[Rondec]

The interesting thing with iso 80 on the K5 was that it did provide more dynamic range than the iso 100 setting. Apparently base iso on the K5 was measure at something in the upper 70s by DXO Mark, allowing for a bit lower iso to be allowed. On the other hand, the kx had a base iso of 200 and allowed 100 to be shot but didn't give any more dynamic range.

I guess what I don't understand is what happens with cameras where the base iso is 100 and they allow you to go down to 50. The whole point of extended range is (I think) to allow for longer exposures in strong light, but I guess I don't understand why it doesn't produce way over exposed images.

[joergens.mi]

if the native sensor ist capable of handling a lower Iso it would be fine. If the extended ISO is only a divide by x of the base Iso in the camera, with the risc of overexposing in the highlights it's useless, there is a ND Filter better. It there is a good technical solution for that it would be fine if ist is a simple marketing gag it should be omitted.

I would like a technical base ISO of 50 /25 and a extension of the Quality for 1 EV at least in the high ISO's


Pentax should use there patent with the fixed mirror, which can be switched between reflective and partly reflective up to transparent and build an variabe ND-Filter into the body.

[robgski]

Having ISO 64 for a Sunny day is useful for me

I agree.

[WillWeaverRVA]

I wouldn't mind having access to ISO 80 or ISO 64, but not behind an extended ISO option. Just make it available from the get-go or don't have it. I never liked having to enable an option in the menu to access features that shouldn't be hidden in a menu to begin with.