Thanks for the info, William. I'll look closer into the set-up options. And perhaps get af faster card :-) Regarding exposure, I'll do som emore test tomorrow, evenly lit scenes (walls, grey card etc.) as well ad contraty ones, im order tio figure out if the meter is off or if the matrix metering is over reacting. Surely I can't live with this.
When photographing a a scenery with a very bright sky (very common in the northern parts og the world) I must dial in MINUS CORRECTION, when using the K10D. This is the exact opposite of what I have done for the last 30 years! I could never get used to this. My K10D requires reversed backlight compensation. Surely that can't be right! So, I'll phone Pentax in Denmark Monday morning. My problem is, that my *ist D is faulty too. The AF is off, so I must focus manually in critical situations. I have quite a few assignments in the near future. So. I will need at least one of the Pentax DSLR's! I guess I could dial in - 0.7 in the K10D, while my D gets repaired. Then send in the K10D and use the *ist D! Jens Bladt Nytarkort / Greeting Card: http://www.jensbladt.dk/godtnytaar2007/lydshow.html http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af William Robb Sendt: 10. februar 2007 18:56 Til: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Emne: Re: *ist-Ds Vs. K10D image quality? ----- 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 -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.17.33/678 - Release Date: 02/09/2007 16:06 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
