----- Original Message ----- From: "Jens Bladt" Subject: RE: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality?
> That's a good point, Godfrey. > You are right of course. I alrady had the card, when I got the camera - > and > naturally I will buy a faster card shortly. > However, I never really understood the thing about card speed. > The *ist D, for instance, could only utilze a fast card up to a certain > point. > Cards faster thant this and that would NOT improve the write speed. Read speed when downloading is something to consider as well, if you use a card reader. > > Where would this point be with the K10D, please? > > The K10D is pretty fast. > But, for the first time I had to wait for the next shot today - while > doing > a panorama series from RAW shots. > So, I definitely want a fast card. But which one? > Sandisk Ultra 2 seems to perform about as well as Sandisk Extreme 3 in the K10. This means that both are fast enough to keep me happy, since I am not actually timing this stuff. Hope this helps, I don't know the I/O speeds of these cards > Back to the original issue: K10D vs. *ist D. > I did many tests - and had to redo them many times - I had travel disc > troubles. And I kept forgetting the the darned K10D does go b ack to > JPEG's > every time I trun it off (Grrr...). This sounds like a set up error. My K10 is set to Raw (DNG) and never switches unless I tell it to. Do you have the camera set to Jpeg, and then to hold RAW when the RAW button is pushed? If so, it will default back to how it was set up. I don't know if the user menu can be optimized for this, it might be worth a try. > The biggest difference I found was, that the K10D overexposes the shots > quite consistantly. I have no idea why. Mine seems to underexpose a little bit. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
