With the caveat regarding who knows about Pentax?... I'd take a full frame sensor that did very well between 200 - 400 ISO any day (ISO 800) w/b nice, over any sensor that had marginal high ISO performance at 1600 and above. I find any photo I take at 1600 or higher with the *ist D to be, while documentary, not worth a heck of alot otherwise. I am loathe to set ISO over 800.
Thinking back to film, I rarely shot anything over 400, and many times I was pushing 100 two stops to get 400. When I needed more light gathering ability the camera was on a tripod and I used longer shutter speeds. I wouldn't mind that at all because I find the high ISO performance of DSLR's to be no more desirable than the performance of high ISO films. Who *seriously* shoots at ISO1600+ and gets results they would rave about? For my kind of photgraphy it doesn't work near as well as a lower ISO and a tripod. Tom C. >From: Mark Roberts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <pdml@pdml.net> >Subject: Re: Next move from Pentax: hints about sensor for next camera(s) >Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 11:47:22 -0400 (EDT) > >Adam Maas wrote: > > >Not only an old sensor, but one with extremely poor high ISO >performance > >(it's the Sensor Kodak used in the DCS14n, DCS/n and DCS/c). > >Well they may have improved it since then: The data sheet shows it's >been revised, January 2007 -- they've nearly doubled the frame rate >from 1.7 fps to 3 fps, for example. > >Not that it has any bearing on Pentax, AFAIK. > >BTW: >http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=25298198 >;-) > > > >-- >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >PDML@pdml.net >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
