Larry Colen wrote:
It wasn't banding, as just ugly noise. Some of that may be from where I
did most of my high iso work,
in low light with tungsten lights turned down very low, i.e. low color
temp, lots of red, boost the blue to concentrate.
OK, just excessive blue noise. Please remember that the blue channel is
"always" (AFAIK) the noisest one, hence I don't think this is a specific
K20D issue. I understand your K20D shows more of it that other cameras you
are used to, and I won't deny that. I only find it strange, as I never had
that same impression.
When I had a K-7 on loan, I used the K20D much often and much more
happily, because its noise looks much better than the "dusty" look of K-7
noise. And I also like the K20D user interface a lot more than the recent
"evolution" (so to speak) in K-7 and K-5.
There were some things I liked better about the K20 UI.
I like the Fn thing better than the OK variation pentax has implmented on
later bodies. That's not a matter of using either button, but the slightly
different logic and the different ergonomics affecting the whole operation.
With the K20D, I keep changing the AF point all the time according to my
needs, with the eye in the viewfinder. That's rather difficult with the
K-7/K-5 interface, enough to limit my use of that function. I'm going to
explain better below.
I find that metering and focus on the K-x is better. Unfortunately with
the K-x you don't know what it focuses on.
About metering, I cannot comment on the K-x because I didn't use it enough.
I had the feeling they are the same, but you must be right because you have
more mileage on it.
About AF, the lack of communication is the reason because I don't find the
whole K-x system better than the K20D setup. A friend of mine using the K-x
kept complaining the pictures were focused randomly (often on the
background).
I think that the body that felt the best in my hands was the K100, which I
believe is very similar to the IST bodies. I *like* small camera bodies, I
can always make it bigger with a battery grip if I want.
I liked small camera bodies when they had fewer controls (e.g., I love the
MX and the ME Super). With DSLR's, I cannot use well cameras which are too
cluttered and without enough tactile differentiation on controls. IMO, the
weak point of the K-7/K-5 interface is not just the smaller body in itself,
but the combination of the following features:
1 - Smaller body, with too many buttons so close each other, including the
damn LV button (much better apart on the K10D/K20D);
2 - All buttons feel the same under your thumb (better differentiation
between regular buttons and 'ring' for operating the arrow keys on the
K10D/K20D);
3 - The button for 2nd function is the OK button (again, almost 'lost'
within other keys) on the K-7/K-5, while it is Fn on the K10D/K20D (separate
from arrow keys and well recognizable by thumb).
To prevent misoperation, above design features 'suggest' you (me) to look at
the back of the camera prior to do something (such as changing AF point) and
then most of the concentration and the magic of shooting at eye level is
lost.
Dario
--
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.
