[Marc Sabatella]

First of all, i don't want to start an off-topic discussion here, so if you're interested to discuss this further PM me. I wanted to note that ISO standards define light levels under certain observation circumstances (like metering mode). If camera has metering modes that comply with ISO standards, their returned values should as well. If the mode is custom/automatic like multi/segment/matrix or whatever you call it, the exposure values calculated cannot be linked to such standards.

You are of course correct here. It's an oversimplification for me to say that the ISO defines exactly how a multisegment meter should handle any given situation. Still, I think my point stands: this exposure is consistent with the expected exposure if one were using standardized metering methods: basically, the goal is to make the thing you are metering come out somewhat darker than 18% gray, and that is being achieved cruelly well here.

[planedriver]

I dont want to sound all negative, but

Do you have the High Iso noise reduction turned up to high on these shots?

I ask, because I am seeing absolutely no detail, especially in that second shot. There is just none.

Could be motion blur as mentioned... I hope so.

I agree-very good question.

Andras

[ilya80]

Looks very promising to me, noise-wise.

Looking forward to 3200 ISO shot from tripod at F8.

[k100d]

On the contrary; I loaded it up and looked the hitogram, and it's pretty much ISO perfect - the average / peak of the histogram just a bit left of center, no clipped highlights but within half a stop of starting to do so. That is, any camera that produced a brighter exposure than this would be violating ISO standards and clipping highlights - in other words, it would be a Canikon :-).

This *is*, however, a good illustration of how easy it is to mistake "correct" exposure for "exposure that the viewer happens to find most pleasing". I think most viewers would agree they'd like the picture brighter; that's not the debate. But wanting it brighter doesn't mean the camera underexposed; it means it is a scene where the photographer should have applied positive exposure compensation.

Marc we have this debate over and over again
if the camera is being given to beginners as an entry level camera, the picture is too dark

[Eruditass]

Perhaps they should make the Auto / scene modes expose for the correct brightness. However, I value that the other modes expose in the current manner.

[Marc Sabatella]

Marc we have this debate over and over again
if the camera is being given to beginners as an entry level camera, the picture is too dark

Beginners should learn about exposure too. A camera that deliberately produces the *wrong* exposure because it thinks a beginner can't learn how to work the camera to get the exposure they want is a camera no experienced photographer would want to use.

Of course, I don't think anyone would be opposed to a new "beginner" mode that did things like this. But any camera that deliberately produced wrong exposures in a regular mode would be defective.

[devorama]

It looks like another person has posted ISO1600 pictures from a k-x unit. They seem to be from the same event.

PENTAX K-x Review (KX) - a set on Flickr

[ilya80]

It looks like another person has posted ISO1600 pictures from a k-x unit. They seem to be from the same event.

Lots of these are soft, as if taken with a 85\2 soft lens. Cant wait for ISO3200 on a tripod shots

[farfisa]

Looks (from the exif) as though these were taken with the kit lens (isn't the kit notorious for "underexposing"), which I guess is an honest way to have people test out a new camera, but nearly the last thing I'd put on it to show it off!

The second one is at 1/40 at f/7.1 at 55mm, and you can easily see motion blur when you peep, so not sure you can judge too much.

Exciting to see a new sensor out there though!

[paugie]

Exciting to see a new sensor out there though!

I read somewhere that this sensor is not a Sony but a Fujitsu. Can anyone confirm?

[Eruditass]

Which CMOS sensor is used in the K-x? Is it the
IMX021 (Sony A700), IMX038 (Nikon D90) or a newer one?

and got this:

Thank you for contacting Pentax.

The only information we have is that the sensor in the K-x is a brand new design from Sony. The K-x has the same Prime ll image processor as the K-7.

If you are in need of further assistance, please respond to this email or call our technical support center at 800-877-0155.

Sincerely,
xxxxxx xxxxxxx
Pentax Imaging Technical Support

[rawr]

I believe the K-x shares the same 12.3MP Exmor CMOS Sony sensor as the new Sony A500 DSLR, which Sony says "ensures crisp low-noise images, packed with fine detail and vibrant colours."

I initially thought the K-x had the same sensor as the D90, but I am pretty sure now that isn't the case.

[yeatzee]

I dont want to sound all negative, but

Do you have the High Iso noise reduction turned up to high on these shots?

I ask, because I am seeing absolutely no detail, especially in that second shot. There is just none.

Could be motion blur as mentioned... I hope so.

Looks like to low of a shutter speed IMO

[georgweb]

More stuff from the sensor I very much speculate to be the same as in the K-X:
Here's a Sony A500 high ISO comparison with other Sony cams at 100%

Low light: JPG low-light noise: A500, A700, A900, and Dynax 7D
Daylight: JPG Noise: A500, A700, A900, and Dynax 7D

Looks like a 2+ stops improvement over my 6mpix K100D which is said to be a decent low light Pentax cam.
Good to see some development in that area (which happens to be of deep interest for my stuff :-)

Best, Georg (the other)

[melander]

Alot of these are shot at shutter speeds down to 1/6s. So you can expect motion blur.