PESO - Hertzlia Marina vs K10D

[Paul Stenquist]

The shot I posted the other day of the two girls is actually 3200,  
since it was one stop underexposed at 1600. While it's a bit noisy,  
it's better than FF film at 3200. DX format is great for everything I  
shoot. And that includes a fair amount of magazine and stock work.
Paul
On Jan 1, 2007, at 2:59 PM, Adam Maas wrote:

> That depends on exactly how demanding the photographer is, and in  
> what ways.
>
> DX format can satisfy very demanding photographers, as long as
> performance at the max ISO is not the primary consideration (Note also
> that the max ISO on a 5D is 1600, H[3200] is actually a software push
> in-camera, as L[50] is a software pull, you can of course do the same
> thing in your RAW converter).
>
> It all depends on exactly what you want. DX is the best option for the
> vast majority of photographers. Those who need max high-ISO  
> performance
> and high resolutions go FF, those who need ultra-high resolution at
> lower ISO's go with a MF Digiback or LF scanning back. There's a  
> hell of
> a lot more to the equation than just the noise barrier.
>
> -Adam
>
>
>
>
> P. J. Alling wrote:
>> APS-C cannot, unfortunately, satisfy the most demanding  
>> photographers.
>> Pentax has already run up against the "noise" barrier with the K10D.
>> They've been forced to abandon 3200 ISO sensitivity.  (Nikon's choice
>> was to use extremely strong noise reduction, with loss of detail).
>> We're dealing with a law of physics here.
>>
>> K.Takeshita wrote:
>>> On 1/01/07 1:45 PM, "John Forbes", <forbes at clara.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> If every other manufacture brings out a FF body Pentax will as  
>>>>> well or
>>>>> they _will_ _die_.  Simple as that.
>>>>>
>>>> But the others won't.  Simple as that.
>>>>
>>>> And actually it won't affect Pentax.  Any "full-frame" bodies  
>>>> would be
>>>> much more expensive, and therefore in a separate market segment  
>>>> that
>>>> Pentax doesn't address.  Canon would suffer from the  
>>>> competition, not
>>>> Pentax.
>>>>
>>> There was an interview article with Nikon on FF subject.  Among  
>>> other things
>>> they said, they have been observing Canon 5D sales for a while  
>>> but it never
>>> went beyond 5% of total DSLR sales.  FF sensor cost in case of 5D  
>>> is still
>>> over 6 times that of APS-C.   Nikon says that they are always  
>>> watching the
>>> market demand but for now, they do not see FF cameras being  
>>> popular.  In the
>>> meantime, DX lenses (their DA equivalent) are becoming ever  
>>> popular and
>>> settling almost as default DSLR format.
>>> Despite some speculations that their F mount is too small for FF  
>>> DSLR, that
>>> is a myth.  They have sufficient margin left for FF digital lenses.
>>>
>>> So, my guess is that before FF sensor cost comes down  
>>> sufficiently, APS-C
>>> sensors design would have progress farther and satisfy the need  
>>> of most
>>> demanding photographers.
>>> Besides, even if they offer FF DSLR, that does not at all mean  
>>> that they
>>> suddenly discontinue APS-C lenses.  I am sure they offer  
>>> different sizes as
>>> two different formats, i.e., FF is NOT an upgrade to APS-C.
>>>
>>> I for one would much prefer compact size of DA lenses and bodies.
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDML at pdml.net
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net