Pentax K-X, best 1.5 crop sensor going?

RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 5:41*am, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 01:28:23 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

Detail retention at higher ISO's seems to be better than other crop
cameras out there and noise control is reasonable. *I think it would
make a very good, compact low-light camera, coupled to a fast lens.

The Canon EOS 7D and Nikon D300s are way ahead of the K-7 for low
noise at high ISOs. *The Nikon D300 has fewer pixels than the K-7 but
the Canon EOS 7D has more.

True, but this entry level thing is better than the K7.

Wishing doesn't make it so.

--
Ray Fischer

In article
,
RichA wrote:

Better in terms of image quality. Read what the owners say in the
Pentax forum on Dpreview.

that doesn't mean anything. owners of every camera think their choice
is the best, otherwise they wouldn't have bought it.

RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 2:15*pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 5:41 am, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 01:28:23 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

Detail retention at higher ISO's seems to be better than other crop
cameras out there and noise control is reasonable. I think it would
make a very good, compact low-light camera, coupled to a fast lens.

The Canon EOS 7D and Nikon D300s are way ahead of the K-7 for low
noise at high ISOs. The Nikon D300 has fewer pixels than the K-7 but
the Canon EOS 7D has more.

True, *but this entry level thing is better than the K7.

Wishing doesn't make it so.

Better in terms of image quality.

Wishing doesn't make it so.

Read what the owners say in the
Pentax forum on Dpreview.

Why? Do you think that biased reporters who have not done detailed
and objective tests are credible?

--
Ray Fischer

RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 6:13 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 2:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 5:41 am, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 01:28:23 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:
Detail retention at higher ISO's seems to be better than other crop
cameras out there and noise control is reasonable. I think it would
make a very good, compact low-light camera, coupled to a fast lens.
The Canon EOS 7D and Nikon D300s are way ahead of the K-7 for low
noise at high ISOs. The Nikon D300 has fewer pixels than the K-7 but
the Canon EOS 7D has more.
True, but this entry level thing is better than the K7.
Wishing doesn't make it so.
Better in terms of image quality.
Wishing doesn't make it so.

Read what the owners say in the
Pentax forum on Dpreview.
Why? Do you think that biased reporters who have not done detailed
and objective tests are credible?

No, I think the owners and Dpreview's both show the sensor is top
notch.

IMO they'd be more or less correct. The Samsung sensor isn't a great
success if you want to recover shadow detail:
http://daystarvisions.com/Docs/Rvws/K20D/pg3.html#dr
OTOH if you don't want/need that, then perhaps it's not an issue. Even
when objective measurement can show a difference, how much that matters
is always subjective/personal.
DXOMark are bad offenders - measurement of read noise at base ISO
doesn't seem to include a (IMO much needed) subjective call on noise
patterns/banding, so cameras with relatively crappy (TM) pattern read
noise score more highly than I'd give them subjectively. When I rule
the world, I'll fix them.
The K-x got marked down on DPReview for poor highlight recovery, but if
it's the same sensor as in other maker's models, highlight detail from
raw should be good. Probably just crappy/inaccurate exposure &/or raw
conversion software.

With Pentax/Samsung cooperation, how come Pentax puts a newer (only a
couple of years old) generation Sony CMOS in their camera? I can
understand when they continued with the 10.2 mp Sony CCD predating the
agreement, but Samsung talked as if they're going to rule the planet for
dslr/evil and sensor production - Pentax choosing to use a Sony sensor
would seem to be a bit of a slap in the face.

RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 6:13*pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 2:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 5:41 am, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 01:28:23 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

Detail retention at higher ISO's seems to be better than other crop
cameras out there and noise control is reasonable. I think it would
make a very good, compact low-light camera, coupled to a fast lens.

The Canon EOS 7D and Nikon D300s are way ahead of the K-7 for low
noise at high ISOs. The Nikon D300 has fewer pixels than the K-7 but
the Canon EOS 7D has more.

True, but this entry level thing is better than the K7.

Wishing doesn't make it so.

Better in terms of image quality.

Wishing doesn't make it so.

*Read what the owners say in the
Pentax forum on Dpreview.

Why? *Do you think that biased reporters who have not done detailed
and objective tests are credible?

No,

Good.

I think the owners

Biased.

and Dpreview's both show the sensor is top
notch.

Too bad that a camera isn't a sensor and that image quality in general
falls short. Also also remember that you say that DPReview is biased.

--
Ray Fischer

RichA wrote:
On Mar 1, 3:30*am, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 6:13 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 2:15 pm, (Ray Fischer) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Feb 28, 5:41 am, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 28 Feb 2010 01:28:23 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

Detail retention at higher ISO's seems to be better than other crop
cameras out there and noise control is reasonable. I think it would
make a very good, compact low-light camera, coupled to a fast lens.

The Canon EOS 7D and Nikon D300s are way ahead of the K-7 for low
noise at high ISOs. The Nikon D300 has fewer pixels than the K-7 but
the Canon EOS 7D has more.

True, but this entry level thing is better than the K7.

Wishing doesn't make it so.

Better in terms of image quality.

Wishing doesn't make it so.

Read what the owners say in the
Pentax forum on Dpreview.

Why? Do you think that biased reporters who have not done detailed
and objective tests are credible?

No,

Good.

*I think the owners

Biased.

*and Dpreview's both show the sensor is top
notch.

Too bad that a camera isn't a sensor and that image quality in general
falls short. *Also also remember that you say that DPReview is biased.

I also said, look at the tests,

The tests that reveals the camera's shortcomings.

and they point out the camera produces
good images.

In some situations.

--
Ray Fischer

nospam wrote:
In article
,
RichA wrote:

Better in terms of image quality. Read what the owners say in the
Pentax forum on Dpreview.

that doesn't mean anything. owners of every camera think their choice
is the best, otherwise they wouldn't have bought it.


Nice one. Maybe one day people will figure this out. :-)

What's most amazing to me is the lengths they will go to defending their
purchase decisions and to beat down the one they didn't choose. I've
shot with most of the major brands and as long as you don't have a
really crappy lens attached, they all make nice prints. Even a couple of
generations old ones will. Unless you are such a crappy photographer
you have to try to make a 16X20 print from 1/4 of the frame or find a
need to shoot at ISO 6400+. Then maybe some models work better than others.

Stephanie

RichA wrote:
On Mar 3, 1:17 am, " wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article
,
RichA wrote:
Better in terms of image quality. Read what the owners say in the
Pentax forum on Dpreview.
that doesn't mean anything. owners of every camera think their choice
is the best, otherwise they wouldn't have bought it.
Nice one. Maybe one day people will figure this out. :-)

Sometimes true, in this case, wrong. A few of them own the K7 and the
K-X and find the K-X to be better. That's why they wish the K7 had
the K-X sensor. Get it?


A few "the owners", Get it??

Plus I would venture to guess people who own both are techno-geek pixel
peepers who couldn't take a worthwhile photograph if their life depended
on it. In a normal size useful print I highly doubt you can see any
difference in the two.

Stephanie

In rec.photo.digital wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Mar 3, 1:17 am, " wrote:
nospam wrote:
In article
,
RichA wrote:
Better in terms of image quality. Read what the owners say in the
Pentax forum on Dpreview.
that doesn't mean anything. owners of every camera think their choice
is the best, otherwise they wouldn't have bought it.
Nice one. Maybe one day people will figure this out. :-)

Sometimes true, in this case, wrong. A few of them own the K7 and the
K-X and find the K-X to be better. That's why they wish the K7 had
the K-X sensor. Get it?

A few "the owners", Get it??

Plus I would venture to guess people who own both are techno-geek pixel
peepers who couldn't take a worthwhile photograph if their life depended
on it. In a normal size useful print I highly doubt you can see any
difference in the two.

Is there something about Pentax that tells you none of them will be
non-techno-geeks but simply good photographers who sometimes produce
abnormally large prints for exhibitions etc.?

--
Chris Malcolm