These are excellent, but k7 is rather good at relatively high ISO as well. Better than most give it credit for. This pic, shown here recently, is at 1600, and even with contrast boosting to give it a gritty look, the noise is minimal: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=10521648 On Jan 19, 2010, at 3:18 AM, Igor Roshchin wrote:
> > I had a chance to test K-x over the weekend using high-ISO in > low-light setting. > As I wrote in another thread, it was very underwhelming with 16-50/2.8, > but that was a problem of the lens (in my very subjective opinion). > > It did great with 50-135/2.8: > > ISO-3200: > http://42graphy.org/swing/lonestar-2010/_IGP4428.html > http://42graphy.org/swing/lonestar-2010/_IGP0114.html > > ISO-1600: > http://42graphy.org/swing/lonestar-2010/_IGP0292.html > http://42graphy.org/swing/lonestar-2010/_IGP0310.html > http://42graphy.org/swing/lonestar-2010/_IGP0323.html > > > It's a hard decision... > I like K-7's feel and AF-performance and > other features better, but as many pointed out, K-x's matrix is > _MUCH_ better at high ISO. > > > Igor > > > -- > 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.
