The advantages of SR are considerable. And K10D banding is only a problem when a shot is grossly underexposed. I own both the D and the K10D. The K10D is a better low-light camera. Paul On Apr 4, 2007, at 9:49 AM, Charles Robinson wrote:
> On Apr 4, 2007, at 8:28, David J Brooks wrote: > >> I think they turned out fine. SA bit of motion blur helps add to the >> "being there" effect. >> >> I have a similar one in May. Now i have the K10D, i think i'll do >> some >> in available light and fast primes with SR. >> > > I found myself wondering if the K10D with its SR would have helped in > this situation... and then I worried about that somewhat-stripey > noise I've seen in some low-light, poorly-exposed examples. And I > thought to myself: "What am I doing here, if not shooting totally > underexposed frames at high ISO? Would the K10D just make these > unusable or are those "flawed samples"??" > > Anyone with the K10D care to comment on the forgiveness of this > camera in less-than-optimal low-light situations? > > > -Charles > > -- > Charles Robinson - [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Minneapolis, MN > http://charles.robinsontwins.org > > I am riding in the MS-TRAM this summer. Please consider sponsoring > me! > http://charles.robinsontwins.org/mstram.htm > > > -- > 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
