K10d issues; how much do you believe?

Takman · 11-02-2007, 11:45 AM

We all know that C*non and N*kon seem to take the cake on other forums. Regarding the K10d, I have come across feeling that I made the wrong choice. Here is why: Edge softness, noise at higher ISO, slow focus, etc. - how much of this do you believe to be factual? The softness and sharpness issues concern me, noise at higher ISO I care less about right now, and slow focus - pixel sharpness, etc also concern me.

regken · 11-02-2007, 12:14 PM

The edge softness is a jpeg issue. The difference in RAW files between any of them is so slight you would need to do some serious pixel peeping to see it and even then I doubt you could pick out which is which. Noise is again a jpeg issue unless you get up in the 800 range. At that level Canon starts adding NR to even their RAW files. If you want cleaner high ISO like Canon use Noise Nija and you will have the same including some lost detail just like Canon.

Slow AF is another issue. In low light they both are a LITTLE better than Pentax. If you are shooting sports it will be a challenge. Stop worrying about small differences you will never see or get out your wallet and pay a lot more money for faster AF that you will probably never need. Buy yourself a great old prime lens that will cost you 1/4 the price of a new lens from one of the other two and take some photos with IQ that will equal or better their much more expensive lenses.

Regards,

Ken

**Lowell Goudge** · 11-02-2007, 12:33 PM

the only issue that should concern you is if it does not give the images you want.

The sharpness issue is only a JPEG issue, if you shoot raw it does not matter, and this is subjective any way, and focusing speed has never been an issue for me with any of my Pentaxes all the way back to PZ-1.

the bottom line is if you are satisfied with the images you get (as opposed to pixel peeping at things that don't matter) then you chose correctly. If you are not satisfied with the images, then you might have some concern. (note I say you might have some concern, not you chose wrong, because the satisfaction in images may be technique or a lot of things that are between your ears not in front of your eyes)

and · 11-02-2007, 12:45 PM

I find the AF to be good eanough, where canikon really beats it is with continous/tracking AF used in sports. because this not only relies on the af speed but also algorithms for following an object in motion.

softness is not an issue, the default jpegs are a bit soft, but you can change the jpeg setting and also use raw, the vs 40d test showed the k10d had more detail in raw.

matix · 11-02-2007, 01:49 PM

My only issues with the K10D are low light focusing which is not up to par, and continuous focusing. Both of course have their work arounds, but need to be resolved.

Issues are subjective of course, 'believe nothing of what you hear, half of what you see, and 100% of what you experience yourself'.. old quote of my fathers.

Phil

WMBP · 11-02-2007, 02:19 PM

Takman,

Good answers here already from several of this forums most sensible users.

I think I've said this to you already, but I'll say it again, in case I have not: I too wonder from time to time if I made the right decision in 2006 to go with Pentax instead of Nikon or Canon. (In my case it would almost certainly have been Nikon.) But I will tell you also that I have these doubts for one reason only, and that is that I'm making money now as a photographer and hope by next year to be spending the majority of my time wearing my photographer's hat rather than my software developer's hat. In other words, this is a business concern, not really a photographic concern. If I were still doing photography only when I want to and only for the sheer love of it, I'd be completely happy with the Pentax K10D and the rest of my system.

I deal with the K10D's minor idiosyncrasies by taking control of the camera as much as I can. I shoot only raw, so I don't care at all about soft jpegs. I wouldn't notice if the next firmware release REMOVED jpeg capability from the camera completely. Although I shoot a lot of sports, I have found that AF.S works better for me than AF.C and I stick with what works. I shoot almost exclusively in M or TAv modes.

As for focus, I confess that I am not a tough guy: I like auto-focus and use it 95% of the time. I switch to manual only when I have time to really focus carefully and to chimp the results of a test photo or two pretty carefully. I wish that the camera focused more quickly especially in low light, but gosh, in low light, my own eyes have trouble focusing, so I reckon that's normal. If I could change just ONE thing on the K10D, I think I'd wish for a split-screen manual-focus indicator like I used to have on my old film slrs. I've looked into the Katz-Eye option and decided I'm not interested in bothering.

Phil writes:

Originally posted by matix

believe nothing of what you hear, half of what you see, and 100% of what you experience yourself'.. old quote of my fathers.

Good quote, although I'd adjust the percentages somewhat. I'm actually willing to believe about 10% of what I hear, and on the other hand, I'm pretty sure that about the same 10% of what I have actually and personally experienced, I have misunderstood. ;-)

Will

Matt Miller · 11-02-2007, 03:16 PM

I use the katz eye in my K10D and love it. The only time I use auto focus is when I'm taking portraits, which is only about 5% of what I shoot. The rest of the time I use manual focus. I rarely have an out of focus shot, and when I do, it's when the autofocus misses. It's never when I'm focusing manually.

I switched from Canon (30D & 5D) to Pentax and don't regret it for a second. The only thing I miss about the 5D is the low noise at 800 & up. I don't miss the plastiky look from Canon & outrageously expensive gear.

lol101 · 11-02-2007, 04:18 PM

Originally posted by Takman

We all know that C*non and N*kon seem to take the cake on other forums. Regarding the K10d, I have come across feeling that I made the wrong choice. Here is why: Edge softness, noise at higher ISO, slow focus, etc. - how much of this do you believe to be factual? The softness and sharpness issues concern me, noise at higher ISO I care less about right now, and slow focus - pixel sharpness, etc also concern me.

I am not really sure what people find so soft in the K10 jpegs....

Here is one I took last week, straight jpeg without any PP (and a 100% crop):

ISO 800 (hence the unbearable noise), DA 50-200 @200mm f5.6 (should be soft also if you believe the online tests):

Well, I guess I don't know what sharp means...

Noise is well under control up to ISO 800-1000 but Canon is better from ISO 800 up (I also shoot a 30D regularly).

The AF is fast and accurate, even if the 30D gets it a bit faster in low light, (when he gets it) but that's really not what some people make it to be IMO.

It's only in the AF tracking abilities that the Pentax takes a severe hit by the Canon so if you're a sports or birds photographer, it is not the best tool available.

For the rest, it's nothing short of an amazing value.

Takman · 11-02-2007, 04:53 PM

lol 101 - the photos above are taken in ISO 800? WHOA! You call that noise? Nice photos!

You guys are doing a good job in convincing me. I think I developed a mental block after taking in information overload from a bunch of sites and forums.

WMBP - so if you start doing this full time or even on the side...will you stick Pentax?

I took the following photo using a Vivitar 200mm F3.5 K-mount lens @ ISO 1600 - handheld - no flash. There was a bit of noise but the photo was still quite useable. I pulled the file into Photoshop Elements and used Noise Ninja. IMGP0052 on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I am impressed I guess. I think I would hardly use high ISO like this so its not an issue for me.

PaulAndAPentax · 11-02-2007, 04:57 PM

I am very happy with mine. As primarily a bird photographer, I agree that the tracking and AF is a bit slow. I'd also like a few more fps. Other than these couple of issues, my k10d is a wonderful camera. I pixel peeped a lot before I bought, and I am thus far satisfied with my choice. btw....lol101....those shots are exceptional.....well done!

Takman · 11-02-2007, 05:25 PM

Paul - I am the person that contacted you via Flickr. I appreciate your reply to my PM on Flickr BTW. Your photos are amazing.

WMBP · 11-02-2007, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by Matt Miller

I use the katz eye in my K10D and love it. The only time I use auto focus is when I'm taking portraits, which is only about 5% of what I shoot. The rest of the time I use manual focus. I rarely have an out of focus shot, and when I do, it's when the autofocus misses. It's never when I'm focusing manually.

I switched from Canon (30D & 5D) to Pentax and don't regret it for a second. The only thing I miss about the 5D is the low noise at 800 & up. I don't miss the plastiky look from Canon & outrageously expensive gear.

Interesting response, Matt.

Interesting that you say you only use auto-focus when shooting portraits. That's about the only time when I use manual focus. One of us may be doing something wrong.

Kidding aside, I will auto-focus a portrait because I have time, time not just to get the focus right in the viewfinder but to chimp the pic afterwards and make sure I nailed the focus, and time to redo if I didn't. If you are good with auto-focus (as you obviously are), why not use it with portraits, too? That is, why do you think using auto-focus for portraits is worth changing your method for?

Also interesting to hear that you came to the K10D from the 5D and think it an improvement. I doubt that's a widely held view, but it's likely not many 5D owners have ever held a K10D in their hands. I'm not a Canon fan myself, for reasons that I can't really explain. I think they have more to do with Canon being #1 and me being a contrarian than anything else.

Will

WMBP · 11-02-2007, 05:50 PM

Originally posted by Takman

lol 101 - the photos above are taken in ISO 800? WHOA! You call that noise? Nice photos!

There's more to noise than the ISO setting. That is, it's not a simple matter of, ISO 1600 noisy, ISO 100 not noisy.

I'm not sure I can put into words easily what the other factors are, but I know I've taken photos with the K10D at 1600 that I was quite pleased with, even without noise reduction (which I generally don't bother with), while I've taken photos at 800 or even 400 where the noise was a serious problem. VPN in particular seems to require a block of the same color in the background. The quality of the light seems to be a factor, too.

Quote:

WMBP - so if you start doing this full time or even on the side...will you stick Pentax?

Well, I'm not going anywhere just now, if only because I've invested more money in my Pentax system this year than I expected to when I got started (I don't want to talk about it!). As for what lies ahead in 2008, it's hard to say. I'm generally rather happy with the K10D in particular. But I'm not a brand loyalist, that is, using Pentax stuff doesn't make me feel special or superior. Using a Mac OS computer used to make me feel that way, but doesn't any more. Perhaps I've grown up (about time, as I'm in my 50s!) and hardware mostly bores me now. I think about it only because I have to.

Quote:

I think I would hardly use high ISO like this so its not an issue for me.

I on the other hand have no choice but to shoot at very high ISO quite a bit -- but the results usually don't bother me. I wasn't that bothered by grain when I was shooting film and I'm not that bothered by noise, at least not always. Kind of depends on the shot.

Will

m8o · 11-02-2007, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by Takman

...Edge softness, noise at higher ISO, slow focus, etc. - how much of this do you believe to be factual?

??? ... not getting something... do you have the camera or not? Yes, you state "I have come across feeling that I made the wrong choice". But it begs the question, if you have the camera and have used it (properly), don't you know the answer to all those questions already?

I'm not troll'n ; I think the answer's "yes, the camera's not w/o fault and there's some validity to all points"; I've had serious AF woes in Tanzania (but not 'slow'! the lens has to do with speed), I keep ISO below 1000 or 1250 (getting the right exposure is critical to nice high ISO shots) , and I shoot RAW always now, or if JPEG on 'vivid'. So with all those way of using it, that's not making me wish I didn't buy it, for too many oustanding qualities and ease of usability it has to mention at a price that can't be beat . Just say'n I'm not get'n why you have to ask if you have and use the camera?

If you wanna know why I adore mine, just look through my Tanzania pix for excerpts (there's so much more) of my pix there. I do echo I did have trouble achieving focus some times on static non-moving animals completely out in the open @ the most inopportune times; where another time I was able to nail focus of a bird on a coudy drizzly day w/the bird under the canopy of the tree, behind leaves... exactly, WTF?:ugh: . I will make a post on it one day to see if the experts here can't help me; could be me and my not knowing a particular technique.

p.s. I may want a 2nd body so contact me if you want to sell yours!

PaulAndAPentax · 11-02-2007, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by Takman

Paul - I am the person that contacted you via Flickr. I appreciate your reply to my PM on Flickr BTW. Your photos are amazing.

Oh!

Small digital world! Hopefully you will find that feeling of peace whether you choose to stay with Pentax or change systems.

11-02-2007, 12:14 PM	#2
regken Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bangor, Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,377	Shoot in RAW The edge softness is a jpeg issue. The difference in RAW files between any of them is so slight you would need to do some serious pixel peeping to see it and even then I doubt you could pick out which is which. Noise is again a jpeg issue unless you get up in the 800 range. At that level Canon starts adding NR to even their RAW files. If you want cleaner high ISO like Canon use Noise Nija and you will have the same including some lost detail just like Canon. Slow AF is another issue. In low light they both are a LITTLE better than Pentax. If you are shooting sports it will be a challenge. Stop worrying about small differences you will never see or get out your wallet and pay a lot more money for faster AF that you will probably never need. Buy yourself a great old prime lens that will cost you 1/4 the price of a new lens from one of the other two and take some photos with IQ that will equal or better their much more expensive lenses. Regards, Ken

11-02-2007, 04:18 PM	#8
lol101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Garennes sur Eure France Photos: Gallery Posts: 899	Originally posted by Takman We all know that Cnon and Nkon seem to take the cake on other forums. Regarding the K10d, I have come across feeling that I made the wrong choice. Here is why: Edge softness, noise at higher ISO, slow focus, etc. - how much of this do you believe to be factual? The softness and sharpness issues concern me, noise at higher ISO I care less about right now, and slow focus - pixel sharpness, etc also concern me. I am not really sure what people find so soft in the K10 jpegs.... Here is one I took last week, straight jpeg without any PP (and a 100% crop): ISO 800 (hence the unbearable noise), DA 50-200 @200mm f5.6 (should be soft also if you believe the online tests): Well, I guess I don't know what sharp means... Noise is well under control up to ISO 800-1000 but Canon is better from ISO 800 up (I also shoot a 30D regularly). The AF is fast and accurate, even if the 30D gets it a bit faster in low light, (when he gets it) but that's really not what some people make it to be IMO. It's only in the AF tracking abilities that the Pentax takes a severe hit by the Canon so if you're a sports or birds photographer, it is not the best tool available. For the rest, it's nothing short of an amazing value. Last edited by lol101; 01-24-2008 at 04:00 AM.

11-02-2007, 04:57 PM	#10
PaulAndAPentax Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Jacksonville, Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 390	I am very happy with mine. As primarily a bird photographer, I agree that the tracking and AF is a bit slow. I'd also like a few more fps. Other than these couple of issues, my k10d is a wonderful camera. I pixel peeped a lot before I bought, and I am thus far satisfied with my choice. btw....lol101....those shots are exceptional.....well done! Last edited by PaulAndAPentax; 11-02-2007 at 05:17 PM.

11-02-2007, 06:15 PM	#14
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	Originally posted by Takman ...Edge softness, noise at higher ISO, slow focus, etc. - how much of this do you believe to be factual? ??? ... not getting something... do you have the camera or not? Yes, you state "I have come across feeling that I made the wrong choice". But it begs the question, if you have the camera and have used it (properly), don't you know the answer to all those questions already? I'm not troll'n ; I think the answer's "yes, the camera's not w/o fault and there's some validity to all points"; I've had serious AF woes in Tanzania (but not 'slow'! the lens has to do with speed), I keep ISO below 1000 or 1250 (getting the right exposure is critical to nice high ISO shots) , and I shoot RAW always now, or if JPEG on 'vivid'. So with all those way of using it, that's not making me wish I didn't buy it, for too many oustanding qualities and ease of usability it has to mention at a price that can't be beat . Just say'n I'm not get'n why you have to ask if you have and use the camera? If you wanna know why I adore mine, just look through my Tanzania pix for excerpts (there's so much more) of my pix there. I do echo I did have trouble achieving focus some times on static non-moving animals completely out in the open @ the most inopportune times; where another time I was able to nail focus of a bird on a coudy drizzly day w/the bird under the canopy of the tree, behind leaves... exactly, WTF?:ugh: . I will make a post on it one day to see if the experts here can't help me; could be me and my not knowing a particular technique. p.s. I may want a 2nd body so contact me if you want to sell yours! Last edited by m8o; 11-02-2007 at 06:30 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Focusing Issues with the K10d	quattro	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	05-03-2010 01:47 PM
K10D focus issues	Harald	Pentax DSLR Discussion	26	02-09-2010 09:30 PM
K10D + HSM issues	tigereye	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	05-09-2009 04:36 PM
K10D going in for BF issues	pentkon52	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7	03-03-2008 09:50 PM
K10D AF issues.................	hudsong	Pentax DSLR Discussion	20	02-22-2008 12:50 PM

11-02-2007, 11:45 AM	#1
Takman Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 34	K10d issues; how much do you believe? We all know that Cnon and Nkon seem to take the cake on other forums. Regarding the K10d, I have come across feeling that I made the wrong choice. Here is why: Edge softness, noise at higher ISO, slow focus, etc. - how much of this do you believe to be factual? The softness and sharpness issues concern me, noise at higher ISO I care less about right now, and slow focus - pixel sharpness, etc also concern me.

11-02-2007, 12:33 PM	#3
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	the only issue that should concern you is if it does not give the images you want. The sharpness issue is only a JPEG issue, if you shoot raw it does not matter, and this is subjective any way, and focusing speed has never been an issue for me with any of my Pentaxes all the way back to PZ-1. the bottom line is if you are satisfied with the images you get (as opposed to pixel peeping at things that don't matter) then you chose correctly. If you are not satisfied with the images, then you might have some concern. (note I say you might have some concern, not you chose wrong, because the satisfaction in images may be technique or a lot of things that are between your ears not in front of your eyes)

11-02-2007, 12:45 PM	#4
and Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,476	I find the AF to be good eanough, where canikon really beats it is with continous/tracking AF used in sports. because this not only relies on the af speed but also algorithms for following an object in motion. softness is not an issue, the default jpegs are a bit soft, but you can change the jpeg setting and also use raw, the vs 40d test showed the k10d had more detail in raw.

11-02-2007, 01:49 PM	#5
matix Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Brisbane, Australia Posts: 239	My only issues with the K10D are low light focusing which is not up to par, and continuous focusing. Both of course have their work arounds, but need to be resolved. Issues are subjective of course, 'believe nothing of what you hear, half of what you see, and 100% of what you experience yourself'.. old quote of my fathers. Phil

11-02-2007, 02:19 PM	#6
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Takman, Good answers here already from several of this forums most sensible users. I think I've said this to you already, but I'll say it again, in case I have not: I too wonder from time to time if I made the right decision in 2006 to go with Pentax instead of Nikon or Canon. (In my case it would almost certainly have been Nikon.) But I will tell you also that I have these doubts for one reason only, and that is that I'm making money now as a photographer and hope by next year to be spending the majority of my time wearing my photographer's hat rather than my software developer's hat. In other words, this is a business concern, not really a photographic concern. If I were still doing photography only when I want to and only for the sheer love of it, I'd be completely happy with the Pentax K10D and the rest of my system. I deal with the K10D's minor idiosyncrasies by taking control of the camera as much as I can. I shoot only raw, so I don't care at all about soft jpegs. I wouldn't notice if the next firmware release REMOVED jpeg capability from the camera completely. Although I shoot a lot of sports, I have found that AF.S works better for me than AF.C and I stick with what works. I shoot almost exclusively in M or TAv modes. As for focus, I confess that I am not a tough guy: I like auto-focus and use it 95% of the time. I switch to manual only when I have time to really focus carefully and to chimp the results of a test photo or two pretty carefully. I wish that the camera focused more quickly especially in low light, but gosh, in low light, my own eyes have trouble focusing, so I reckon that's normal. If I could change just ONE thing on the K10D, I think I'd wish for a split-screen manual-focus indicator like I used to have on my old film slrs. I've looked into the Katz-Eye option and decided I'm not interested in bothering. Phil writes: Originally posted by matix believe nothing of what you hear, half of what you see, and 100% of what you experience yourself'.. old quote of my fathers. Good quote, although I'd adjust the percentages somewhat. I'm actually willing to believe about 10% of what I hear, and on the other hand, I'm pretty sure that about the same 10% of what I have actually and personally experienced, I have misunderstood. ;-) Will

11-02-2007, 03:16 PM	#7
Matt Miller Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Cambridge, Iowa Photos: Gallery Posts: 339	I use the katz eye in my K10D and love it. The only time I use auto focus is when I'm taking portraits, which is only about 5% of what I shoot. The rest of the time I use manual focus. I rarely have an out of focus shot, and when I do, it's when the autofocus misses. It's never when I'm focusing manually. I switched from Canon (30D & 5D) to Pentax and don't regret it for a second. The only thing I miss about the 5D is the low noise at 800 & up. I don't miss the plastiky look from Canon & outrageously expensive gear.

11-02-2007, 04:53 PM	#9
Takman Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 34 Original Poster	lol 101 - the photos above are taken in ISO 800? WHOA! You call that noise? Nice photos! You guys are doing a good job in convincing me. I think I developed a mental block after taking in information overload from a bunch of sites and forums. WMBP - so if you start doing this full time or even on the side...will you stick Pentax? I took the following photo using a Vivitar 200mm F3.5 K-mount lens @ ISO 1600 - handheld - no flash. There was a bit of noise but the photo was still quite useable. I pulled the file into Photoshop Elements and used Noise Ninja. IMGP0052 on Flickr - Photo Sharing! I am impressed I guess. I think I would hardly use high ISO like this so its not an issue for me.

11-02-2007, 05:25 PM	#11
Takman Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 34 Original Poster	Paul - I am the person that contacted you via Flickr. I appreciate your reply to my PM on Flickr BTW. Your photos are amazing.

11-02-2007, 05:37 PM	#12
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Originally posted by Matt Miller I use the katz eye in my K10D and love it. The only time I use auto focus is when I'm taking portraits, which is only about 5% of what I shoot. The rest of the time I use manual focus. I rarely have an out of focus shot, and when I do, it's when the autofocus misses. It's never when I'm focusing manually. I switched from Canon (30D & 5D) to Pentax and don't regret it for a second. The only thing I miss about the 5D is the low noise at 800 & up. I don't miss the plastiky look from Canon & outrageously expensive gear. Interesting response, Matt. Interesting that you say you only use auto-focus when shooting portraits. That's about the only time when I use manual focus. One of us may be doing something wrong. Kidding aside, I will auto-focus a portrait because I have time, time not just to get the focus right in the viewfinder but to chimp the pic afterwards and make sure I nailed the focus, and time to redo if I didn't. If you are good with auto-focus (as you obviously are), why not use it with portraits, too? That is, why do you think using auto-focus for portraits is worth changing your method for? Also interesting to hear that you came to the K10D from the 5D and think it an improvement. I doubt that's a widely held view, but it's likely not many 5D owners have ever held a K10D in their hands. I'm not a Canon fan myself, for reasons that I can't really explain. I think they have more to do with Canon being #1 and me being a contrarian than anything else. Will

11-02-2007, 05:50 PM	#13
WMBP Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Dallas, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,482	Originally posted by Takman lol 101 - the photos above are taken in ISO 800? WHOA! You call that noise? Nice photos! There's more to noise than the ISO setting. That is, it's not a simple matter of, ISO 1600 noisy, ISO 100 not noisy. I'm not sure I can put into words easily what the other factors are, but I know I've taken photos with the K10D at 1600 that I was quite pleased with, even without noise reduction (which I generally don't bother with), while I've taken photos at 800 or even 400 where the noise was a serious problem. VPN in particular seems to require a block of the same color in the background. The quality of the light seems to be a factor, too. Quote: WMBP - so if you start doing this full time or even on the side...will you stick Pentax? Well, I'm not going anywhere just now, if only because I've invested more money in my Pentax system this year than I expected to when I got started (I don't want to talk about it!). As for what lies ahead in 2008, it's hard to say. I'm generally rather happy with the K10D in particular. But I'm not a brand loyalist, that is, using Pentax stuff doesn't make me feel special or superior. Using a Mac OS computer used to make me feel that way, but doesn't any more. Perhaps I've grown up (about time, as I'm in my 50s!) and hardware mostly bores me now. I think about it only because I have to. Quote: I think I would hardly use high ISO like this so its not an issue for me. I on the other hand have no choice but to shoot at very high ISO quite a bit -- but the results usually don't bother me. I wasn't that bothered by grain when I was shooting film and I'm not that bothered by noise, at least not always. Kind of depends on the shot. Will

11-02-2007, 06:29 PM	#15
PaulAndAPentax Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Jacksonville, Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 390	Originally posted by Takman Paul - I am the person that contacted you via Flickr. I appreciate your reply to my PM on Flickr BTW. Your photos are amazing. Oh! Small digital world! Hopefully you will find that feeling of peace whether you choose to stay with Pentax or change systems.