a 20. The K20 is a behemoth compared to the > *ist D or Kx even without the grip. I bought the Kx so that I could > retire my *ist D as my general duty (i'll take it because it's not too > big) available light cam and so far it's doing the job well, it so > nice having a screen that's bigger than a postage stamp, LV, video and > much faster save times. > If size is a consideration, the Kx is obviously a good choice. I have no idea how accurate the kx metering might be, but I know the K7 excels in that regard. In any case, it's my main tool for now. And I'll shoot the heck out of it:-). I'm already at 10,000 exposures, thanks to some marathon magazine shoots. It's a good hammer! Paul > Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) > Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours > Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Dec 24, 2009, at 7:00 PM, William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - From: "paul stenquist" > Subject: Re: dpreview reviews the k-x > > > > >I do shoot lowlight snaps of Grace and pics for grins, but those aren't > critical. > > She might not think so down the road. > Don't you want her pictures of the good times with Grampa to be as sharp and > clear as her memories> > Really Paul, think of the children. > Gosh, gee. Sorry. Seriously, I'm okay at up to 3200 with the k7, and that's fine for room light most of the time. Underexposure is the main culprit when it comes to noise, and I can count on the K7 to nail the exposures. Paul > William Robb > > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
But if you wanna' freeze the motion of stars high ISO performance is critical. 2009/12/25 Thomas Cakalic : > I like by pictures taken in the dark to look that way, so I'd never > use the high ISO settings. :-) > > 2009/12/24 Margus Männik : >> Tim Bray wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: >>> ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ >>> >>> And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T >>> >> >> Yes, and they're absolutely correct. I tested the camera for 3 weeks and as >> a result, K-7 doesn't impress me any more. It's dark here... >> >> BR, Margus >> >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On 25/12/2009, paul stenquist wrote: > I agree. That's not a big difference. But the big plus for me with the K7 has > been the exposure accuracy. No comparison between that camera and the 20 in > regards to nailing the exposure. The Kx doesn't have the same metering system > as the K20. It's considerably less sophisticated in that regard. That would > be the deal breaker for me. Plus, I think it's even smaller. The K7 is > borderline in that regard for me, even with the battery grip installed. I > need mass for handholding. As far as low light is concerned, I've found the > K7 to be quite adequate at 3200 with accurate exposure, and that's all I > need. My commercial work is never low light. I do shoot lowlight snaps of > Grace and pics for grins, but those aren't critical. It would be interesting to see some real life comparisons showing how the metering responds between the Kx and K7, I've not a fan of the K10/20 though I still have a 20. The K20 is a behemoth compared to the *ist D or Kx even without the grip. I bought the Kx so that I could retire my *ist D as my general duty (i'll take it because it's not too big) available light cam and so far it's doing the job well, it so nice having a screen that's bigger than a postage stamp, LV, video and much faster save times. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
- Original Message - From: "paul stenquist" Subject: Re: dpreview reviews the k-x >I do shoot lowlight snaps of Grace and pics for grins, but those aren't critical. She might not think so down the road. Don't you want her pictures of the good times with Grampa to be as sharp and clear as her memories> Really Paul, think of the children. William Robb -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Dec 24, 2009, at 5:55 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 25/12/2009, William Robb wrote: > >> I've come to prefer the K7 body, and while I like what I am seeing in the >> K-x, I have no wish to go back to a 10mp camera. If they could get a 15mp >> chip from Sony with K-x performance, that would be nice. > > Honestly there's very little in it resolution wise, 14.6MP for the > K20/7 or 12.4MP for the Kx, just set ACR to convert +1, the Kx files > come out at 5120 x 3401 pixels. > I agree. That's not a big difference. But the big plus for me with the K7 has been the exposure accuracy. No comparison between that camera and the 20 in regards to nailing the exposure. The Kx doesn't have the same metering system as the K20. It's considerably less sophisticated in that regard. That would be the deal breaker for me. Plus, I think it's even smaller. The K7 is borderline in that regard for me, even with the battery grip installed. I need mass for handholding. As far as low light is concerned, I've found the K7 to be quite adequate at 3200 with accurate exposure, and that's all I need. My commercial work is never low light. I do shoot lowlight snaps of Grace and pics for grins, but those aren't critical. Paul > -- > Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) > Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours > Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On 25/12/2009, William Robb wrote: > I've come to prefer the K7 body, and while I like what I am seeing in the > K-x, I have no wish to go back to a 10mp camera. If they could get a 15mp > chip from Sony with K-x performance, that would be nice. Honestly there's very little in it resolution wise, 14.6MP for the K20/7 or 12.4MP for the Kx, just set ACR to convert +1, the Kx files come out at 5120 x 3401 pixels. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
- Original Message - From: "Margus Männik" Subject: Re: dpreview reviews the k-x Dario Bonazza wrote: Tim Bray wrote: On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T And a lot better! For that reason, some time ago I wrote I'd love a K-7 with the K-x sensor. Dario ... and K20D body, please! I've come to prefer the K7 body, and while I like what I am seeing in the K-x, I have no wish to go back to a 10mp camera. If they could get a 15mp chip from Sony with K-x performance, that would be nice. William Robb -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Dario Bonazza wrote: Tim Bray wrote: On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T And a lot better! For that reason, some time ago I wrote I'd love a K-7 with the K-x sensor. Dario ... and K20D body, please! Margus -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
I like by pictures taken in the dark to look that way, so I'd never use the high ISO settings. :-) 2009/12/24 Margus Männik : > Tim Bray wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: >> >>> >>> ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': >>> >>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ >>> >> >> And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T >> > > Yes, and they're absolutely correct. I tested the camera for 3 weeks and as > a result, K-7 doesn't impress me any more. It's dark here... > > BR, Margus > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Tim Bray wrote: On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T Yes, and they're absolutely correct. I tested the camera for 3 weeks and as a result, K-7 doesn't impress me any more. It's dark here... BR, Margus -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On 25/12/2009, paul stenquist wrote: > I haven't had time to read the entire review. Does dpreview quantify the > difference in noise? I know my k7 is better than my k20. Glad you made sense of my previous post, I couldn't after the fact ;-) The review states more than once that they think the Kx offers better low light/high ISO performance than the K7 and it seems to be corroborated with numerous anecdotal reports. Ceheck the following user test under the headding "Dynamic range (revisited)", it looks like the Kx's DR is similar to the Nikon D700 at low ISO's some feat. http://falklumo.blogspot.com/2009/12/lumolabs-sensors-of-nikon-d700-d5000.html Cheers, -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Dec 24, 2009, at 3:21 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: > On 24/12/2009, paul stenquist wrote: > >> It should have better low light performance. It's a lower- res sensor. That >> comes with the territory. > > The sensor difference is far to small to account for the significance > of the difference in noise performance. > I haven't had time to read the entire review. Does dpreview quantify the difference in noise? I know my k7 is better than my k20. Paul > -- > Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) > Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours > Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio > > -- > 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. -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On 24/12/2009, paul stenquist wrote: > It should have better low light performance. It's a lower- res sensor. That > comes with the territory. The sensor difference is far to small to account for the significance of the difference in noise performance. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Tim Bray wrote: On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T And a lot better! For that reason, some time ago I wrote I'd love a K-7 with the K-x sensor. Dario -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Dec 23, 2009, at 10:57 PM, Tim Bray wrote: > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: >> ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': >> >> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ > > And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T > It should have better low light performance. It's a lower- res sensor. That comes with the territory. Paul > 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. -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
Yes, good review in a sense that I think it is the very first such review that consistently praises Pentax for job well done without any hesitation. As for low light handling - I am starting to think that software piece of the puzzle has made serious steps up and forward recently. Been shooting yesterday at ISO 3200 with my K-7 and I am finding the results very pleasing to my eye. I don't mind Kx being better than K-7, especially given that it publishes higher maximal ISO rating which probably means that there is some substance behind the numbers :-), but K-7 is not bad at all just as well. Let's hope that Pentax will keep up doing the good work they've been doing this year. -- Boris -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 19:57:40 -0800 Tim Bray wrote: > On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: > > ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': > > > > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ > > And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T they actually go one step further: "where the K-x really starts to shine is in low light. Its high ISO JPEGs are possibly the best of all current DSLRs with an APS-C size sensor" -- 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.
Re: dpreview reviews the k-x....
On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Subash wrote: > ...and gives it a 'highly recommended': > > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxkx/ And says the low-light handling is better than the K-7's. Hmf. -T -- 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.
