Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-24-2008, 02:02 PM   #31
Veteran Member
lol101's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garennes sur Eure France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by jonny1986 Quote
i watched this video and i'm not reassesed.
i recently bought the new da 16-50 2,8, i 'm ready tobuy many more lenses and i have decided t wrk as afull time photographer using pentax gear. i could have chosen other brands, but i consider k10d a great tools for prie feature.
consider the price of the k20d. is more exepnsive than 40d and alpha 700. slighly less than oly e3 and 300 dollars less than nikon d300. Compare specs of the fourh camera and you will see this camera is overpriced.
everybody claims that IQ is superb and high iso are the best of the world...i have seen some iso 3200 sample and they are not so better than those of canon 40d r nikon d300.
I'll by the camera anyway.
Are you talking about the ISO 3200 shots of the hawk?

The one underexposed by at least 2 stop?

If that's the case, I suggest waiting until normally exposed images surface to pass judgment.

Have you also seen the various ISO 100/200 images that are floating around?

I must say that at first I was not impressed but as I watched a bit more closely I got more and more convinced that the resolution is nothing short of stunning and I am more and more confident that IQ is going to be quite a sight to see...

01-24-2008, 02:05 PM   #32
Veteran Member
Tom M's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lincoln Park, NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 782
QuoteOriginally posted by jonny1986 Quote
have you shoot outdoor wireless or with strobe in daylight?
the fact that i shot primarily landscape travel and people doesn't mean that i don't need 5 fps .
for example i shooted during thw palio of siena and other popular event...i shoot this year at motor show in Bologna and bruxelles, sometimes i shoot sports. I can live with 3 fps, actually i consider the atuofocus with k10d good opposite to many people that complaint about it.
The fact is that it's better to have these features than not. In addition i see that all the camera that cost more than 1200 have them.
Consider this..

If you have a camera that has poor ISO performance between 400 and 1600 you need faster flash sync.. You actually MUST have it..

If you have a camera that has great ISO performance between 400 and 1600 you don't always need faster flash sync.

Here's why..

First, you have great ISO performance so you can increase your sensitivity thus allowing you to increase your shutter speed allowing you to STOP the action and capture enough light without a flash. Try it sometime...
01-24-2008, 02:20 PM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: italy
Posts: 411
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
i'm not calling you a troll, someone else is calling you a troll, i'm just calling you misinformed and/or having placed your values in the wrong basket

it seems to me that you expected the K20D to be some sort of super camera that would crush the D300 and D40 into dust, and are found disappointed when that isnt exactly the case.


not at all...i repeat i don't do sports photography and i can't live without the sr...but the feature i'm talking about are not the moon.. i repeat they are normal for a camera in the 1300 dollar range.
pentax is claiming superb high iso quality. I assume this is the real bomb of this camera and so i'll wait to see it.
01-24-2008, 02:21 PM   #34
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: italy
Posts: 411
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
Are you talking about the ISO 3200 shots of the hawk?

The one underexposed by at least 2 stop?

If that's the case, I suggest waiting until normally exposed images surface to pass judgment.

Have you also seen the various ISO 100/200 images that are floating around?

I must say that at first I was not impressed but as I watched a bit more closely I got more and more convinced that the resolution is nothing short of stunning and I am more and more confident that IQ is going to be quite a sight to see...
they are good, but sincerely i don't think the image quality will be so superior than d300 or alpha or olye3.

01-24-2008, 02:23 PM   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: italy
Posts: 411
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Tom M Quote
Consider this..

If you have a camera that has poor ISO performance between 400 and 1600 you need faster flash sync.. You actually MUST have it..

If you have a camera that has great ISO performance between 400 and 1600 you don't always need faster flash sync.

Here's why..

First, you have great ISO performance so you can increase your sensitivity thus allowing you to increase your shutter speed allowing you to STOP the action and capture enough light without a flash. Try it sometime...
the point is that a t 1300 dollar or you have a superb iso performance,and d300 or canon 40d are nt bad at iso 1600 or iso 3200, that thrash away the competitor or the camera is clearly overpriced compared to the others camera in its class.
01-24-2008, 02:31 PM   #36
hll
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: new york
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 297
if iso 1600's noise of k20 is better or very close to d300's 3200's noise, i would choose Pentax without worrying... SR does matter....
i think there is no point to discuss about comparing them before the tests....
halil
pentax forever!!!
01-24-2008, 02:57 PM   #37
Veteran Member
lol101's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garennes sur Eure France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by jonny1986 Quote
they are good, but sincerely i don't think the image quality will be so superior than d300 or alpha or olye3.
Who cares?

I have a K10, not a D300 ;-o

Listen, the K10 was a camera said to be very good and extra cheap for what it had to offer and that was true.

Now (only 14 months later!) ships the K20D that is everything the K10D was + a whole new imaging engine and loads of new features for a "normal" MSRP price.

Haven't we lost some perspective on this? Maybe we've been spoiled quite a bit by what the K10 had to offer compared to its price and are now being a bit too greedy?

I know the other guys have 5fps and we don't and that matters a lot to some people but they don't have the R&D costs to balance from the design and production of their first own sensor and I still think that this baby will outresolve the 40D based on what I saw from a friend's 40D... but we'll see about that in due time (also note that mechanically, if the K20 and the 40D have the same per pixel noise at high ISO, prints from the K20 will be finer grained at a same given size).

(On a side note, I am also willing to bet that the E3 will be noticeably inferior to K20 in the high ISO dept.)
01-24-2008, 03:02 PM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,299
QuoteOriginally posted by jonny1986 Quote
to double the perceived resolution of a 10 million sensor you need a 40 million sensor. From 12 to 14 the difference in detail will be minor. that'the same from 8-10 or 10-12...do u need so many difference from a 10 to a12 million pixel sensor?
You are wrong. You have stated this wrong info many times.

To double the resolution, well, you double it!
I believe you are talking about horizontal resolution + vertical resolution. Yes, if you are double BOTH horizontal AND vertical resolution, then you need to quadruple the pixels.

But here, 14.6MP has a 46% higher resolution than 10MP (40D).

01-24-2008, 03:57 PM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Posts: 377
QuoteOriginally posted by jonny1986 Quote
to double the perceived resolution of a 10 million sensor you need a 40 million sensor. From 12 to 14 the difference in detail will be minor. that'the same from 8-10 or 10-12...do u need so many difference from a 10 to a12 million pixel sensor?
14mp vs 10mp gives you around 1000 pixels more (horizontal) and 500 more (vertical), isn't that enough of a jump? Don't get fooled by the numbers. Add to that increased dynamic range, sensitivity and resolution (ability to capture fine detail) and you have a HUGE difference in detail. Go look for the comparisons.
01-24-2008, 04:03 PM   #40
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
Perhaps it's worth noting, to give a little perspective, that 16.7 MP would be required, to achieve the same proportionate increase in pixel dimensions beyond the K10D, as the K10D is beyond the K100D.
01-24-2008, 04:07 PM   #41
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 195
"Consider this..

If you have a camera that has poor ISO performance between 400 and 1600 you need faster flash sync.. You actually MUST have it..

If you have a camera that has great ISO performance between 400 and 1600 you don't always need faster flash sync.

Here's why..

First, you have great ISO performance so you can increase your sensitivity thus allowing you to increase your shutter speed allowing you to STOP the action and capture enough light without a flash. Try it sometime..."
__________________






Are you seriously trying to suggest that you can replace the virtues of fill flash by simply upping ISO? I don't think so. Fill flash has many uses that you can't always get with just better sensitivity. Having the ability to control shutter to a higher point while using fill flash makes the camera more versatile.

Seems as though this should be a requirement on a camera for outdoor portrait or event shooting.
01-24-2008, 04:07 PM   #42
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
QuoteOriginally posted by ChrisA Quote
Perhaps it's worth noting, to give a little perspective, that 16.7 MP would be required, to achieve the same proportionate increase in pixel dimensions beyond the K10D, as the K10D is beyond the K100D.

Geez...So let's pick a number...Ah would 19.7 mega pixels work for you? Or better yet 21.3?

I have seen a significant improvement in real world print quality between that K10D and K20D and the K10D was incredible for magazine print output. Go out and get the "Dream" issue of West East magazine next week at finer International Magazine stands to see my point.

There is an important difference especially for beauty and landscape format fashion.
01-24-2008, 04:17 PM   #43
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London
Posts: 389
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
Geez...So let's pick a number...Ah would 19.7 mega pixels work for you? Or better yet 21.3?
Did something I said suggest to you that I give a damn about pixel dimensions, in isolation from other camera features?

Threads like this are sport, not serious photographic discussion. Why should you have a monopoly on choosing the reasons you post to a thread, Ben?
01-24-2008, 04:31 PM   #44
Veteran Member
Tom M's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Lincoln Park, NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 782
QuoteOriginally posted by txbonds Quote
"Consider this..

If you have a camera that has poor ISO performance between 400 and 1600 you need faster flash sync.. You actually MUST have it..

If you have a camera that has great ISO performance between 400 and 1600 you don't always need faster flash sync.

Here's why..

First, you have great ISO performance so you can increase your sensitivity thus allowing you to increase your shutter speed allowing you to STOP the action and capture enough light without a flash. Try it sometime..."
__________________






Are you seriously trying to suggest that you can replace the virtues of fill flash by simply upping ISO? I don't think so. Fill flash has many uses that you can't always get with just better sensitivity. Having the ability to control shutter to a higher point while using fill flash makes the camera more versatile.

Seems as though this should be a requirement on a camera for outdoor portrait or event shooting.
Not at all - though, with either the K10D or K20D's ability to HSS at all shutter speeds, I don't see Johhny1986's point.. You're only limited to 1/180 with the on-camera flash.
01-24-2008, 05:00 PM   #45
Forum Member
keithg's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hillcrest Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 92
Why dont we just wait and see. Ben has used the camera and im sure he must be rolling on the floor laughing at some of the suggestions. Who cares what cannon and nikon have got. Are you happy with what you have? I know im more than happy with my K10D. I take a mixture of pics from sporting events to landscapes to portraits and i cant fault it. On top of that, ill probably never use everything thats on it. And i havnt ever used auto on it either. So thats one thing for a start. I use all my old lens's that iv'e had for 30 years so what more could i want. I am hoping that one day ill be in a position to get the new one and im sure ill be over the moon with it. Regards. Keith
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
opportunity, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nature Bald Eagle Missed Opportunity s.randy Post Your Photos! 4 10-19-2010 09:53 AM
If I have the opportunity to buy... mulanrouge Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 09-02-2009 08:07 AM
Eastern Water Dragon - A Missed Opportunity dosdan Post Your Photos! 2 10-17-2008 10:10 PM
MMA opportunity ! OttawaPhotog Post Your Photos! 2 04-03-2008 11:06 AM
Photo opportunity missed... Buddha Jones General Talk 5 01-07-2007 05:22 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:36 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top