On 11/11/2010 6:47 AM, Miserere wrote:
On 10 November 2010 20:33, paul stenquistpnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
I did drop a Fuji 50mm about 35 years ago, but I was fondling it, while I
was stoned.
For adultery?
--M.
Paul ain't gonna get out of this one unMARKed...
Boris
--
On 11/9/2010 10:35 PM, Ralf R. Radermacher wrote:
I know what you mean. The DS kind of snuggled into my hands. I didn't
even have to 'hold' it.
That's probably the only thing with K10D that did not go as smoothly.
K10D is slightly big for my hands. K7 is more ergonomically convenient
for me.
Jack, you speaketh the truth... The world of Pentax hath been given its
pride back and therefore Pentax people go with pride. Looketh down the
Pentax man at his peers now.
Thus spake Zarathustra...
/broad smile here too/
Boris
On 11/10/2010 1:07 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
Feels, in a way, that
I think I made a mistake. It should be You speakest and not You
speaketh. But that does not change a thing.
Boris
On 11/10/2010 1:07 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
Feels, in a way, that Pentaxians have lost the humility. They've
always been a little embarrassed and guarded about their chosen photo
On 11/9/2010 6:24 PM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
I understand your reasons but what amazes me a bit is how a sensor praised for
almost everybody is bashed that hard in the following iteration...is just by
comparison with the new generation sensors?
It amazes me too, Jaume, because K-7's sensor has
Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
I am just trying to understand how the opinion on it changes so
dramatically in so little time.
More people are ready to admit that it's no good.
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog :
On Nov 9, 2010, at 11:32 PM, Christine Aguila wrote:
- Original Message - From: P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2010 9:04 AM
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
The K-7 offered huge
2010/11/10 Ralf R. Radermacher fotor...@gmx.de:
More people are ready to admit that it's no good.
People being honest with themselves voiced their opions long ago.
--
Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa:
Does that mean that you screwed-upeth?
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 3:23 AM, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote:
I think I made a mistake. It should be You speakest and not You
speaketh. But that does not change a thing.
Boris
On 11/10/2010 1:07 AM, Jack Davis wrote:
Feels, in a way, that
Screwed-upest may be :-). Or screwest-uped ;-).
On 11/10/2010 2:59 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
Does that mean that you screwed-upeth?
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 3:23 AM, Boris Libermanbori...@gmail.com wrote:
I think I made a mistake. It should be You speakest and not You
speaketh. But that
Rob Studdert wrote:
2010/11/10 Ralf R. Radermacher fotor...@gmx.de:
More people are ready to admit that it's no good.
People being honest with themselves voiced their opions long ago.
Yep. I'm extremely happy with the Samsung sensor and can easily wait
to upgrade. If I do, it'll be because of
I would go with third person verb, speaketh.
Jack
--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 12:23 AM
I
My unspokeneth thought as well.
Jack
--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
From: Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 5:45 AM
Rob Studdert
Your support is enthusiastically welcomed, Boris! grin
Jack
--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 12
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
Yep. I'm extremely happy with the Samsung sensor and can easily wait
to upgrade. If I do, it'll be because of the lower minimum ISO of 80
rather than the high ISO settings of the K-5.
OK. Let's look at it on your terms:
CheekyGeek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 7:45 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
Yep. I'm extremely happy with the Samsung sensor and can easily wait
to upgrade. If I do, it'll be because of the lower minimum ISO of 80
rather than the high ISO settings of the K-5.
OK. Let's look at
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
OK. Let's look at it on your terms:
In a digital camera, I would argue that lower ISOs are *primarily*
important for the maximum Dynamic Range that they provide.
Not to me.
OK. Can you expand on that? What is it about
That's the reason they make good sturdy tripods.
Jack
--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
From: Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 7:16 AM
This is a bit of a ridiculous discussion, if we equate it to film days...
Let's imagine a set of photographers (let's say they shoot for
National Geographic) who swear by Kodachrome 25. If Kodak or a
competitor came out with a film that gave them Results
Indistinguishable from Kodachrome 25 - but
On Nov 10, 2010, at 6:45 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
- Mensaje original
De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mié,10 noviembre, 2010 09:26
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
On 11/9/2010 6:24 PM, Jaume Lahuerta
CheekyGeek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
OK. Let's look at it on your terms:
In a digital camera, I would argue that lower ISOs are *primarily*
important for the maximum Dynamic Range that they provide.
Not to me.
OK. Can you expand on that?
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:49 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
CheekyGeek wrote:
OK. Can you expand on that? What is it about lower ISOs that make them
primarily better to you?
Longer shutter speeds.
To be fair, Darren did write Lower ISO settings mean nothing by
themselves,
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
CheekyGeek wrote:
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
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 11:12 AM, CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com wrote:
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.
Also, many types of long exposure shots
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
Why does it bother you so much that I like to work the way I like to
work?
I could care less about how you like to work.
However I find your inability to adequately justify your stated
positions in this particular
CheekyGeek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
Why does it bother you so much that I like to work the way I like to
work?
I could care less about how you like to work.
However I find your inability to adequately justify your stated
positions in
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:49 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.
Suppose you have two hypothetical cameras:
(a) Minimum ISO 80, dynamic range of 12 EV at minimum ISO
to
insignificant is not the option of anyone but the shooter.
Jack
--- On Wed, 11/10/10, Matthew Hunt m...@pobox.com wrote:
From: Matthew Hunt m...@pobox.com
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Wednesday, November 10, 2010, 9:10 AM
On Wed
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:49:06AM -0500, Mark Roberts wrote:
CheekyGeek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
OK. Let's look at it on your terms:
In a digital camera, I would argue that lower ISOs are *primarily*
important for the maximum Dynamic
John Francis wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:49:06AM -0500, Mark Roberts wrote:
CheekyGeek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:16 AM, Mark Roberts m...@robertstech.com wrote:
OK. Let's look at it on your terms:
In a digital camera, I would argue that lower ISOs are *primarily*
important for
On Nov 10, 2010, at 8:16 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
CheekyGeek wrote:
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
I think the punsters need to go hijack this thread. We are slipping
into extended dynamic rage.
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
On Nov 10, 2010, at 8:16 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
CheekyGeek wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:49 AM, Mark Roberts
2010/11/10 Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com:
I think the punsters need to go hijack this thread. We are slipping
into extended dynamic rage.
are you sure it is EDR and not just a flame mapped thread?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message -
From: eckinator eckina...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
2010/11/10 Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com:
I think the punsters need to go hijack this thread. We
just a bunch of noise.
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Ken Waller kwal...@peoplepc.com wrote:
Kenneth Waller
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/kennethwaller
- Original Message - From: eckinator eckina...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
2010/11/10
On Nov 9, 2010, at 19:37, Adam Maas wrote:
There's a good reason why every other 35mm
mount in common use today ended up with the same basic setup, it makes
a lot of ergonomic sense for right-handed users. Camera in left hand,
holding button, lens in right hand mounting/unmounting.
This would
On 11 November 2010 03:12, CheekyGeek cheekyg...@gmail.com wrote:
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
On 10 November 2010 16:07, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote:
This would actually really screw me up (horses for courses, I guess).
For me: I always have the camera facing away from me - right hand gripping
it, reach in with the ring finger, push the lever, and twist off with the
I usually change lenses with little drama. I never gave the release
switch much thought. I'll try to get annoyed next time.
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Miserere miser...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 November 2010 16:07, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote:
This would actually really
On 11/10/2010 1:45 PM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
So, the sum of the 3 factor have resulted in a 'perfect storm' for the K-7
sensor (and camera).
Does it make sense?
It makes perfect sense to me, Jaume. And indeed, you and I will not have
an argument. That would be extremely unlikely.
Boris
--
- Mensaje original
De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mié,10 noviembre, 2010 09:26
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
On 11/9/2010 6:24 PM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
I understand your reasons but what amazes me
I usually hold the lens I'm putting on the camera between my thumb and
forefinger of my left hand and the lens coming off with my palm and the
remaining fingers of that hand. Obvious this doesn't work with
relitively large lenses. It's fast and I've only dropped the 43mm
limited once,
On Nov 10, 2010, at 8:20 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
I usually hold the lens I'm putting on the camera between my thumb and
forefinger of my left hand and the lens coming off with my palm and the
remaining fingers of that hand. Obvious this doesn't work with relitively
large lenses. It's
Well, I started doing that when I was shooting for newspapers. Getting
the shot was everything then.
On 11/10/2010 8:33 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
On Nov 10, 2010, at 8:20 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
I usually hold the lens I'm putting on the camera between my thumb and
forefinger of my left
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 20:33 -0500, paul stenquist
pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
I did drop a Fuji 50mm about 35 years ago, but I was fondling
it, while I was stoned.
Now that is definitely a MARK!
Cheers
Brian
++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
Brian Walters wrote:
pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
I did drop a Fuji 50mm about 35 years ago, but I was fondling
it, while I was stoned.
Now that is definitely a MARK!
Can I trim it to just I was fondling it while I was stoned.?
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On 11/10/2010 8:55 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Brian Walters wrote:
pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
I did drop a Fuji 50mm about 35 years ago, but I was fondling
it, while I was stoned.
Now that is definitely a MARK!
Can I trim it to just I was fondling it while I was stoned.?
Hey, out of
I always have the new lens ready. I remove the old one and quickly
put the new one on. My technique was aimed at minimizing open body
time.
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 8:58 PM, P. J. Alling
webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
On 11/10/2010 8:55 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Brian Walters wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com wrote:
My technique was aimed at minimizing open body time.
Mark! Should go right after the one about urinating on your scalpel.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to
I try to do that during class as well.
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Matthew Hunt m...@pobox.com wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 9:11 PM, Steven Desjardins drd1...@gmail.com wrote:
My technique was aimed at minimizing open body time.
Mark! Should go right after the one about urinating on
On Nov 10, 2010, at 8:49 PM, Brian Walters wrote:
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 20:33 -0500, paul stenquist
pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
I did drop a Fuji 50mm about 35 years ago, but I was fondling
it while I was stoned.
Now that is definitely a MARK!
Only with the extra comma
On 10 November 2010 20:33, paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
I did drop a Fuji 50mm about 35 years ago, but I was fondling it, while I
was stoned.
For adultery?
--M.
--
\/\/o/\/\ -- http://WorldOfMiserere.com
http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for
On 9 November 2010 16:34, Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote:
I feel that shelling out for K-7 was a waste. Presently I see no reason to
keep shooting with it unless I really have to. Having bought several rolls
of film I will concentrate on analog full frame, so to say.
Sorry to hear
Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com wrote:
I feel that shelling out for K-7 was a waste. Presently I see no reason
to keep shooting with it unless I really have to.
Which is, in a nutshell, my mood during the last 12 months.
Now, get rid of it while you'll still get some money for it (my K-7
On 11/9/2010 1:55 PM, paul stenquist wrote:
When I have time I'll do side by side outdoor pics at ISO 200.
Perhaps later today. Time to work now. Paul On Nov 9, 2010, at 12:34
AM
I shall look forward to it.
Boris
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Gosh. I still like my K-7. it performs well in good light and has earned me
quite a bit of money. Yes, K-5 is better, but the K-7 isn't rubbish. I'll
continue to use it when I need a second camera.
When I have time I'll do side by side outdoor pics at ISO 200. Perhaps later
today. Time to work
Hi!
On 11/9/2010 4:21 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
1. Although a year and few months ago K-7 was top of the line and
many on the list praised its image quality saying that at the time
it was the best Pentax produced, it is actually /rubbish/.
You're kidding, right?
No, I am not. I cannot say
On Nov 8, 2010, at 23:34, Boris Liberman wrote:
To conclude:
1. Although a year and few months ago K-7 was top of the line and many on the
list praised its image quality saying that at the time it was the best Pentax
produced, it is actually /rubbish/.
You're kidding, right?
In
On Nov 9, 2010, at 9:52 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
On Nov 9, 2010, at 8:34, Boris Liberman wrote:
No, it does not make K-7 junk. After all, it is a piece of gear
that works as per its design and specifications. It is just that
the sensor of K7 is really lagging in certain qualities that
- Mensaje original
De: Boris Liberman bori...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mar,9 noviembre, 2010 16:03
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
On 11/9/2010 4:52 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
I guess I can see that... I find it fascinating
On 11/9/2010 5:37 PM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
I am in the opposite ugrade path as you Boris (*ist Ds, K20D,...). So I skipped
the K10D (with great efforts) and when the K20D came out I remember that the
comments were that it had a great sensor less noisy than the K10D sensor
(there were a lot of
Lahuerta wrote:
- Mensaje original
De: Boris Libermanbori...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail Listpdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mar,9 noviembre, 2010 16:03
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
On 11/9/2010 4:52 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
I guess I can see that... I find
: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mar,9 noviembre, 2010 16:45
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
And then the K-7 came out and in a few months its sensor (evolution of the
K20D's) was totally crap...¿?
I presume the question sign upside down is also a question sign
On 11/9/2010 11:11 AM, Jaume Lahuerta wrote:
- Mensaje original
De: P. J. Allingwebstertwenty...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail Listpdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mar,9 noviembre, 2010 16:46
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
If you believe DxO the K20D has a slightly better
OK, looking at the comparison image on my work monitor (17) and I can
see more noise difference as well as a better dynamic range on the K5.
In case I have still misunderstood this, by dynamic range I am
referring to the fact that I can see details of the back wall of the
K5 shot whereas I have
Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
I am in the opposite ugrade path as you Boris (*ist Ds, K20D,...). So I
skipped
the K10D (with great efforts) and when the K20D came out I remember that the
comments were that it had a great sensor less noisy than the K10D sensor
(there were a lot of
P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com wrote:
...but the sensor in the K-7 was the best
that Pentax could do at the time, the rest of the camera was just awsome
for it's price point.
Well, at least it's been good for one thing:
Pentax had to come up with one heck of a processing system to
Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
I understand your reasons but what amazes me a bit is how a sensor praised for
almost everybody is bashed that hard in the following iteration...
Well, I think that's a classical way of reasoning. We tend to justify
our decisions - often against better
An interesting discussion.
Without going detail nutty on my camera impressions and opinions, what
I like most about the Pentax system was the quality of the lenses and
its value for dollar. The thing that disappointed me most is the
bodies. The *ist DS was a delightful if cheaply built camera.
On 9 November 2010 11:24, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
But I am afraid that the only thing that may prevent me from going the K-5
route
is the...Pentax EVIL...(although first I should overcome my EVF/LCD framing
allergy...).
Regards,
Jaume
We're in the same boat, Jaume, except
On Nov 9, 2010, at 12:34 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
An interesting discussion.
Without going detail nutty on my camera impressions and opinions, what
I like most about the Pentax system was the quality of the lenses and
its value for dollar. The thing that disappointed me most is the
If you believe DxO
I believe Paul and all of the others that have bought one and are
using it, along with hands on, in the field reviews.
Dave
--
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
On Nov 9, 2010, at 8:34, Boris Liberman wrote:
No, it does not make K-7 junk. After all, it is a piece of gear that works as
per its design and specifications. It is just that the sensor of K7 is really
lagging in certain qualities that I happen to value.
In short, I am not happy about
Yea, but I was comparing their comparison of the K20d to the K-7. The
K-5 is head and shoulders above them both, (also according to DxO but
hey that wasn't exactly the point).
On 11/9/2010 1:55 PM, David J Brooks wrote:
If you believe DxO
I believe Paul and all of the others that have
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 10:28 AM, paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
While I doubt that you're in the market to change systems again, you really
should try the fit of a k-7 or k-5 body.
While better than the K10D and K20D, playing with the K-7 didn't
impress me as being much more to
On 9 November 2010 15:10, Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote:
Besides that, one minor thing remains an irritant to me on all Pentax
K-bayonet bodies. It's a silly thing, but I hate having the lens
release button between the grip and the lens ... I like it on the left
side of the body
Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote:
The *ist DS was the closest to that feeling for me.
I know what you mean. The DS kind of snuggled into my hands. I didn't
even have to 'hold' it.
I'm a lot happier with the K-5 because of its image quality. But I'll
never be really comfortable with
Funny, for me it is the exact opposite ;)
2010/11/9, Ralf R. Radermacher fotor...@gmx.de:
Godfrey DiGiorgi gdigio...@gmail.com wrote:
The *ist DS was the closest to that feeling for me.
I know what you mean. The DS kind of snuggled into my hands. I didn't
even have to 'hold' it.
I'm a lot
On 11/9/2010 4:52 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
I guess I can see that... I find it fascinating how differently the
camera is perceived based upon so many variables. For me (all-green
images from something being broken notwithstanding) the K7 is a
marvelous camera and a great step up from the
Thibouille pentaxl...@gmail.com wrote:
Funny, for me it is the exact opposite ;)
You''d rather have a DS in a K-5 body? ;-)
Ralf
--
Ralf R. Radermacher - DL9KCG - Köln/Cologne, Germany
Blog : http://the-real-fotoralf.blogspot.com
Audio : http://aporee.org/maps/projects/fotoralf
Web :
That K-7 image looks like my old K200D at ISO 1600.
(Which would make it a 2 stop improvement) but still an unfortunate
amount of noise, in my book.
Those who think the K-7 image looks GOOD have to be K-7 owners.
: )
I'd rather see a comparison between the K-x at 6400 and the K5 at 6400
and see
LOL
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:34 PM, Miserere miser...@gmail.com wrote:
... Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, let's not get into a fight, Godders!
It's not a fight. I'm strongly right-handed ... I will never handle
lenses and try to fit mating flanges together with my left hand. My
left hand is find to
On Nov 9, 2010, at 4:31 PM, CheekyGeek wrote:
That K-7 image looks like my old K200D at ISO 1600.
(Which would make it a 2 stop improvement) but still an unfortunate
amount of noise, in my book.
Those who think the K-7 image looks GOOD have to be K-7 owners.
: )
I'd rather see a comparison
Sure, but I'd like to see the K5, Kr, and Kx compared as well. I
mean, my K7 has all that other stuff and it's a terrible camera.
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:53 PM, P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
On Nov 9, 2010, at 4:31 PM, CheekyGeek wrote:
That K-7 image looks like my old K200D
On Nov 9, 2010, at 5:00 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
Sure, but I'd like to see the K5, Kr, and Kx compared as well. I
mean, my K7 has all that other stuff and it's a terrible camera.
My K-7 is a very good camera, not perfect, but very good. I wouldn't
trade it for Kx.
Paul
On Tue, Nov
Sorry. Forgot the smilie. :-)
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:15 PM, P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
On Nov 9, 2010, at 5:00 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
Sure, but I'd like to see the K5, Kr, and Kx compared as well. I
mean, my K7 has all that other stuff and it's a terrible camera.
On Nov 9, 2010, at 16:15, P N Stenquist wrote:
On Nov 9, 2010, at 5:00 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
Sure, but I'd like to see the K5, Kr, and Kx compared as well. I
mean, my K7 has all that other stuff and it's a terrible camera.
My K-7 is a very good camera, not perfect, but very
On Nov 9, 2010, at 5:27 PM, Charles Robinson wrote:
On Nov 9, 2010, at 16:15, P N Stenquist wrote:
On Nov 9, 2010, at 5:00 PM, Steven Desjardins wrote:
Sure, but I'd like to see the K5, Kr, and Kx compared as well. I
mean, my K7 has all that other stuff and it's a terrible camera.
My
Please stop this :-0
Dave
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 5:25 PM, P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
Boris asked me to provide a direct comparison. So here it is. One pic each
of the same scene from each camera, shot off a tripod with the DA* 16-50 at
f5.6, 1/60th. (Both meters agreed on
- Mensaje original
De: Ralf R. Radermacher fotor...@gmx.de
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mar,9 noviembre, 2010 18:24
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
I understand your reasons but what amazes me
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
Noise is only a small part of it. You also get better exposure control,
weather sealing, better build quality, better write speed, better battery
life and you don't get lumped in with people who buy red cameras:-).
with a broad smile.
Jack
--- On Tue, 11/9/10, P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
From: P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net
Subject: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Date: Tuesday, November 9, 2010, 2:40 PM
On Nov 9, 2010, at 5:27
- Mensaje original
De: Miserere miser...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mar,9 noviembre, 2010 18:50
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
On 9 November 2010 11:24, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
But I am afraid that the only
- Mensaje original
De: P. J. Alling webstertwenty...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mar,9 noviembre, 2010 16:46
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
If you believe DxO the K20D has a slightly better sensor than the K-7.
The fact
On Nov 9, 2010, at 6:02 PM, CheekyGeek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
Noise is only a small part of it. You also get better exposure control,
weather sealing, better build quality, better write speed, better battery
life and you don't get
Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
What I meant Ralf is that the K20D sensor was praised and then almost the same
sensor in the K-7 was terrible...(and this didn't happen with the 6mpix sensor
even when it was already ageing in the K100D super)
Well, by the time the K-7 came out, this
On Nov 9, 2010, at 3:02 PM, CheekyGeek wrote:
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 3:53 PM, P N Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
Noise is only a small part of it. You also get better exposure control,
weather sealing, better build quality, better write speed, better battery
life and you don't get
On 9 November 2010 18:27, Jaume Lahuerta jlah...@yahoo.com wrote:
- Mensaje original
De: Miserere miser...@gmail.com
Para: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Enviado: mar,9 noviembre, 2010 18:50
Asunto: Re: K-5, K-7, side-by-side at ISO 6400
On 9 November 2010 11:24, Jaume
On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 5:55 PM, paul stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
But you asked why the flagship models were worth more than the Kx.
**Rereads my post. Finds no such question, probably because I have no
such question.**
Darren Addy
Kearney, Nebraska
--
Nothing is sure, except Death
1 - 100 of 135 matches
Mail list logo
