Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-01-2008, 01:36 AM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
Don't get me wrong, my key point is on "the K20D which looks to share the same body, AF, AE and flash system as the old K10D", which is in response to the OP's question.

I do not refer to the high ISO performance as the main point about the issue of low light performance. But instead, I won't expect the AF can do better nor the AE can be more accurate in low light, as far as the K20D and K10D shares the same systems, as least as shown on paper.


QuoteOriginally posted by GWP Quote
Hi Michael,
I'm a little confused and hopefully you can help me out.
On Jan 25, 2008. you posted that that "high ISO results from the K20D were surprisingly good."
Now you are saying that you are willing to bet that the " K20D will not be something much better and show great difference" than the K10D.

My confusion is what has changed your mind? Your two statements are very much a contradiction.



....and how much are you willing to bet?

Yours Sincerely
Grant


02-01-2008, 01:57 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Mallee Boy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hindmarsh Isl. Sth Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,485
Sorry, but I am now more confused. So you are retracting your Jan 25 statement then?

You also have not said how much you are willing to bet on your statement that K10d and K20D high iso performance "will not be something much better"
Kind Regards
Grant
02-01-2008, 09:50 AM   #18
Veteran Member
lol101's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garennes sur Eure France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
I'm not satisfied with the K10D at even as low as ISO 400 when color noise starts to appear. With the K100D, things are acceptable up to ISO 800. For usable good ISO 1250 by my standard, my 5D is the only DSLR I have can provide that.
Oh! I am truly sorry to ear that your K10 is that noisey above ISO 400 and that its AF and AE are defficient...

But wait... I thought you didn't own a K10?!

What gives?
02-01-2008, 11:14 AM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Redmond, Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 228
To be fair, I believe what RH was saying was that good high ISO performance (pics at high ISO look good with low noise) does not necessarily equate to good low light camera performance (exposure accuracy in low light, autofocus speed and capability in low light, etc.). High ISO isn't only used in "low light" situations...at least as far as I know.

No having owned a K10 or any Canon, and the K20 not even in final firmware yet, I can't comment or speculate on any of them myself.

02-01-2008, 11:42 AM   #20
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,314
QuoteOriginally posted by Jester_rm Quote
To be fair, I believe what RH was saying was that good high ISO performance (pics at high ISO look good with low noise) does not necessarily equate to good low light camera performance (exposure accuracy in low light, autofocus speed and capability in low light, etc.). High ISO isn't only used in "low light" situations...at least as far as I know.

No having owned a K10 or any Canon, and the K20 not even in final firmware yet, I can't comment or speculate on any of them myself.
I agree, RH is commenting on the system, and if the AF and metering remain relitively unchanged, you should not expect any difference in the performance. The real question is, is the performance of the metering and AF on the K10D good enough.

That will always be an opinion. Good enough for what?

As I commented in an earlyer post, I have shot A LOT at high ISO with pentax cameras, and not on sunny bright days where all I wanted was to get 1/4000 shutter, but in dark auditoriums and dance halls photographing musicals and dance performance, using only stage lighting.

I have never had a problem with focusing performance on any of my cameras. Note lighting is only able to give 1/60 at F2.8 and 1600 ISO. shots are hand held, focus is sharp and precise, no noticible hunting.

Now, having said that, if I point into a dark shadow, where the lighting is well below the specified minimum EV for the camera, then no it won't focus well, but I should not expect it to. Why should the camera be able to focus on things I can't even see with my eye?
02-01-2008, 10:56 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by lol101 Quote
Oh! I am truly sorry to ear that your K10 is that noisey above ISO 400 and that its AF and AE are defficient...

But wait... I thought you didn't own a K10?!

What gives?
Phil Askey don't own the K10D, nor most of other gear (brand regardless). Why you folks or so many other people still read his stuff?
02-01-2008, 11:25 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 923
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Don't get me wrong, my key point is on "the K20D which looks to share the same body, AF, AE and flash system as the old K10D", which is in response to the OP's question.

I do not refer to the high ISO performance as the main point about the issue of low light performance. But instead, I won't expect the AF can do better nor the AE can be more accurate in low light, as far as the K20D and K10D shares the same systems, as least as shown on paper.
Not necessarily. We'll only know for sure when the K20D actually comes out.

There are three main subsystems to the each of the AF and AE systems, which work together. The sensors - which you can see, the processor hardware, which you can't see, and the software, which manufacturers are usually very secretive about.
And this applies to most other electronic gear - successive iterations of the same base system often see improvements in performance as designers tweak the software and hardware. Not spectacular improvements, but better nevertheless.
That's why you can get visible differences in performance or image quality even with cameras which use the same sensor. I would be very surprised if Pentax left the AF and AE system totally untouched.

My day job is heavily into electronics and software. Nothing to do with cameras, but these are basic survival strategies in the hyper-competitive world of consumer electronics.
02-02-2008, 12:30 AM   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
As I commented in an earlyer post, I have shot A LOT at high ISO with pentax cameras, and not on sunny bright days where all I wanted was to get 1/4000 shutter, but in dark auditoriums and dance halls photographing musicals and dance performance, using only stage lighting.

I have never had a problem with focusing performance on any of my cameras. Note lighting is only able to give 1/60 at F2.8 and 1600 ISO. shots are hand held, focus is sharp and precise, no noticible hunting.

Now, having said that, if I point into a dark shadow, where the lighting is well below the specified minimum EV for the camera, then no it won't focus well, but I should not expect it to. Why should the camera be able to focus on things I can't even see with my eye?
For stage lightings, even it's not very bright for the overall exposure values, there are usually contrasty objects which are existent for focusing - provided that we know where to focus. But for daily indoor shooting situations, especially with tungsten lights, the objects are often with low contrasts which just makes the Pentax DSLRs show all their weaknesses or even give up!

With MZ cameras or with DSLRs of other brands, there is no such problem for the AF struggles to survive, for similar shooting conditions. So, this is the real problem.

Well, I am actually satisfied with the AF performance of my K100D for the concert show situations / applications you mentioned. Here are some very recent examples of mine which just I took the pics yesterday:-

Attached Images
     
02-02-2008, 01:41 AM   #24
Veteran Member
lol101's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garennes sur Eure France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 900
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Phil Askey don't own the K10D, nor most of other gear (brand regardless). Why you folks or so many other people still read his stuff?
AFAIK he doesn't review gear by compiling random posts on the internet...
02-02-2008, 03:16 AM   #25
Site Supporter
Mallee Boy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hindmarsh Isl. Sth Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,485
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
For stage lightings, even it's not very bright for the overall exposure values, there are usually contrasty objects which are existent for focusing - provided that we know where to focus. But for daily indoor shooting situations, especially with tungsten lights, the objects are often with low contrasts which just makes the Pentax DSLRs show all their weaknesses or even give up!

With MZ cameras or with DSLRs of other brands, there is no such problem for the AF struggles to survive, for similar shooting conditions. So, this is the real problem.

Well, I am actually satisfied with the AF performance of my K100D for the concert show situations / applications you mentioned. Here are some very recent examples of mine which just I took the pics yesterday:-
Michael???? I'm stunned! Thats a photograph.!
And a very nice...subject...too, very nice.
02-02-2008, 03:25 AM   #26
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
QuoteOriginally posted by GWP Quote
Michael???? I'm stunned! Thats a photograph.!
And a very nice...subject...too, very nice.
But no exif on the images... RH must enjoy Cantonese concerts...
02-02-2008, 04:54 AM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
But no exif on the images... RH must enjoy Cantonese concerts...
I dunno why the Forum upload function will remove all the EXIF..

Anyway, I re-upload those images to my website and include them below for you to view the EXIF data if interested:-





02-02-2008, 05:11 AM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ste-Anne des Plaines, Qc., Canada
Posts: 2,014
Instead of buying another body or system, I'd look into a decent quality high speed lens. It could show you a side of the k10d you would not have suspected existed! As far as RH is concerned, he might know quite a bit about photography, but he is also a s*** disturber.
02-02-2008, 11:26 AM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Amherst, NY.
Posts: 334
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by flyer Quote
Instead of buying another body or system, I'd look into a decent quality high speed lens. It could show you a side of the k10d you would not have suspected existed! As far as RH is concerned, he might know quite a bit about photography, but he is also a s*** disturber.
I will always keep my 50/1.4, but which two additional lens would you suggest I look at? I am into landscapes, low-light shooting & doing, maybe, some portraitures. If you were in my shoes, which 'very high quality glass' lens would you consider?
02-02-2008, 11:33 AM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Ontario
Posts: 750
RH,

I'd wait and see what the k20d can do in low light & with AF before I make a call on how it does, as opposed to writing it off right away.

However, the main reason why I'm responding is those pictures are very well done. Nice work with those (whether it's a Pentax camera or not - as I'm too lazy to look at the exif data).
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!
camera, d300, desire, dslr, information, k10d, k20d, lenses, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Camera Gear Insurance paulelescoces Photographic Technique 1 02-05-2010 06:47 AM
ist DS, nice backup camera or waste of money? per Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 09-13-2008 07:25 AM
Need a new Camera, help me spend my money!!! miniman82 Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 05-18-2008 01:49 PM
Off Camera Flash: A New Way to Blow Money Mike Cash Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 19 10-11-2007 05:20 AM
Spelunking camera gear? Tom Lusk Photographic Technique 5 09-26-2007 11:24 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:42 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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