On 26/9/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: >Agreed. According to what I've heard, Pentax might do slightly better than >Canon in low light. Certainly there are enough complaints at dpreview >regarding >Canons and low light.
Er, I beg to differ. I was shooting some fairground dodgems at ISO 1600 in very low light with purple laser beams spitting everywhere and I had few problems. I didn't use manual focus because I was too busy zooming in and out on a 70-200. If I hadn't had to zoom, I would have probably focussed manually, but in the event i was pleased with the results. >From my point of view, I agree that Canon 20D AF, as well as Pentax *istD AF and Nikon D100 / D70 AF would not have coped. D2h AF would have. 1D did. It's just a shame that there is no higher tier of Pentax to be able to cope with that situation. Until maybe next year? Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________
