As I mentioned in another post. I think an ISO 1600 shot in the K10, underexposed by one stop and pushed in conversion will be better than a 3200 shot in the D. In fact, I think I'll do a little test when I have more time. paul On Nov 26, 2006, at 7:13 PM, William Robb wrote:
> > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Paul Stenquist" > Subject: Re: Handled the K10D today > > >> I realize that. But I found ISO 3200 unacceptable on the *istD. Yet >> 1600 on the K10D appears to yield better results than the same >> sensitivity on the *istD. Thus, at this point, I believe I can attain >> higher shutter speeds in low light with the K10D than I could with >> the *istD. Where I couldn't get enough shutter speed with either >> camera, I would combine some slow shutter flash with an ambient >> exposure. I might get some motion blur, but I'd get a sharp central >> image as well. That's generally how it's done. > > Flash is sometimes not an option, at which time the necessity of > getting > a picture is more important than whether high ISO noise is acceptable. > > William Robb > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
