[Mr. A.S.]

I'll show you two pictures of Manhattan, NY with tripod.
First I did in Jan' 24, 2012 at 5PM Pentax K20D camera,
and the second I did yesterday in Aug' 23, 2012 at 5PM Pentax K-30 camera.

Lens Carl Zeiss 18mm/3.5

First - 1/20; f 6.7; ISO 200.
"P" exposure.

Second -1/400; f 7.1; ISO 400.
"TAv" exposure.

PICTURES 700 x 1050





CROP 700 x 1050

---

Last edited by Mr. A.S.; 08-23-2012 at 02:40 AM.

[georgecape]

Mr AS, should that not be 1/40 and not 1/400th?

The K-30 crop does not look good?
George

[audiobomber]

Mr AS, should that not be 1/40 and not 1/400th?

The dates would explain the difference. In August, 5:00 PM is full daylight in New York. In January, 5:00 PM is evening light. Mr. A.S., did you by any chance use Highlight and Shadow correction? I suspect from the ISO's that you had highlight correction enabled on the K20D and both enabled on the K-30. I'm not a fan of shadow correction, it messes with the colours. I use highlight correction sometimes to prevent blown highlights.

Was the intent to show how much brighter the K-30 exposed? The K20D photo seems a little underxposed, but probably looked rather like the scene? That's pretty much the only conclusion I can reach here. The processing in the photos is quite different. The K20D photo does look like it has more resolution, but the amount of contrast, saturation, sharpness and the corrections applied could easily explain the difference.

[Mr. A.S.]

Mr AS, should that not be 1/40 and not 1/400th?
The K-30 crop does not look good?
George

1/400 it's true
and ISO 400 too

I don't say good or no good
I want say:
please see photo
maybe they NOT different
ISO 200 1/20 - K20D
ISO 400 1/400 - K-30

Anatol

---

Last edited by Mr. A.S.; 08-23-2012 at 07:04 AM.

[Mr. A.S.]

The dates would explain the difference. In August, 5:00 PM is full daylight in New York. In January, 5:00 PM is evening light.

YOU right. Tomorrow I take my K20D with K-30 and take one more test at 5PM.

Anatol.

[Vasyl]

one click touch in Picasa.

[jeff knight]

I own both, but the K20D autofocuses terribly and has way less dynamic range than the K-30. Go into your High/low key adjustment, and contrast adjustment on K-30 and play with it. Shoot in raw too. Wow, it will blow your mind! The raw files are way more malleable than the 20D. The K20D is a classic camera, though, and has what many call excellent "bite". A hard thing to describe if you've never owned one.
Your shots don't illustrate the differences as well as they could but, I still enjoyed your post.

[audiobomber]

I own both, but the K20D autofocuses terribly

What do you mean, exactly? The conclusion of the K20D review at DPR lists AF as a Pro:
■ Accurate, reliable auto-focus

IME, it does as well as any other Pentax in good light. In dim lighting, it sometimes has trouble locking focus.

[jeff knight]

What do you mean, exactly? The conclusion of the K20D review at DPR lists AF as a Pro:
■ Accurate, reliable auto-focus

IME, it does as well as any other Pentax in good light. In dim lighting, it sometimes has trouble locking focus.

How clear do I have to be? Who cares about the old outdated DPR review you reference? Things have changed greatly in a very short time as technology has improved swiftly in this very competitive era. I absolutely LOVE the K20D. I think it is the greatest digital camera ever. I own two of them, but it autofocuses terribly compared to the K-30. That is my opinion. You are welcome to disagree, but old, outdated reviews don't prove anything at all. Those who believe in the veracity of the printed word, especially on the internet, need a serious reality-check.

[audiobomber]

it autofocuses terribly compared to the K-30. That is my opinion. You are welcome to disagree

Would you care to explain as I requested, or would you rather throw another temper tantrum? I haven't tried a K-30, but I own a K-x and I owned a K-5 for a couple of weeks. I notice no difference in AF vs the K20D except in very dim light.

[Mr. A.S.]

K20D + Carl Zeiss 28mm/2
1/80, f4.5, ISO 200


K-30 + Carl Zeiss 28mm/2
1/80, f4.5, ISO 200


K20D + Carl Zeiss 50mm/2
1/80, f4.5, ISO 200


K-30 + Carl Zeiss 50mm/2
1/60, f4.5, ISO 200

[Mr. A.S.]

CROP
K20D + Carl Zeiss 50mm/2
1/80, f4.5, ISO 200


CROP
K-30 + Carl Zeiss 50mm/2
1/60, f4.5, ISO 200

[Mr. A.S.]

CROP
K20D + Carl Zeiss 50mm/2
1/250, f7.1, ISO 200


CROP
K-30 + Carl Zeiss 50mm/2
1/640, f7.1, ISO 320

[jeff knight]

Would you care to explain as I asked, or would you rather throw another temper tantrum? I haven't tried a K-30, but I owned a K-5 for a couple of weeks, and I noticed no difference in AF except in very dim light.

You are imagining a temper tantrum. To me, the autofocus is quicker and much more assured and responsive than the K20D. There is speedy autofocus using live view. Try that using the sadly antiquated live view on the K20D. Please read the K30 review on this very forum. Here's a quote:

"Autofocus performance was extremely impressive to us. While it fares little better than the K-5 in extreme lighting conditions, in everyday use the new SAFOX IXi+ system is a knockout. The focusing action has a real confidence and decisiveness in use that inspires a similar feeling in the user, and the real-world results can't be argued with."

[georgecape]

Mr A.S.
Again, to my eyes the cropped building and cars of the K20 is sharper and more detailed than the K-30 (and the sunsets)?
Or is the difference simply in the contrast?.
Does it seem the same to you?
George