On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Mark Roberts <m...@robertstech.com> wrote: >>OK. Can you expand on that? What is it about lower ISOs that make them >>primarily better to you? > > Longer shutter speeds.
That's fine. ISO 100 to 80 is less than a 1/2 stop difference (if we compare the SETTINGS). If we compare the lower thresholds of the sensors (actual bottom end ISOs), it is less than that... more like 85 to 75. I'd be interested in seeing (real world) what shutter speed the auto exposure would recommend in AV on a K5 and a K7 when recording the same scene with the same lens/aperture wide open. Just an observation: Of the stuff you have in your robertstech PESO galleries (and thus, I'm guessing, are some of your favorites) there are virtually NO shots that would benefit from a longer shutter speed. The two major exceptions might be the motion blur Carousel (where I would argue that a 1/2 stop MORE motion blur would NOT have been an improvement) and the dungeon/guest shot which would have turned into a 40-45 second exposure and (i believe) registered LESS of the ghostly effect of the guest by virtue of the lower sensitivity. It also seems a bit silly to me to point to slower ISOs as a reason to buy a more expensive camera, when one can achieve the same effect with a ND filter at a fraction of the cost. If slower shutter speeds are what you want above all else, then optimum sharpness probably isn't your highest priority anyway. Darren Addy Kearney, Nebraska -- Nothing is sure, except Death and Pentaxes. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
