Originally posted by Kunzite Peter Zack, could you point to some of his ISO102400 work?
I fail to see how only at noon on a sunny day could I use shutter speeds faster than 1 second@ISO100.
Since I don't have access to his photo library, I can't of course. But I read an interview some time ago that he was so happy with the high ISO abilities of the new Canon, that it had changed his shooting. Does he regularly shoot over 12,800. I bet not. Any smart shooter would still stay as low as possible whenever possible.
But I had the chance to shoot a wedding in a church I shot in last summer. it's dark and the only light is stained glass windows. Very dim indoor lights high in a vaulted ceiling. With the K20D, I had only one choice. Flash for everything. It meant timing each shot very carefully for a number of reasons. Worked but not the way I'd like to shoot.
Last weekend, I could do the same thing at 6400 and 12,800 without the flash and get what I wanted. A lot less disruption to the service and a lot more shots were keepers.
Your second statement has me totally baffeled.
I fail to see how only at noon on a sunny day could I use shutter speeds faster than 1 second@ISO100.
1 second in a sunny situation? what are you trying to say?
What I've tried to say several times is this. It's dawn, you are at the lake and see a deer walking along the edge of the misty water. At 6AM the light is beautiful but at ISO 1600 (that's about as high as the K20D or K-7D can do well), the shutter speed is 1/30th. Too slow to freeze the shot and with a long lens, far to slow for even SR to keep it steady. In fact even with a tripod, you are probably going to miss the shot or loose a lot of detail.
So if you could get a clean shot that is properly exposed at 6400, same aperture and 1/125th, then you might have a fighting chance. That's what I'm saying.
Lets take that another way. You are at the soccer pitch and the action is moving fast. You want f8 or f11 and a minimum of 1/2000. Unless it is really bright, this may not be possible. Crank up the ISO and you've got the shutter speed and depth to nail the shots.
You seem to think I'm dissing Pentax. That I've taken it upon myself to trash the brand. Far, far from it. I want the brand to be better in every way. To offer me and many others more than 2 cameras that have more than we've ever had before. In fact I'm in the middle of buying a K-7 for certain needs. I'll probably always have a Pentax for some things. At least I hope so.
Look at the competition. Sony has 6 cameras, Nikon and Canon have at least this many or more. Even Oly has around 5 or more. We have 2 and we're always playing catch up. I really do not understand this tendancy to defend a brand that once was a leader and ever since the world went digital has always been at least a year behind.
Yes I've gotten some Nikon gear. I have no choice. If I want to pay the rent, I need a camera that can pay the bills and Pentax isn't there. To be fair, they don't pretend to be either. I'm not their customer.
But if they would at least listen to the shooters like me who need gear like this to stay on top of the market, then we'd "come home" in a heartbeat.
I've shot Pentax for 30 years and been happy for the most part. I wanted the K-7 to be a whole lot more than it was in terms of the sensor. I can't wait any longer. We've lost some top notch shooters in the last 2 years and that sucks. I see zero effort from Pentax to even try to bring anyone back.
At ISO 400 and below, it's probably the best sensor available. But I don't make any money with flower shots.
So don't take me as trashing the line. Far from it. What I want is BETTER. MUCH BETTER cameras and lenses (optically they are fine, SDM is another issue).