Paul, you make some valid points.
I should say that I experienced the "wow" of AF improvement transiting
from *istD to K10D. I think that given that I still find K10D's AF
adequate or sufficient for /my/ kind of shooting, makes the improvements
of K7 less visible.
It may also be the case that my copy of K10D was somewhat above the
average. I never had any AF precision problems that I could discern. And
the Katz Eye screen I installed my-clumsy-self was spot on too, very
much unlike the saga I had with K7.
I don't agree with you about the meter, though. It is good but it is far
from being spot on. It seems to consistently expose to the left. But
given the significantly better dark areas noise performance of the
camera, I just don't bother (lazy?) tweaking the meter with expo-comp to
make it expose to the right.
Also, it could be that local light between, say April and October
(inclusive) is quite different than light that I saw in Chicago.
Assuming you're closer to Chicago light-wise than to me :-).
Boris
On 10/30/2010 1:52 AM, paul stenquist wrote:
Good read, Boris. Thanks for sharing your observations. Some
interesting differences in my experience. First, I never use the
electronic level. I find it a distraction. Second, I find the
autofocus considerably better than any previous Pentax camera. I
shoot a lot of action, and the K-7 locks on much better than my K20D.
I shot a kiddy halloween parade today at Graces school and I don't
think the autofocus missed on even a single shot of these moving
subjects in somewhat low light. Finally, I think the exposure is
close to spot on. A huge improvement over previous Pentax models.
Paul
--
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.
