Originally posted by mrpackerguy I'm looking at getting a used K10d. Is that because of the reported noise issue? I recently bought a K200d which has the same sensor I understand, but wondering if the ISO noise issue is the same for the K200d?
There are basically two issues. One is that, seeing as they squeeze 10 million pixels onto a sensor that is the same size and same basic underlying technology (Sony CCD) as the 6 million pixel K100D, each pixel is smaller, and thus indeed, the K10D *will* have more noise at some level than the K100D. However, as is easily demonstrated by anyone who has actually done the experiment, this increase in noise is only visible if you actually blow up both pictures to 100%, which is to say - if you blow up the K10D image much larger than the K100D. Size both images the same way and the K10D simply does *not* have more noise than the K100D, and this can be verified both by inspection and by the statistical analysis of the RAW files that has been undertaken by several folks over on dpreview. The K200D is exactly the same in this way - blow the image to 100% and it looks worse than the K100D; view images at the same size and it is does not.
The other issue is something specific to the K10D and its analog-to-digital converter and/or other elements of the image processing engine. The issue is the way shadow noise often lines itself up into vertical "banding", especially when you shoot underexposed and then push in PP. This is supposedly not nearly as much of an issue with later model K10D's, and the K200D appears to be similar to later K10D's in this respect.
I can just tell you that on upgrading from the DS to the K200D, my pictures got better. They could be considered noisier only if you view at 100% - which is to say, if you blow the K200D image up bigger. Viewed at the same size, there is no visible difference in noise, and the K200D clearly holds more detail (as should be expected). I've been shooting in jazz clubs for several years now, and there is no question in my mind that images I get from the K200D are as clean as and more detailed than those I got from the DS. Here's some recent K200D shots at ISO 1600, all underexposed a stop and pushed in PP, meaning they are really the equivalent of ISO 3200: