Originally posted by WMBP Lightroom isn't any slower than anything else I've used, and I've used nearly everything. There's simply no getting around the fact that a 15 MP file involves a LOT of data. Getting all that data read from the disk and manipulating it takes a lot of memory, a fast hard disk, processing power. And you don't get better prints in return.
I sense with some hope that megapixel creep has slowed down a bit, but I'm not sure that there's any way to stop it for good. Perhaps in a few years, we'll all be using 30 MP cameras whether we need 'em or not.
Will
Can't stop the marketing/bragging effect. I do hope Pentax stays at 15 MP as well.
Originally posted by quarc I used to shoot 6x7 for weddings, which you probably could compare with 25 MP. I would love to have 25 MP as long as nothing suffers in quality.
A valid position as well
Originally posted by photogerald On the "other" forum, GordonBGood had some interesting findings regarding the 7D recently:
"Revisiting the Canon 7D review as to raw noise comparisons only leads to one "aha" that can't be explained as above: Why is the noise performance of the Canon 7D so much better than that of the Canon 50D right across the ISO range? In order to get this kind of improvement, the 18 MP 7D would have to have almost twice as many maximum electrons in the electron well as does the 15 MP 50D, and while Canon has reworked the layout of the new sensor to improve this, they haven't been that effective. At this point I refer you to the results of my work above, that the 7D has unequal alternating green photosites and the news from a few months ago that many raw converters were being updated to support cameras that had such unequal greens, including ACR!
[...]
This also explains the slight softening in appearance of the ACR produced noise gray patches of the 7D as compared to the 50D; when processed identically they have an almost identical appearance. The softening is due to the effective averaging between adjacent green photosites that takes place in demosiacing in order to avoid maze patterns due to the unequal adjacent rows, which reduces noise by about 30% just as having about double the maximum effective electron well capacity would.
I hope some of you find this interesting. I would post this in the Canon Forum but can't be bothered defending it against Canon fanboys. In fact, this doesn't really detract from the Canon 7D's use in any practical sense anyway, it just means that the superior raw noise results from the DPR Canon 7D review aren't real. In fact, I was looking for signs of chroma noise reduction in the K-x and discovered this."
In case you are interested in following this in more detail, here is the link to the post:
Re: 7D raw noise filtering unlikely reply (Conclusion)...: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Thanks for the info.
Originally posted by Ratmagiclady People clamoring for this dubiously-useful novelty (Yeah, there'll be cries about that from those who really like em, but if you really like em, how about a purpose-made accessory you could plug in? ) ...in a weathersealed camera they expect to be smaller, lighter, and under the usual price curve when Pentaxians who'll shell out actually tend to be among the last purists... I dunno, there. I'd rather get my eye closer to the finder I'm carrying an SLR for and make the LCD as good for the inevitable chimping as possible.
Yes, I have also yet to see a tilt/swivel LCD, which properly replaces an angle-view finder
Originally posted by opiedog Thanks for the link. Richard Smals is a fine chap, always worth a read
Originally posted by RolloR I mean "like a K-7." I like to think that APS-C cameras should be sized like Canon rebels, with the bigger ones like Pentax K-7 and Nikon D90. I mean I like holding the 7D/5DII/D300. But carrying them around is a different thing.
I have to agree, I think 8fps is asking too much. Maybe 7fps "with battery grip" would be ok
a higher frame rate camera, would be very welcome indeed
Originally posted by smc I would be surprised if Pentax went away from the size of the K7. When I received mine, I was a little disappointed as it was way too small, the buttons had moved, but eventually I got used to it. I sold it recently thinking I could make do with the K20d only to find, ironically, that the K20d now feels too big. So I have a K7 coming and the K20d will go. My point is that you might find yourself growing into the camera, especially if you add a grip. The K7 is still huge as compared to older 35mm film bodies...
good point
Originally posted by Class A As Arpe mentioned, even on a tripod you may not be able to afford the delay caused by a timer (e.g., when birding).
I think removing the SR button was a bad idea for the above reasons but also regarding alerting potential customers to the difference between in-body and in-lens image stabilisation.
agree
Originally posted by CWyatt I'm someone who uses the ISO on the front finger wheel continuously.
Occasionally shoot on TAv, but 90% of the time it's aperture priority, with aperture on the rear wheel and ISO on the front.
Exactly the same here. I returned home from a trip to Malaysia, where I had given my K10 its first big workout, where I really felt this feature was what I needed. Upon returning, I read on a forum, how it was possible to assign front wheel with Iso.
One of the reasons, I'll always go for two wheel cameras.
As I recall, it was the new features that the K10 brought to the market, which made Canikon add auto-Iso to their models.
Seems *Isteve also discusses how he will miss the Pentax possibility, which he will not have on his D700 or D90 :
"•Automatic auto-ISO shutter speed setting based on program line and lens FL"
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&message=35213895&changemode=1 Originally posted by nulla Robin... I recently got a K-x as a second camera and this is one of the things I miss the most, so I tend to disagree there.
On the topic of SR... this is a post from another thread.
"People may figured this themselves, but I noticed a lot of people complaining on the forums that they have to dive into the menu to change SR settings. I thought I'd post a quicker alternative that I use:
Hit 'Info' button, and move your active selection to SR. Any time, you want to toggle SR, you just have to hit 'Info', rear-dial, and you can toggle SR on/off quickly. Two clicks just short of a dedicated SR button.
Disclaimer: Ofcourse, this wouldn't work if you change other settings using info button as well."
Thanks. If they do the same on the K7 follower, or I end up getting the K7, good to know.
Originally posted by rparmar On a typical day out shooting, just carrying the camera around with me, I might do macro, street, landscape or cityscape shots, looking for details, large form structures, colours or textures. That's a lot of different shooting priorities, some of which call for narrow DOF, others deep, others requiring me to freeze action (a flower waving in the breeze) others not. For some of these I am happy with ISO 400 or 800 and might need higher settings to get shots sharp enough. If I'm converting to B&W I don't care about noise. But for other shots I need ISO 100 or 200 for clarity of detail.
So I change regularly to get the best ISO for the job at hand. I have tried auto but having the camera make the decision for me is not my way.
I also tend to shoot events. Dance is extremely challenging because I am restricted to low light and there is subject movement. Music gigs have highly contrasty stage lighting and rapidly changing illumination. Here too changing ISO is key to responding to the situation.
That's my scene anyway. YMMV.
Well stated