For what it is worth, your expectation may be a little high for the K20. Where did you come up with this expectation. Generally speaking as the photosites get smaller, noise gets stronger. So there has to be a way to compensate for it. It is my understanding that manufacturing has improved so that the photosites are too much smaller than the older 6mp sensors.
My experience has been starting with the *IstD 6mp body. Then getting a K10D 10mp body. The K10D had better image quality until you boost the ISO too far and amplify the noise. So up to 800 iso it was better than the *IstD - but beyond that, the *istD is better. Now I have a K20D - the image quality is better than the K10D and the high iso images are improved - better than the K10D, but not significantly better than the *istD - marginally better, perhaps. This is still quite an accomplishment because you are comparing a larger photosite 6mp sensor to a smaller photosite 14.6 sensor. What I am getting at here is that your expectation may be off. How do the normal images look? Those not boosted to high iso? The best thing to do is compare to another K20. I'm in Sacramento so not too convenient. I do work in SF every Thursday. -- Best regards, Bruce Tuesday, July 21, 2009, 8:11:42 AM, you wrote: LC> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 07:29:29AM -0400, paul stenquist wrote: >> Why would you add +.7 exposure comp on the K100 but not on the K20? LC> Because without the exposure compensation the K100 was LC> underexposing. At nominal exposure, the white in the background on the LC> K20 was on the verge of clipping, with the K100, I had to tweak the EV LC> to expose to the right. LC> I was getting both cameras to expose correctly so that it would not be LC> an apples to oranges comparison. >> More exposure will reduce the noise on both cameras. Again, it's >> apples to oranges. LC> The problem is that what I really need is to compare my K20 with LC> another K20. I'm trying to find out if my K20 is working properly, and LC> my understanding is that it is supposed to be so much better than the LC> K100, that there shouldn't be any question. I should not be able to LC> make the K100 work even close to as well as the K20. LC> But, perhaps I spent $800 for far less improvement in image quality LC> than I expected. >> Paul >> On Jul 21, 2009, at 3:42 AM, Larry Colen wrote: >> >> >On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 12:34:36AM -0700, Joseph McAllister wrote: >> >>Hardly a labeled K20 shot in the bunch, Larry. You've duplicated the >> >>urls on most of them. >> > >> >Oops, The URLs for the sets which have 18 or 27 shots each were >> >correct. >> > >> >And they're all in the collection: >> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/collections/72157621749552926/ >> > >> >> >> >> >> >>On Jul 21, 2009, at 00:21 , Larry Colen wrote: >> >>>K100, at 1000x800 >> >>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621756137388/ >> >>> >> >>>K20 at 1000x800 >> >>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621756062718/ >> >>> >> >>>K100, cropped in tight >> >>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621631845587/ >> >>> >> >>>K20 cropped in tight >> >>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/sets/72157621631845587/ >> >>> >> >>> >> >>>K20 ISO 3200 >> >>>Exposure: 0.6 >> >>>Aperture: f/5.6 >> >>>Focal Length: 77 mm >> >>>Exposure: 0.00 >> >>>ISO Speed: 3200 >> >>>http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2481/3742194472_2a6494a52f_o.jpg >> >http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellarsee/3741392561/in/set-72157621631852205/ >> >http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2583/3741392561_b9288fdf07_o.jpg >> > >> >>> >> >>>K100 ISO 3200 >> >>>Exposure: 0.8 >> >>>Aperture: f/5.6 >> >>>Focal Length: 77 mm >> >>>Exposure: 0.00 >> >>>ISO Speed: 3200 >> >>>Exposure Bias: +0.7 EV >> >>>http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2481/3742194472_2a6494a52f_o.jpg >> >http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2481/3742194472_2a6494a52f_o.jpg >> > >> >>> >> >>>K100 ISO 800 pushed 1 2/3 stops >> >>>Exposure: 1 >> >>>Aperture: f/5.6 >> >>>Focal Length: 77 mm >> >>>Exposure: +1.90 >> >>>ISO Speed: 800 >> >>>Exposure Bias: -1 EV >> >>>http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2576/3742195532_35f085de3e.jpg >> >http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2576/3742195532_35f085de3e.jpg >> >http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2576/3742195532_1e99ae1e6f_o.jpg >> > >> > >> >>>-- >> >>>The first step is learning to take great photos, >> >>>the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. >> >>>Larry Colen [email protected] >> >>>http://www.red4est.com/lrc >> >> >> >>Joseph McAllister >> >>[email protected] >> >> >> >>http://gallery.me.com/jomac >> >>http://web.me.com/jomac/show.me/Blog/Blog.html >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>-- >> >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >>[email protected] >> >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> >>to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above >> >>and >> >>follow the directions. >> > >> >-- >> >The first step is learning to take great photos, >> >the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. >> >Larry Colen [email protected] >> >http://www.red4est.com/lrc >> > >> > >> >-- >> >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> >[email protected] >> >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 >> [email protected] >> 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 [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
